|
|
Post by redeyes on Nov 9, 2013 9:17:01 GMT
modernserviceweapons.com/?p=5185#more-5185
What do y'all think of this? Gun gamer stuff or a good idea for bad situations? I sort of get it. You don't point a firearms at something you are not willing to destroy, but then your sights may not be perfectly lined up before the hammer or striker falls. Maybe this is only for someone with a crapton of rounds downrange? I am not entirely comfortable with this idea. |
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Nov 10, 2013 15:50:08 GMT
I started shooting a dbl action gun and still do shoot/like dbl action guns. That said, absolutely no on putting your finger on the trigger. Sorry, even a 12 lbs can be mashed very quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by doc11 on Nov 10, 2013 19:20:49 GMT
Listen, the whole finger off/on the trigger started because range officers wanted to be able to look down the line and make sure that on one was putting the booger picker on the trigger before they gave the command to fire. Sheriff Jim Wilson of Shooting Times often advocated the finger on/near the trigger and often caught hell for it in his writing.
I personally see no reason to no put your finger on/near the trigger. Do we teach that? No. Why? Because we want to run a range where we lessen the chance of a fuck up. It's not because we don't trust our shooters--really--it's because we're in a teaching environment and we're stressing the players. We don't want the student to have to worry about one more thing, like going bang when you are trying to learn a skill. It's like the safety on the AR when you move, on or off? David says off, Chris says on, I say what makes you comfortable.
When I'm clearing my house, or when I was going through a building as LEO, I put my finger on the trigger.
All this talk about reflexive shootings and such, much of it has been discounted. We shoot because our brain sends a signal to our finger to give that lever a pull.
Are you comfortable with the finger on the trigger?
|
|
|
|
Post by doc11 on Nov 10, 2013 19:25:11 GMT
I find the forum editing my language annoying. If we can all be adults, why can't we swear?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Nov 10, 2013 19:45:32 GMT
I find the forum editing my language annoying. If we can all be adults, why can't we swear? Well, the other mod brought this up and I'm on the fence. I don't want people being turned off by a bunch of foul language posts. Then again, I don't want to stifle free speech. I'll start a poll. I think the general rule should be keep it to a minimum. I'll post up on the board suggestions and see what folks want. |
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Nov 10, 2013 20:28:28 GMT
I find the forum editing my language annoying. If we can all be adults, why can't we swear? Being an adult, do you need to swear?  Pottie mouth  |
|
|
|
Post by doc11 on Nov 10, 2013 21:11:40 GMT
LOL. Being a former LEO and now an atheist, I find the bans on language often are annoying and based on archaic and or religious constraints which depend on a belief in a deity I don't subscribe to. Your definition of foul language is my everyday speech! Let's face it; language is strongly dependent on the social mores of the people around you; most of the people I hang out with are .mil types who like me, find that swearing is less a matter of offensiveness and more a matter of expression. I don't swear all the time; but when I do, I use it as a means to convey the seriousness of the situation.
But this is a topic for another thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by scotticus on Nov 11, 2013 0:33:47 GMT
DA/SA in semi-autos have a very specific advantage in that in the event of a failure to fire, the shooter can drop the hammer on the same cartridge a 2nd (or more!) time in the hope that the cartridge will eventually fire. Often, a second strike on a primer will be sufficient to fire the cartridge, which would return the DA/SA to SA mode and resume normal firing.
In the event of cartridge failure, DA revolvers shine even a little brighter, because not only do you get to drop the hammer again regardless of cartridge performance, you even get to move on to the next cartridges, eventually coming all the way around to the one that didn't fire on the first strike. You just keep going.
Hammerless striker-fired pistols must be manually cycled in the event of a click-and-no-bang failure. Regardless of other features, this is definitely a category where Sig-style DA/SA action has a clear tactical advantage.
|
|
|
|
Post by redeyes on Nov 11, 2013 2:12:48 GMT
DA/SA in semi-autos have a very specific advantage in that in the event of a failure to fire, the shooter can drop the hammer on the same cartridge a 2nd (or more!) time in the hope that the cartridge will eventually fire. Often, a second strike on a primer will be sufficient to fire the cartridge, which would return the DA/SA to SA mode and resume normal firing. In the event of cartridge failure, DA revolvers shine even a little brighter, because not only do you get to drop the hammer again regardless of cartridge performance, you even get to move on to the next cartridges, eventually coming all the way around to the one that didn't fire on the first strike. You just keep going. Hammerless striker-fired pistols must be manually cycled in the event of a click-and-no-bang failure. Regardless of other features, this is definitely a category where Sig-style DA/SA action has a clear tactical advantage. I disagree. Why would I drop the hammer twice on the same cartridge? If the primer didn't ignite the first time, either the round is a dud or I had a light primer strike. If I had a light primer strike, that is an issue I should have noticed on the range and corrected. If it is a dud, I need to get the bad round out and a good round in the chamber quickly as possible. Pull the trigger, click no bang, tap rack bang. |
|
|
|
Post by doc11 on Nov 11, 2013 2:24:35 GMT
Are you sure about that "tactical advantage?"
I would say that the capability of a second strike is as over rated as the idea that revolvers are more reliable than an auto. I would put to you that a well trained individual can clear a dud round fast enough to get back into the fight and that a second strike is about as worthless as an empty chamber. If a round fails, you are better off getting rid of the offending round than trying to make it work.
The idea of hitting a primer until it goes off is pretty senseless in the context of a fight; you have to get the firearm working, and the most sure way is to get rid of the round as quickly as possible. A tap rack is the best way to handle the situation. DA/SA was developed more as a way to allow shooters to have a modicum of control over the decision to squeeze off the first round, less for the idea of second strike.
|
|
|
|
Post by scotticus on Nov 11, 2013 2:37:59 GMT
DA/SA in semi-autos have a very specific advantage in that in the event of a failure to fire, the shooter can drop the hammer on the same cartridge a 2nd (or more!) time in the hope that the cartridge will eventually fire. Often, a second strike on a primer will be sufficient to fire the cartridge, which would return the DA/SA to SA mode and resume normal firing. In the event of cartridge failure, DA revolvers shine even a little brighter, because not only do you get to drop the hammer again regardless of cartridge performance, you even get to move on to the next cartridges, eventually coming all the way around to the one that didn't fire on the first strike. You just keep going. Hammerless striker-fired pistols must be manually cycled in the event of a click-and-no-bang failure. Regardless of other features, this is definitely a category where Sig-style DA/SA action has a clear tactical advantage. I disagree. Why would I drop the hammer twice on the same cartridge? If the primer didn't ignite the first time, either the round is a dud or I had a light primer strike. If I had a light primer strike, that is an issue I should have noticed on the range and corrected. If it is a dud, I need to get the bad round out and a good round in the chamber quickly as possible. Pull the trigger, click no bang, tap rack bang. Re-striking a cartridge that didn't fire may elicit the discharge on the second strike. Can't do that with a DAO. Just because it didn't fire the first time doesn't mean it won't fire the second time. If it does, cool for you -- back to work. If it doesn't, tap / rack / bang like you would have had to do on a DAO / SAO anyway. DA/SA semis give you an opportunity that SAO / DAO does not. |
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Nov 11, 2013 2:51:57 GMT
I'm certainly in the camp of if it doesn't go bang, it gets tapped and racked. If the slide locks back, it gets a reload.
|
|
|
|
Post by redeyes on Nov 11, 2013 3:14:36 GMT
Re-striking a cartridge that didn't fire may elicit the discharge on the second strike. Can't do that with a DAO. Just because it didn't fire the first time doesn't mean it won't fire the second time. If it does, cool for you -- back to work. If it doesn't, tap / rack / bang like you would have had to do on a DAO / SAO anyway. DA/SA semis give you an opportunity that SAO / DAO does not. Why do you feel that dropping the hammer a second time on a cartridge that did not go bang on a previous trigger pull is better than a tap rack bang? |
|
|
|
Post by redeyes on Nov 11, 2013 3:20:47 GMT
Listen, the whole finger off/on the trigger started because range officers wanted to be able to look down the line and make sure that on one was putting the booger picker on the trigger before they gave the command to fire. Sheriff Jim Wilson of Shooting Times often advocated the finger on/near the trigger and often caught hell for it in his writing. I personally see no reason to no put your finger on/near the trigger. Do we teach that? No. Why? Because we want to run a range where we lessen the chance of a frackalicous up. It's not because we don't trust our shooters--really--it's because we're in a teaching environment and we're stressing the players. We don't want the student to have to worry about one more thing, like going bang when you are trying to learn a skill. It's like the safety on the AR when you move, on or off? David says off, Chris says on, I say what makes you comfortable. When I'm clearing my house, or when I was going through a building as LEO, I put my finger on the trigger. All this talk about reflexive shootings and such, much of it has been discounted. We shoot because our brain sends a signal to our finger to give that lever a pull. Are you comfortable with the finger on the trigger? No, I guess not. I am more comfortable keeping my finger off the trigger until I am sure I need to shoot. It is how I was trained and how I train now. I will think some more on this subject. |
|
|
|
Post by dannusmaximus on Nov 22, 2013 2:57:09 GMT
If I think an engagement might be imminent (clearing my house after hearing a window smash at 3AM, for example), finger on the trigger, no questions asked. For range and admin purposes, straight and off the trigger.
The very issue raised by the article makes me very happy that I am a complete Glock snob and don't have to think about such things as "increased initial shot trigger take up pressure" or whatever.
|
|
