Difference of opinion before the "rack"

[Greybeard]

I noticed recently that John Correia has a record number of followers on YouTube. Good for him. He does have some good things to say. But ….. I am not in agreement with what he states in #10 in the article linked below (and in a specific video he did on the subject). The reason being, even in not necessarily stressful shooting environments, I have observed a number of students have a malfunction that was the direct result of a magazine release being bumped during recoil. And these are not necessarily with "crap guns". The magazines can drop down just enough that the top round fails to feed properly - or (most often) does not feed at all. Color me "old school" perhaps, but I continue to teach a quick "tap" or "slap" before the "rack".

"10. Malfunctions happen. They just do. But unless you’re carrying a crap gun, they’re rare. In all my videos I have never seen someone clear a malfunction that needed a tap to the baseplate to get the gun back working again or whose mag fell out when the gun went click…rack and reassess is necessary though. In a couple of instances, a strip, rack, reload would have helped."

https://firearmusernetwork.com/2017/01/ ... gunfights/

[Mike S]

I didn't watch the link you provided, however I am in agreement with you. Slap, Rack, Assess is still valid.
However, I modified it slightly to Slap, Rack, Reacquire (for reacquire a solid two-handed grip; I've observed so many students that failed to re-establish a solid support hand grip during malfunction & reload drills that resulted in inconsistent shots when re-engaging the target , & drilling the "re-establish a solid two-handed grip" mantra into their heads fixed it).

I also let them know the original is "Tap, Rack, Reassess", & that the assessment of "did I fix the malfunction" & "is the justification still valid to shoot my target" is implied.

[Greybeard]

""Tap/Rack/Bang" always carried a conditional measure of familiarity and usage that has been lost in carrying the concept forward to people whose mouths drop open at the idea of shooting 250 rounds a year."

Agreed. The issue I have with eliminating the "tap" is that I'm an pretty sure that there are several hundred thousand people who fit that category in ASP's 1.6 million followers. And they don't know what they don't know.

[The Annoyed Man]

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I’m no "expert gunfighter", but I have a brain; and it seems like eliminating the tap saves an insignificantly small amount of time, while keeping it may eliminate the need for the relatively much longer rack to get the gun back into action.

But I confess that I don’t really train on failure drills. I just execute them if I have a malfunction (which is very rare)....so I’m probably not very fast when doing them. OTH:

1. I carry Glocks, and I properly maintain them. They’re not perfect...no mechanical device is. But they’re as close to 100% reliable as any gun is going to get in the real world.
2. I only use ammo that I’ve run through the gun in practice, verifying that it functions reliably in the gun.
3. I always carry at least one spare mag—not because I expect to need upwards of 30 rounds, but because of the probability of a failure being magazine related.

That’s probably not a gunfighter's attitude, but like I said at the top, I’m not an expert gunfighter, and I don’t pretend to be one. I should probably train more, and I have a standing invitation to do so with someone not too far away. So I’ll probably take advantage of that soon.

[strogg]

For what it's worth, I have seen first hand pistols and rifles malfunction due to the magazine not seated properly. Despite that, there was enough tension on the magazine that it did not fall out on its own accord. In those cases, a tap, tilt, and rack would have solved the problem. And these aren't cheapo bad guns either.

I'm 100% with the OP on his opinion.

[maverick2076]

The MOABs are awesome. I’m slowly replacing all of my Glock baseplates with them.