To Cock, or Not to Cock...

[Kleanbore]

Posted by FIVETWOSEVEN: Even still, a good shoot is a good shoot.

How that cliche pertains to the question at hand is not clear to me, but one person's "good shoot" may not be a "good shoot" in the eyes of those who will determine the shooter's fate.

In the event of a shooting that the actor believes to have been done in necessary self defense, it will be incumbent upon the shooter to provide evidence supporting each of the following:

He or she had reasonable grounds to believe he or she was in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm.

He or she actually believed that he or she, or a third person, was in such imminent danger.

The danger was such that he or she could only save himself or herself by the use of deadly force.

He or she used no more force than was necessary.​

If the actor cannot do so, or if contradictory evidence outweighs the evidence produced by the actor, the "shoot" will not be judged "good."

There is also the issue of the ways in which the shooter either recognized and addressed the risks of harming someone other than the intended target, or exacerbated those risks. The reason that long-pull striker fired and DAO firearms are recommended for self defense and for law enforcement usage these days is that it is very easy for a person under high stress to fire a single action trigger unintentionally.

 

[KenW.]

Why does it matter if you can flee or not? You must be in one of "those" states.

retreating before you can defend yourself is just wrong.

 

[DT Guy]

Regarding my use of long distance and competitive shooting as exemplary, I certainly was referring to the OP. Using shooting at distant targets as a synonym for 'difficult' seems reasonable, and shots fired in SD are ALWAYS difficult, if only because of the defender's physiological response.

Most ( though not all, including people I know) shoot better with an SA trigger. I'll always shoot as well as possible when shooting for my life.

Larry

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by KenW: ...retreating before you can defend yourself is just wrong.

Depending upon laws and precedent in one's jurisdiction, one may or may not have a duty to retreat if retreat is safely possible.

Regardless, it is often the smart thing to do tactically, it can help a lot with one's affirmative defense even if it is not required, and not having used deadly force is a far better situation in which to be than having had to use it.

 

[LouCap]

If you're behind cover and being shot at, I'd say you won't have a hard time justifying self defense. Regardless of the state in which you reside, getting behind cover in and of itself is a form of retreat. Given the circumstances (i.e. fighting for your life), I think you can do whatever necessary to eliminate the threat, including cocking the gun, provided you have the extrordinary presence of mind to do so.

I think the bigger question though is what in the world did you do to get into such a situation in the first place? This scenario is in no way a typical SD scenario, but more like a barricade/professional hit. Most SD aituations are up close and personal, without the distance "taking cover" implies. If you get involved in a protracted gun battle involving cover and concealment, there' s more than a simply robbery going on there, and THAT's the first thing I'd investigate, not the state of your trigger during the gun fight.

Sent from my SGH-T849 using Tapatalk

 

[Kleanbore]

If you're behind cover and being shot at, I'd say you won't have a hard time justifying self defense.

Probably very true, but the OP said "pinned down" in what he or she judged to be a lethal force situation. Shots fired? Not clear.

The real issues are the possibility of hitting the wrong person or shooting after the threat has dissipated, and a light trigger pull can contribute to that risk.

Here's something on that subject:

http://www.snubnose.info/docs/daovdasa.htm​

.

..people who carry a revolver for self defense should practice almost exclusively for double action fire, as if the single action option wasn't even there. Why? Because there are almost no situations in which single action fire is appropriate in self defense. Most self defense situations unfold rapidly. There isn't time to thumb cock a revolver and take careful aim in the way one would do while target shooting. A cocked revolver is dangerous in the adrenaline dump of a lethal force encounter. The trigger is just too light. Its too easy to fire when you don't mean to.

Regardless, if I were actually behind good cover, it would take real necessity to cause me to expose myself to a violent criminal actor armed with a firearm for the purpose of getting a shot or two at him.

 

[LouCap]

Probably very true, but the OP said "pinned down" in what he or she judged to be a lethal force situation. Shots fired? Not clear.

Okay, I'll bite. How are you ever "pinned down" without shots being fired? I mean, with the exclusion of playing hide-and-go-seek, why else are you hiding behind cover? I think we have to assume shots have been fired, otherwise the entire discussion is moot.

Sent from my SGH-T849 using Tapatalk

 

[wristtwister]

You guys overlook the obvious... if it's a single action gun, you have to pull the hammer back. If it's double action, the hammer will go back when you pull the trigger... in either case, unless it's striker fired, the hammer will go into action when you pull the trigger.

I've got half a dozen guns of both types and revolvers too, so "pulling the hammer back" simply depends on what kind of gun I'm shooting. Eventually, the hammer has to go back to make the gun function. How accurate you are with either condition is a matter of your skills. When you put a round into the chamber of a striker fired gun, it sets the striker back so the gun will function, so the question is really moot. The mechanism to strike the primer of the bullet has to be back to make the gun function.

I liked the answer someone gave when the cops asked him "why did you shoot him 7 times"?... and the guy answered, "because I ran out of ammo"...

I carry high capacity guns... why?.. so I don't have that problem, and in case I have multiple BG's to deal with (which has already happened). I usually carry about 30+ rounds and my P-12 is "cocked and locked" all the time. The answer to the OP's question is "I carry my gun cocked and locked because that's how it functions". That takes "intent" out of the equation.

WT

 

[sansone]

I would cock if had the time to. If my nerves were jittery, maybe place my finger on the trigger guard

 

[JShirley]

if you find yourself in a lethal force scenario where it is impossible to flee, but you are pinned down behind cover

Okay, so you have set up a situation that is only likely to occur in battle or an "active shooter" situation. Yes, if you need to take a longer-range or very precise shot, by all means, cock the hammer.

My concern is that you have set up an extremely unlikely scenario just to pose this question, which could confuse a lot of newer/less trained defensive shooters. In the vast majority of self-defense situations, double-action handguns should be fired double-action. I've had several less experienced shooters explain earnestly that they liked cocking their (double-action) revolvers before shooting, because they could be more accurate.

Since they were almost invariably shooting at 15 meters and less, they were training in bad habits for real-life defense.

Now, what phaser gun for space monkeys? :banghead:

John

 

[driftrider]

You guys overlook the obvious... if it's a single action gun, you have to pull the hammer back. If it's double action, the hammer will go back when you pull the trigger... in either case, unless it's striker fired, the hammer will go into action when you pull the trigger.

Obviously, but that wasn't what I was asking. My question had to do with DA/SA pistols and DA revolvers with exposed hammers, and whether or not folks would or should manually cock the hammer back before firing their first shot.

As for accidental/negligent discharge... if you've trained correctly, then even under stress your finger should be straight and off the trigger until you intend to fire.

As for pinned down, you don't necessarily have to be currently taking fire to be pinned down. Read the scenario I posted as an example. The BG is threatening to kill anyone who moves, but he hasn't fired yet. You, having maintained adequate situational awareness, identified the threat early and got to cover in the isles immediately. However, the only way out is to expose yourself to the BG, because he's between you, and everyone else for that matter, and the door. The BG clearly has a gun, and has threatened repeatedly to use it. If lethal force is necessary (and I'd say at that point, barring the guy suddenly turning tail and bolting for the door), you have time to make your way to a point where you can shoot from cover, but it'll take a few seconds to get there. This would give you time to cock your weapon before firing the first shot.

Mike

 

[driftrider]

Unlikely scenario? A BG committing an armed robbery in a convenience store with customers present unlikely? Happens all the time.

Maybe I should have asked more clearly. Since I asked it in the "Legal" forum, I thought it would be self evident that I was also interested in the legal ramifications of doing so, not just the tactical considerations. It appears a lot of folks missed the point.

Mike

 

[Kleanbore]

Unlikely scenario? A BG committing an armed robbery in a convenience store with customers present unlikely? Happens all the time.

Maybe I should have asked more clearly. Since I asked it in the "Legal" forum, I thought it would be self evident that I was also interested in the legal ramifications of doing so, not just the tactical considerations. It appears a lot of folks missed the point.

Anything that cocking a firearm might introduce into the legal ramifications of an armed citizen's firing a gun during an armed robbery in a convenience store would pale compared to the fact that his or her personal liability is effectively unlimited either way.

 

[Art Eatman]

The use of the phrase "pinned down" seems to me to take any legal issue out of the scenario. That forces me to visualize a strictly self-defense situation.

To cock or not to cock seems to me to be pertinent as to which method allows better results, and that's likely dependent on the specific scenario. There's no "One size fits all" in this.

Probably oughta just let this thread die and start over in a discussion of strategy and tactics. If it really needs disccussing...

 

[honestlou]

In my humble legal opinion, if you are even remotely considering the legal consequences of your actions at that point in time, you are not in a situation that requires the use of deadly force.

By all means, discuss scenarios and the legal consequences, but you should not get in your head another decision that needs to be made at the time of a potential defensive use of a firearm.

As far as "finger off the trigger until you're ready to fire", I would say that you should never cock a DA/SA weapon until you're ready to fire. I frequently use a classic DA/SA Sig, and even after firing (when the gun is cocked as a result of it's function), if I go to the "ready" and am no longer pointed in, I decock.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

What I mean by a good shoot is one that is perfectly legal.

 

[seal]

I let my lawyer remind me what I did. If your concerned about court cases. But I don't think it would come up at trial.

For accuracy id rather hammer back

 

[LKB3rd]

That's what she said!
...
Or is that not what you were looking for?

 

[rondog]

Why would you even mention to the investigators that you cocked the hammer first?

 

[Kleanbore]

What I mean by a good shoot is one that is perfectly legal.

Of course--that's the common usage meaning of "a good shoot."

But a "good shoot" may not be judged to have been a "good shoot" by others based on the evidence and testimony that is brought forth and admitted in court. Hence, the cliche is often misused because it is usually meaningless.

Outside of the common usage, and back into plain but somewhat ungrammatical English, the "best shoot" is the one that never happens.

In the scenario set forth here and amplified by the OP (armed robbery in a convenience store), shooting would no doubt be perfectly legal in most jurisdictions, provided that the shooter did not exhibit criminal negligence, and the legal consequences are likely to be limited to civil liability.

 

[NMGonzo]

Why would you even mention to the investigators that you cocked the hammer first?

I aimed and fired, Detective.

 

[KBintheSLC]

If I had time and I knew, without a doubt that I had to shoot, I would cock the hammer into SA. Better precision = increased accuracy = less shots fired = more hits = less misses = all-around safer.

 

[Guns and more]

perfectly cromulent action.

Whoa!

If I were on a jury and the defendant was under fire, and cocked his weapon to return fire and thus save his life I would think that was a cromulent action on his part.
Not Guilty.

 

[Deanimator]

Most of my concealed carry guns are either single action or "safe action" (Glock) autos. They're ALWAYS "cocked" when I carry them. A couple are double action revolvers. At any likely engagement range, I can hit more than well enough using double action. I shoot our club's double action revolver league at 50'. Seven yards is nothing.

 

[1911Tuner]

Assuming that any uninvolved witnesses actually lift their heads off the ground and look in your direction long enough to see whether the gun is cocked...and assuming that they're close enough to you to be able to tell...it's not likely that they'll remember that small detail in the midst of all that hot lead screamin' through the air and bouncin' off the hard structures. It's been observed that after experiencing something like that...some eyewitnesses have trouble remembering their own phone numbers.