How do you do Tactical Reload?

[pickpocket]

If you're shooting a Garand, it doesn't really matter whether you want to do a Tac Reload or not

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Pickpocket - the point is that most of the reload argument is speculative. That's what you just spouted. Hypotheticals and what ifs. None of them are new in the analysis of the reloading debate.

One way to resolve such gun forum debates is to see what works under stress in real incidents or well designed studies (which have been used in many, many other stress situations). The gun world just prefers BS endless debates. Once a BSer decides their position is 'truth' - then they denounce the need for actual data or research. What a yawn!

If there was a true lull in the fighting - then the difference in the classic tac or retentiona would mean nothing but still folks blah, blah about it.

Like I said - the proof is in the pudding - let's evaluate cases where the different techniques actually did anything or a realistic simulation where it meant something for the police or civilian.

Also, if you are an expert - who are you? You claim many incidents. Time to share.

My point about the difference between mag safety guns and those without was that all the reload blather impacts gun choice - didn't you get that?

[Striker1]

Some of you guys are getting off the original subject. I didn't ask if you believed in the TAC reload, I asked what the current technique was among different trainer's.

Each individual can determine for themselves if it is a skill they wish to practice.

As for me, I don't think it hurst to have planned for this event. I may never need to do it, but then again I might.

[pickpocket]

Pickpocket - the point is that most of the reload argument is speculative. That's what you just spouted. Hypotheticals and what ifs. None of them are new in the analysis of the reloading debate.

Coincidentally, 95% of the tactics discussions are speculative in nature. You say that there are no new arguments; I agree. However, just because someone can't prove that something DOESN'T work isn't usually the best platform to argue against it. Proving a negative doesn't work out so well, logically.
The thread never asked for an analysis of the Tac Reload. Some people believe it's useful, some don't. That's the way of the world.

One way to resolve such gun forum debates is to see what works under stress in real incidents or well designed studies (which have been used in many, many other stress situations). The gun world just prefers BS endless debates. Once a BSer decides their position is 'truth' - then they denounce the need for actual data or research. What a yawn!

I'm not saying there's no need for research. My point is that while you're saying there's no proof that the Tac Reload holds benefit you should also realize that there's no proof that the Tac Reload has negative benefit, either.
This is a circular debate with no real universally accepted truth, and you had to know this going in.

If there was a true lull in the fighting - then the difference in the classic tac or retentiona would mean nothing but still folks blah, blah about it.

Truthfully - I don't believe there's much use for civilians to worry about magazine retention. Both the Tac Reload and magazine retention are really primarily specific to either combat operations or special tactics. However, there is some benefit to knowing what a Tac Reload is....if you care about it, that is. If not, then it doesn't really matter at the end of the day now does it?

Like I said - the proof is in the pudding - let's evaluate cases where the different techniques actually did anything or a realistic simulation where it meant something for the police or civilian.

Let us also then examine the evidence that supports that different techniques did NOTHING. You are firmly on the other side of the fence, so why do you feel the need to seek validation? Would it change your mind if the "proof" you seek suddenly appeared? I imagine not.

Also, if you are an expert - who are you? You claim many incidents. Time to share.

I'm no expert - just a guy who's still alive to tell his stories and has chosen to try to train others from his own experiences.
I spent two years kicking in doors and clearing houses. I have one 11-day continuous operation under my belt - so at the very least I understand the need to not drop your magazines all over the place because you might just want to reload some of them at some point. Suffice it to say that when you're not sure how many rounds you put through the last three guys and you have to kick in another door, you might want to put in a fresh mag - just in case.

My point about the difference between mag safety guns and those without was that all the reload blather impacts gun choice - didn't you get that?

But see, that's the disconnect. You imply that the choice of technique defines the tool. I say that a combination of tool, time, skill, and situation defines the technique.

Please do not take this as insulting, because that's not the intent here, but what I see is that I have formed opinions based on my experience and you seem to be forming them based on the lack of that same type of experience.
I'm not saying that your opinion is invalid, just that the experiences that have formed our respective opinions has been different.

At the end of the day, the Tac Reload is just another tool. It has its pros and cons, just like any tool. It will fail you if used at the wrong time or in the wrong situation, just like any tool. It will seem unecessary until you need it, just like any tool. The central concepts behind the Tac Reload are to minimize the amount of time your weapon is without a source of ammo and to retain the spent/partially spent magazine in case you might need it later. If we can agree that both of those may be important things to consider, then why does it matter what it's called?

[threegun]

I know its not a tactical reload but it is very impressive anyway.

http://www.break.com/index/quickload.html

[tshadow6]

Dump the empty mag while reaching for the fresh mag. slam fresh mag home, release slide stop. DO NOT SAVE EMPTY MAGAZINE. An empty magazine is worthless. If time permits, one may save a partialy loaded magazine. Also, do not waste time saving empty speed loaders, or empty brass. Dead cops have been found with empty speedloaders/brass in their hands, because that's how they trained. They didn't want to have to look for their empties on range day.

[pickpocket]

tshadow6 -
You have a point and I understand it quite well, but remember, this wasn't a discussion on the merits of Tactical vs. Combat reloading, simply a discussion of technique.

What you are pointing out is a "administrative" training issue, not a problem with application of a specific technique.

[rezmedic54]

Everyone here has already said it .What worked for me was to start slowly and very deliberately and just performing them over and over cause you know what they say is smooth is fast and so far has work for me. But heck just mt 2 cents. Be Safe Out There. Kurt

[Archie]

Stryker, forgive me if I'm misunderstanding your desire here. Are you interested in gun handling skills for defense purposes, or are you dealing with shooting games? When I first read your initial question, I was thinking in terms of real world problems. If, however, you are discussing 'gun juggling' skills in order to shoot low times and win competitions, I can't help you.

However, and presuming a real time aspect, allow me this observation: Keep your gun loaded! Ammo is only of use when it is in the firearm.

One of the absurdities foisted upon shooters is the 'tactical reload with retention'. I suppose it's great to add in for 'competition' but I fail to see the real world significance. Sadly, it has been incorporated into law enforcement training; along with lower power, high capacity firearms in an effort to replace marksmanship with multiple attempts.

I quit shooting in 'combat' matches when the rulebooks went beyond about two pages, the guns grew - stuff and shooters turned into 'athlete competitors'.

But I think I'm digressing. Forgive the rant.

[Striker1]

Archie,

My desire was to know what was being taught out there in other agencies/schools? At no time did I intend this thread to turn into an argument pro/con onthe issue.

As I said previously, I will leave it up to individuals to decide the worthiness of the technique.

Regards

[Archie]

Well, just for the record, the agency for which I work (one of the large federal ones) teaches 'combat' and 'tactical' reloading.

"Combat" reload is from an empty gun; 'tactical' is with retention.

[Koz]

like this

http://www.thatvideosite.com/view/2558.html

[David Armstrong]

I'm not saying there's no need for research. My point is that while you're saying there's no proof that the Tac Reload holds benefit you should also realize that there's no proof that the Tac Reload has negative benefit, either.

And with that we see the failure of so many to understand the problem that the tactical reload creates. Yes, there is plenty of evidence that it has a lot of negative benefit if your concern is actual gunfighting situations. First, it is more prone to problems than any other standard reloading technique. Second, it is slower than any other standard reloading technique. Third, it takes time away from what is for most a very limited amount of training time, time that could be better utilized learning and/or perfecting a technique or skill that might actually help one survive the fight. so there is a fair amount of negative to it, with absolutely no proven benefit.

As Glenn pointed out, if the tactical reload mattered at all outside of long-term military-like operations somebody, somewhere, sometime, would have found an instance where it made a difference. The fact that nobody has ever done so is pretty tellilng.

[BobK]

I don't like them either. But if your going to do it then do the following:

1. FIND COVER.
2. Check six all around back to six.
3. Keep the gun at chest level.
4. Release the mag and put in your pocket, as your hand comes up grab the new mag and load it in the gun.

Other things to consider:

1. Does your gun have a magazine disconnect?
2. How many mags do you have on you? Is it time to split or stay and fight?
3. What if your wounded? Now what?
4. How many bad guys are still standing?
5. A New York reload is faster.
6. Carry your spare mag in a decent mag carrier. Not a pocket.

Some disagree with the tactical reload and some don't. If you choose to do so, practice until your blazing fast.

[pickpocket]

And with that we see the failure of so many to understand the problem that the tactical reload creates.

Honestly, it's really a matter of a failure to understand the application of a technique. If a technique is understood, then one could figure out where and when to apply it; if it is not understood, then there will be no right time to apply it. A Tac Reload is not meant to be fast - if you wish it to be so then you do not understand the application. Survival is a matter of choosing the right tool for the right situation, and anyone who believes that there are tools unworthy of learning is only limiting themselves and their options.

I find the notion that people can't afford to learn more than one thing absurd.

I would much rather walk through life having learned a skill that I never had to use than find myself wishing too late that I had learned it.

[David Armstrong]

If a technique is understood, then one could figure out where and when to apply it; if it is not understood, then there will be no right time to apply it.

We'll disagree. I understand the technique just fine, I can execute it without any trouble, and so on. My point is that if one claims that a technique has value as it relates to a problem one should be able to provide some evidence of that value. To date, nobody has been able to do that with the tactical reload. It provides nothing that is not provided as well as or better by other techniques, and has a distinct downside.

I find the notion that people can't afford to learn more than one thing absurd.

As do I. But that is not the case here, is it. To learn to use a gun well one has to learn many things. Why waste your time learning something that has no value other than to possibly keep some dirt out of the magazine?

I would much rather walk through life having learned a skill that I never had to use than find myself wishing too late that I had learned it.

And I would rather walk through life knowing that I had spent my time learning skills of value that might be important when used instead of wasting my time learning a skill with no unique value in itself and shares value with other techniques that have more applicability. Don't get me wrong, if you want to spend time learning a range skill that has no value off the range, go for it. Just do not attempt to justify that with some claims of value in the real world of defensive firearms use.

[pickpocket]

Don't get me wrong, if you want to spend time learning a range skill that has no value off the range, go for it. Just do not attempt to justify that with some claims of value in the real world of defensive firearms use.

Then again, maybe it's me who just needs to remember who his audience is. No insult intended - but I tend to view things from an operator's perspective. I refuse to boil my defensive training down to the bare essentials because I know what has been valuable in my own experience.

You're right - we'll just agree to disagree.

[Striker1]

Pickpocket,

Where di you first learn the Tac reload?

[pickpocket]

First learned it in the Marine Corps, with an M-16, and where magazine retention is stressed primarily because of extended operations and little chance of finding a supply depot out in the desert to issue new magazines.

Since then, I've found at least one shooting system that takes the time to explain a variation on the traditional Tactical Reload - which is synonomous with "magazine retention".
The C.A.R. system explains this variation as a Tac-Com (Tactical/Combat), which is simply a hybrid of the traditional definitions of both Combat Reload and Tactical Reload.

Many people here arguing against the Tac Reload have a very valid point - sometimes magazine retention becomes the primary focus to the exclusion of the real goal: topping off your mag without running to slide-lock. In all honesty, it just doesn't make sense to say "I will ALWAYS retain my magazine". Sometimes, you're just going to want to make sure there's a full magazine in the weapon and you're not going to care about where the old one falls.
I hear and agree with the arguments that always worrying about where your spent mags are will end up badly for you one day. But, then again - do ANY of us here advocate ALWAYS doing something the same way, or do we prefer to adapt to the situation? Same here.

Koz posted a video earlier in the thread and stated that the example wasn't a Tac Reload. Maybe not, but it certainly does fit the description of C.A.R.'s Tac-Com...dropping a used mag in favor of a new one but not worrying about retention.

[Striker1]

I also learned with the M-16. We always had to try and keep the mag on us, but if it was dropped we were told to forget about it.

M9 was taught the classic version but never did it during the course basic of fire, however, during advanced courses of fire, we practiced 1 hand, weak hand, rapid, and tactical reloads.

These are all techniques I taught for 10+ years.

[Moloch]

How do you do Tactical Reload?

Quick.