A red Dot a Laser, or neither on a Carry gun?

[george burns]

Night sights are not meant to illuminate anything but the front of your gun., and of course sighting the target I keep seeing people making the statement about NS not helping to illuminate the target, they aren't supposed to do that and never were. What they do is let you see that your gun is level and that your not aiming off to the side or pointing someware other than where you think you are. In complete darkness it is like a pilot with no visual conformation who needs to fly by instruments alone. It is really easy to lose track of ablolute zero in the kind of darkness where you can't see your weapon. The NS allows you to be able to point your gun at the target, not where you think the target is, in a manner that will allow the bullet to hit the target instead of beng a few inches or feet off at distance.Lasers and dots do not illuminate the target either, only make some shoot more accurately, only a Tac light is going to help you find the target. The NS are only going to help you find the front sight is aligned easier than not having them.

 

[bigger hammer]

I was around when RDS first appeared in IPSC. They gave users such an advantage over iron sights that they created a new class for them. I see no reason not to take advantage of that advantage, especially as my eyes aged. Like any piece of equipment, they require training before using them becomes second nature. I'm using an RMR on a Glock 19 and they don't make concealment any more difficult. I carry IWB at 9 o'clock (I'm left handed). I didn't need a new holster either.

 

[chaim]

Personally, I wouldn't want either a RDS or laser on a self defense weapon (maybe at home, definitely not for a gun I'd carry). I don't know RDS as well, so my comments are mainly about lasers.

To me, the 'minor' negatives are: battery operated so won't work every time (and with good old Murphy's Law, they could die when you most need them), electronics sometimes break (see first negative), the lasers require you to train an extra action (turning it on) in most designs, and cost (good ones are usually expensive, small ones are usually expensive).

Possible positives to partially counteract the negatives: help for aging eyes, help aiming a gun that may have poor sights (thought about them for my LCP with very poor sights, I've decided instead it is better to replace the gun). One possible positive as I see it is that in the adrenaline dump of a defensive shooting, most people, no matter how good a shot and how well trained, will miss more than they'll hit. The police only hit about 33% (1/3) of the time in a real shooting situation. There are situations that are unique to police (pursuing threats, possibly shooting at greater distances) that I'm willing to grant might make most of us a little more accurate, but at best, we'll likely miss half or more of our shots. Something that might aid our aim under stress and lower that percentage is a good thing.

My "major" negative that makes a laser a no-go for me is: size. Most add quite a bit of bulk to the end of the gun. Even smaller ones add bulk (maybe not too much for concealment, but I'd rather take my extra bulk in a larger more capable gun than in any add ons). The smaller the laser the more expensive it usually seems to be. And of course, anything added to the end of the gun makes finding holsters more difficult. The one exception, they add virtually no bulk, are Crimson Trace grips. I would consider using those, and I definitely would if they were gifted to me, but I'm not sure that the utility justifies the cost.

 

[bigger hammer]

To me, the 'minor' negatives are: battery operated so won't work every time (and with good old Murphy's Law, they could die when you most need them),

That's why proper systems on guns used for self–defense have BUIS.

electronics sometimes break (see first negative),

Iron sights break as well. I broke the rear blade on an adjustable S&W handgun sight. At a recent class I attended, an instructor had a fixed rear sight come loose, and nearly fall out of the dovetail. While electronics have their own issues, the experience in recent conflicts where just about every rifle has lasers, lights, and some type of battery operated sights has shown that in CQB situations (similar to the fast shooting required in self defense situations) they give a distinct advantage. The lights have improved over the last few years, to huge degrees.

the lasers require you to train an extra action (turning it on) in most designs

No different than a light mounted on the gun. And those have shown to be very advantageous in dark situations.

and cost (good ones are usually expensive, small ones are usually expensive).

LOL. No argument there.

Possible positives to partially counteract the negatives: help for aging eyes

They sure helped me. I'm now wearing graduated trifocals. It took me quite some time to find the right spot on the glasses lens so that my front sight was in sharp focus. Not an issue in very close situations, but at any distance longer than that, or where a precision shot was needed, it seemed to take FOREVER.


Now, with the RDS, I can see the dot clearly no matter where I look through the lenses of my glasses. AND I am MUCH better at longer shots, beyond what is normally considered 'handgun distances.' A few days ago I was hitting a steel silhouette target at 85 yards offhand consistently. With irons, even taking the time to sharpen the front sight, I'd be at about 10%.

One possible positive as I see it is that in the adrenaline dump of a defensive shooting, most people, no matter how good a shot and how well trained, will miss more than they'll hit. The police only hit about 33% (1/3) of the time in a real shooting situation.

Few police officers are 'gun guys.' I was shocked to learn when I first went on the job that there are some LEOs who, if they were not required to, would not carry a gun. Some only shoot when they're required to, at qualification shoots. OTOH, there are a few who train pretty hard, and I know a few who are, or were, world class competitors.

There are situations that are unique to police (pursuing threats, possibly shooting at greater distances) that I'm willing to grant might make most of us a little more accurate, but at best, we'll likely miss half or more of our shots. Something that might aid our aim under stress and lower that percentage is a good thing.

I've never been good at anything over 35–45 yards. Beyond 60 yards I couldn't stay on paper with any consistency. But with my RDS, I'm getting hits at 100 yards about 85% of the time, with a rest or from prone. Such a shot would be extremely rare, but in an active shooter situation, I might have to take one.

My "major" negative that makes a laser a no-go for me is: size. Most add quite a bit of bulk to the end of the gun. Even smaller ones add bulk (maybe not too much for concealment, but I'd rather take my extra bulk in a larger more capable gun than in any add ons).

Yep, handguns were designed as minimalist tools. When you add capabilities and versatility, you sometimes get bulk.

The smaller the laser the more expensive it usually seems to be.

That's the case with just about any electronics. But as time passes, the prices come down.

And of course, anything added to the end of the gun makes finding holsters more difficult.

Not really. It's easy these day to find someone who builds a holster for most gun/light/laser combinations. Many LEOs these days are mounting lights on their duty weapons. Holster manufacturers are keeping up.

The one exception, they add virtually no bulk, are Crimson Trace grips. I would consider using those, and I definitely would if they were gifted to me, but I'm not sure that the utility justifies the cost.

I have a couple of lasers on a couple of my handguns. My J frame wears a CT laser. But since I'm left handed (yeah, I know – bad eyes AND left handed WHATALOSER! lol) and I can't use the CT on anything but a revolver, because my support hand thumb blocks it. I use a different grip on the revolver. I have a laser on my baby Glock that's mounted on the front of the trigger guard. The battery is in the hollow at the back of the grip and the wire is buried in a groove machined in the bottom of the trigger guard. The laser only protrudes about 1/4" from the front of the trigger guard so I haven't had any issues with standard holsters for it. And I have a combination light/laser from Streamlight that mounts on any rail. I thought that the green laser there was going to be 'the answer' to my vision problems and for many situations it was. But in very bright sunlight, against light targets, it's not bright enough to be seen quickly, defeating its purpose. The light is too bright for some small room situations, while it may blind the target, the glare is bothersome. The light is great for outdoor or large room use though.

 

[Single-Shot Super-Fan]

I don't really like either for a carry pistol. I feel like they add too much bulk for too little advantage.

I'm not a fan of lasers in general. They just never really appealed to me.

I love optics on handguns at the range (to me, handguns with optics are better for leisurely, relaxing shooting) or on full-size combat pistols (the FNX 45 Tactical with a good suppressor and a red dot is a beautiful firearm).