Personal defense with awful vision?

[uke]

Hey all, was discussing this with a friend the other day, and was looking for some input. I am about 20/700 in each eye and when training in martial arts i am constantly losing contacts.

It had never occurred to me before, but I realized recently how easy it is to one's corrective eyewhere in a scuffle. In addition, being in a dark home defense situation while simultaneously looking for glasses, etc. could also result in big problems. I've often heard that people practice at the range without eyewear, but considering how bad my vision is, paticularly in the dark, I often doubt I could ID targets with complete confidence.

Barring surgery for now, what are some tools and tricks that help ya'll with defending yourself with nearsightedness? Any special sights help you do the job? Some tips I've gathered so far:
-Practice "speed drawing" your glasses and perhaps carry backups.
-Tape/velcro cheap pairs of eyewear to home defense longarms.
-(Kinda skeptical)For nearsighted people, having shorter barreled guns can help because the sights are perhaps within an easier range to focus on.

What do you guys find useful?

 

[Preacherman]

Hmmm... well, without your glasses or contacts in a self-defence situation, you'd certainly make a spectacle of yourself...



Seriously, though, this is a problem. I'm wearing glasses this year, for the first time, as my eyesight falls victim to advancing age. I can (so far) see and shoot OK for defensive use without them, but I'm sure this will change over time. I guess I'll have to make sure that my glasses rest on top of my gun next to the bed!

 

[Kjervin]

don't need glasses, but....

It occurred to me that maybe a set of perscription googles might be in order. That way, less likely to be lost in a scuffle. Not sure where to get them, though.
Just a suggestion.
Kj

 

[armoredman]

I have atrocious vision as well, and every so often I will take the prescriptions off, put on shooting glasses, and shoot the CCW qualifier that way. I haven't failed it yet....

 

[one-shot-one]

short barrled shotgun

and a good lawyer, just in case.

 

[Khaotic]

Years and years of practice - that an an extreme situational awareness combined with active training using audio cues.

My depth perception is hosed, especially in bright light, so i know where you're coming from, but anyone in my home after dark who I don't want there is likely to soak up a round even if I blindfolded, hung-over and sick with the flu.

It's amazing how well training sticks when you've had years of it, just keep at it, okay ?

-K

 

[CAS700850]

This presents a legal nightmare. Of all the talk we do about the legal liability of certain ammo, single action handguns, I don't recall evr talking about a legitimate problem that is something many members must face on a daily basis. Can you imagine being in court, the attorney for the now deceased scumbag holding your vision test results, asking you how you felt justified to shoot when you were not wearing corrective lenses, and you are virtually blind without them?

"And sir, how do you know my client's young son was intending to hit you with a hammer, for as these results show, you cannot see more then a foot in front of your face clearly? You couldn't possibly have seen a hammer in his hands."

This is a situation where all of the bells and whistles on a gun (night-sights, red-dot, laser, etc.) aren;t going to help a lot. The problem will be in target identification. I know there are sports goggles (Rec Specs) that offer corrective lenses. There are companies that offer shooting glasses with corrective lenses. But, neither of these will do you much good without enough notice to put them on.

My advice is to look into something like a Croakie strap, or something else to help keep the eyewear in place, and make your home as hard a target as you can, with some alarm decvice to give you early warning of intrusion. Give yourself time to put on the glasses.

Good luck.

Chris

 

[fjolnirsson]

Exactly why I opted for Lasik surgery. I was 20/1000 before surgery, and Lasik corrected it to 20/20. It's been 5 years now, and it's the best thing I ever did for myself.
Until then, I fumbled in the dark for glasses, and was unable to participate in sports.

Good luck.

 

[fjolnirsson]

Since the range will be 10 ft or less,
and since point shooting is faster than aimed fire at such close ranges, you basically have nothing to worry about.,

Actually, the problem is target identification. At ten feet, all I was able to see was a fuzzy blob. I couldn't even distinguish arms, etc. With vision as bad as mine was( and it sounds like the origional poster has eyes nearly as bad), you can't tell if you are being attacked until you are struck, let alone by whom. My "distance vision" was so bad that I could not read print until 4-6 inches from my face. I couldn't see dividing lines on the road, or see well enough to avoid blows in a martial arts setting.

 

[jc2]

Not hardly!

 

[fjolnirsson]

If you live alone, or if you live with just your wife, and she is screaming behind you, it's the middle of the night, then ANYONE in front of you is a justifiable target. Your loved ones know of your poor vision, and know to ID themselves, or risk being shot, right?

Heh. good point.

 

[Mauserguy]

I am mildly near sighted, and have considered this problem. In terms of target identification, I came to these conclusions:

1. Outside the home, the guy trying to mug me is the guy trying to mug me and should be stopped. I really don't need to look at the fine details of his ugly mug.

2. I live alone, so if anybody is in my house without my permission, and they come at me rapidly, I really don't need to examine the fine details of his ugly mug.

In both cases above, I would just point and shoot, bang, bang, bang, until the perpetrator moves no more. As long as I can make out the attackers form, point shooting is good enough.
Mauserguy

 

[The_Antibubba]

I had the LASIK (Wavefront) done, too, and even with a little haloing, I wouldn't hesitate to do it again.

However, you should talk to an expert, because you might not be able to spar for some time afterwards.

 

[JohnBT]

"You couldn't possibly have seen a hammer in his hands."

You're right, as bad as my eyesight is he was fuzzy around the edges and looked about three times as big as he was and whatever he was holding looked way bigger than a Domino's pizza box so I figured he wasn't a lost pizza delivery person. Seeing as how I was the only one in the house when I locked all of the doors and windows at bedtime I calculated that he was in my bedroom to do me harm. Looks like I was right and I wasn't about to let him get close enough to kiss me before he attacked me.

John...20/1200+ uncorrected. My friends and neighbors know to yell loudly before they walk in on me. I've been to two surgery seminars and doing both eyes will run me $4800 or so, but screw up my incredible vision for anything out to 7 inches.

 

[confed sailor]

if anyone is retired military, talk to tricare and see if you can get OBA goggles.

thats what they issue us blind guys in the USN for wear under gasmasks, OBA Masks, ect.

 

[NMshooter]

My biggest concern pre LASIK was my inability to use sights without glasses.

I was a big believer in the buckshot loaded shotgun then.

For those whom surgery is not an option at this time I strongly encourage you to practice shooting without glasses. Keep in mind things tend to happen up close and personal, no need for 25 yard bullseye shooting here.

Even if you can not see the sights you can still see the pistol, that will give you an idea of your point of aim, and with practice you can put the rounds where they need to go at close range.

You are not trying to shoot his left eye out, just get him off you.

 

[klover]

CTC laser grips may be?

My eyes are slowly going South. This fact and the fact that 38 special isn't an extremely potent arm in an airweight J frame justified my purchase of CTC grips.

Also, I wanted the old grips off the 638 for the new 649, so I figured in a grip discount of sorts.

 

[MechAg94]

I am mildly nearsighted with a slight astygmatism. I can see across the room well enough to ID someone or see a gun, but details get fuzzy fast. I wouldn't attempt to shoot at any distance without corrective lenses.

I have been wearing contacts for the last 4 years. I do need to try to get some cheapy glasses as backup in case the SHTF. My current glasses are good enough, but several years out of date.

I have thought about laser surgery, but haven't seriously considered spending the money.

 

[bcochran]

poor eye sight

Send me a personal email at [email protected] and I will expand on my comments.

Go to turnipseedtechnique.com or quickshoot.com and order the video of the shooting. KT, the instructor, has worse eyesight than you. My eyesight is such that I don't have binocular vision. I have had eye surgery (and this wasn't lasix!) and my depth perception is so bad that I cannot parallel park.

Nonetheless, having been taught proper technique and stance by KT, I am routinely shooting about 3 days a week without prescription lenses and managing 149 kill shots out of 150 rounds rapid fire at 21 feet to the base of the throat at the convenient indoor range.

KT's background is in the martial arts and paratroopers. The stance and technique work for all small arms and whether you are static or moving when shooting.

 

[CAS700850]

Again, I don't know that hitting the target is the biggest concern here. We all saw Michael Jordan shoot a successful free throw with his eyes closed. How? Repitition of the movements. Same was successful point shooting works. Same way you can type without looking at the keys (unless you are me, and looking at the keyboard right now ).

The big concern here is target identification, threat analysis, and the legal aftermath of such a shooting. Obviously, if physically attacked, the glasses knocked off, you'll likely prevail. But, what happens when you hear a bump in the night, you get up, grab your gun, and shoot the moving blob on the other side of the room? And, what happens when this turns out to be some 13 year old unarmed kid stealing your DVD player? You get sued for wrongful death, and you have to justify your shots. Think a jury is going to have sympathy for the "blind" man who fired upon an unarmed kid? I wouldn't count on it...

Secure the home to the highest degree, install noisemaking alarms on the entrances, and get some type of retaining device for the eyewear. Don't give the plaintiff's attorney the "blind man" argument.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

And, what happens when this turns out to be some 13 year old unarmed kid stealing your DVD player? You get sued for wrongful death, and you have to justify your shots. Think a jury is going to have sympathy for the "blind" man who fired upon an unarmed kid? I wouldn't count on it...

In some states, that's not a wrongful death. You need to know your state laws on this topic.

In those states, if he's in your house unbidden, you are correct to assume he's there to do you harm and free to use lethal force. In fact, you might be stupid NOT to. (I'd probably feel bad about it, later -- but not as bad as if it turns out that the poor misguided kid was armed, too, and he got off the first shot.)

In NC, my state, you can shoot as soon as they come in the door or window. The assumption is that they were intent upon doing you or yours bodily harm, and you can respond accordingly.

Just don't shoot them as they're on the way out the door.... Its difficult, then, to make folks believe you felt you were still in danger. A judge or jury might consider THAT a wrongful death. (But not, apparently, in Texas.)

 

[roo_ster]

Another nearsighted, astigmatised fellow, here. I have trouble with the big "E" on the eyechart without correction.

I place my specs, Surefire 6P, and firearm(s) in the same exact location every night. I can reach out and grap specs & Surefire without opening my eyes. I can also operate my quick-access safe without any light.

I also lock my doors, disconnect the power to the garage door, and own two vigilant dogs. All of that is to give me enough time to wake and gear up in case of a break-in.

Seeing a BG then would not be a problem, as my glasses don't fall easily of my face. If I were involved in a scuffle & they were lost, I think I can reasonably assume hte guy who I am scuffling with is the same guy, both pre- and post- glasses.

 

[bcochran]

you need to distinguish between bad vision and target

You need to distinguish between identifying a target, if necessary, and shooting with poor vision.

No one is advocating shooting 13 year olds in the dark. As for a discussion of legal consequences, it is largely irrelevant. I am admitted to practice in New York, Nevada and California. I have read these "legal objections" or "legal issues" for years and they are not relevant to poor vision.

If you want target identification, either don't shoot or use a light. There are plenty of lights on the market. If you are worried about getting sued, then don't shoot - ever. In the real world, people make instaneous decisions to shoot - like my friend who was being held up a gunpoint - and who killed the perp who had the drop on him. Or like my friend walking out of a dojo with plain clothes officers who ran into their own gang initiation - with the gang members going down.

How about a compromise? I have a loaded pistol with a light on it. I also have a loaded pistol without a light. So, the next time L.A. has its riots, I can make an instanteous choice of which to use.


If you pay for quality instruction, you will be able to shoot in daylight, in low light and with your eyes closed. For example, I did a night police instructed shotgun course and didn't use a light and was just fine. If I had wanted target identification, I would have used a light.

For the original poster, the following comments are valid. Your martial arts stance is the same stance used in boxing and shooting. Your framing is slightly different from dance, in that the feet are not spread wide and solid on the ground; however, your indexing towards your partner (or a target or an opponent) is the same. With proper stance and indexing, you can learn to draw, shoot without sights and consistenlty hit 1/4 inch hanging string at 15 feet. It would be nice to have perfect vision; however, ask yourself, do you really need it in the martial arts?

 

[CAS700850]

bcochran,

May I ask how you find concerns about the legal ramifications involved here as being irrelevant? Granted, I am speaking in terms of Ohio law, but here, a person must be in reasonable fear for one's own safety, or the safety of another, to apply self-defense. To reach deadly force levels, one must be in reasonable fear that the target of your shooting was an imminent risk to cause serious physical harm and/or death.

Now, if you have a shooter who is, for all intents and purposes, blind without glasses, and the facts show that the shot was fired without the glasses on, don't you believe that there is a great legal risk, in either the civil or criminal arena? Perhaps I was pushing it a bit with the unarmed 13 year old, but I was trying to make a point, based on Ohio law. You cannot just shoot an intruder assuming that the mere intrusion causes the subject to pose a risk.

I am licensed in Ohio. Perhaps that colors my legal opinions, as it is based upon my knowledge of Ohio law.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

CAS700850:

What justifies the use of lethal force in your state?

This seems a lot like the argument about whether using a gun that has been gunsmithed (light trigger, etc.) or one with a heavy trigger is going to cause you problems. I've heard folks say that a district attorney or an attorney representing the person shot could use this to show an "attitude" problem. I've also heard that this is "BS" -- that if you were justified in using lethal force, it didn't matter. If you weren't justified, it could make things worse.

If your use of the gun falls within the parameter justifying lethal force, is vision an issue? (Serious question, and not an attempt to be flippant.) Particularly if you're inside your own home with an intruder?