WRT the guy in BDUs above, he's holding that gun like an M4, and he's not using the sights in the picture.
His finger is also off the trigger and he is not in the actual process of shooting at that exact moment
That picture might reference the equipment, but it would be an inane stretch to try to read much into the technique being used by a still frame snapped at an arbitrary moment when the guy is not even shooting.
If you're shooting at stationary targets, the sight is far less of a handicap. The little red dot doesn't get in your way like ghost rings.
In our own way I think we starting to hit at the same thing. Different end uses favor different equipment. I will note three gun does not merely involve shooting stationary targets, since you appear to be unfamiliar with the sport.
Many people do not find that ghost rings get in the way at all for this type of shooting. The type of shooting we are discussing might be more analogous to a PH shooting charging dangerous game. One will find sights on those rather expensive double guns. Speed is certainly of the essence in placing those aimed shots. I don't have GRs on my hunting shotguns, not would I put them on gun for clays (skeet trap etc). When I use a gun with ghost rings on it for shooting small flying discs (some times a target in 3 gun but for me most often practicing with my shotguns or shooting for giggles with friends) I do not find the rear ring seriously inhibits me using the front post as a bead and shooting as I would otherwise. I do however find that sights of some sort make a very significant difference when it comes to aimed fire, particularly shooting slugs at the limits of their effective range. Thus, FOR ME, GRs (and to a greater extent a red dot) is clearly a net gain. That is why I, and many others find them preferable for tactical shooting.
To suggest that such users do not know how to shoot, or are looking to equipment to make up for a fundamental lack of skill, is not only insulting and narrow minded, it suggests a lack of understanding of the task said equipment is meant to be used for.
Jerry runs a red dot because he shoots open class which allows optics and optical sights are superior to a bed or iron sights (think about why an optic pushes you into open class. The fact it does is a pretty large indicator they are widely accepted as inherently superior, so much so that it would be unfair to make a shooter using a bead shoot against one using an optic). What we ought to look at is what are the top guys in divisions that disallow optics using? Are they running GRs? open sights? beads? This is actually an interesting research question.
If someone is asking about ghost rings, that tells me something about the techniques he most likely hasn't learned to their full potential.
That is the presumption that you always make and it is not a safe one. He stated expressly that he wants to be faster on
aimed shots. Sights let you take aimed shots faster. Asking about GR might just as well tell you about how he plans to shoot/use his gun.
Technique will always be the highest trump, no wise person will dispute that. It is correct to point out that equipment is not a sound substitute for skill. It is wrong IMO to presume that someone looking for an improvement in equipment is looking to substitute for skill. Some equipment is inherently superior to other equipment. When I replace the GI sights on my 1911 I am not looking to shortcut shooting technique. Rather the improved sights genuinely are faster to acquire and use. When I put a scope on my rifle it is similarly because it really lets me do the task I am seeking to do, shooting at long range, better. Same for a red dot in the type of shooting we are talking about. The same is true for ghost rings if we are talking about aimed shots, and lest anyone forget, we are talking about aimed shots. I quote the OP-- "I am considering a reflex sight or a ghost ring set up so that it will line up faster for aimed fire." A bead is slower and inferior for that task. An optical sight (which I mention because it was an option the OP was originally considering) is superior to a bead sight for the type of shooting we are discussing. GR are superior as well.
My point is that if someone is shooting their shotgun slower than someone with ghost rings, they'll gain more from practice on moving targets, with a gun that fits, than from putting sights on it.
I understand your point as quoted. However, he wants to be faster at aimed shooting. Does one aim when he shoot clays? NO! This is a different type of shooting. Steering him away from equipment based on your belief that it is inferior for a different task than the one he is asking about, and then suggesting he doesn't know how to shoot is probably not the most useful advice he could get. Shooting clays will of course make one a better shotgunner (it is also lots of fun). It is not the solution to or a teacher of every skill set that one might want to employ with a shotgun.
As to the vent rib. I would have to ask Jerry before I presumed to assign its importance to his shooting. I will say that I have seen a bunch of top shooters with small red dots mounted far to the rear of the gun. Many have no rib. For example Jack Travers gun
Ill close by saying that in re reading my posts and yours I think we are probably fairly close on some things and that the medium in communication (at least from my end) probably inhibits articulating my self, and also inhibits me from a more precise understanding of others' exact points. I do believe GRs trump a bead for a tactical shotgun that will see the full spectrum of use. I do not believe they forcedly will make the user slower for that type of shooting. I think a properly set up red dot is better than both for speed and believe there is a fair amount of objective evidence to support that. A red dot may have other draw backs. As always, this is my opinion. I do not presume to know what will work best for everyone, nor do I seek to project the way I use my guns onto them.
