carry guns with lasers

[jimbob86]

The US Border Patrol tested laser equipt handguns with the possibility of issuing every Agent one. What came out of the evaluation is that they added little if any practice use for most shooting situations. They actually slowed down shot times as agents looked for the dot, not every shooter every time, but enough to cause concern.

And your tax dollars paid for it ...... when the problem was evaluated and reported on 3 decades ago ........ and written down, in books available FOR FREE in any public Library, and this being the Information Age, easily found......... yet again, there is proof that there is no functional difference between those who can not read and those who do not read.

[Terry A]

Lasers are good as long as you don't become "laser dependant". By that I mean if you get so used to only shooting with your laser that if, for whatever reason man-made mechanical things fail, you'll freeze up or hesitate for even a split second trying to figure out what went wrong, you could lose.

The sights on your weapon should be what you're most comfortable aiming with. Lasers can add to that, but they should never take away from that.

[BGutzman]

Funny youd be hard pressed to show me more than a handful of infantry troops that don't use them.... weird for something so mediocre... or is in 30 years of technology's things have come a long way..

[Dr Big Bird PhD]

People always resent technological innovations at first

[colbad]

Remember a laser traces in both directions. Just like light discipline sometimes its better to remain in the dark and not give away a tactical advantage. I think night sights are the way to go.

[Skadoosh]

Funny youd be hard pressed to show me more than a handful of infantry troops that don't use them....

Are you suggesting that we should carry them because soldiers do?

[Mike Irwin]

I simply have never been all that sold on lasers, especially on a defensive gun, and especially not a home defense gun.

[Gaerek]

Funny youd be hard pressed to show me more than a handful of infantry troops that don't use them.... weird for something so mediocre... or is in 30 years of technology's things have come a long way..

In that case, I'm going to start carrying my M4 with me everywhere, wearing body armor, and can't forget the helmet. I need to find some grenades and probably some flashbangs.

There's lots of stuff soldiers use on a daily basis. Most of that stuff are things we'd never even dream of carrying in our day to day civilian life. They have a specific mission they are trying to accomplish with rules of engagement that are completely different than ours.

Besides, the lasers that are mostly used by our troops aren't the same thing we'd carry. They are mainly used as laser designators to "paint" a target for an aircraft above. Most (maybe all now?) can only be seen in infrared, so you need NVGs for them to even be used as a sight, and it also won't draw a line back to your gun (assuming the bad guy doesn't have NVGs). Yes, most troops have them. No, most troops don't use them in the way you're thinking. (Source: Brother-in-Law, Major in the Army, 3 tours in Iraq, 2 in Afganistan)

By the way, how many of them have lasers on their M9s? Very few...if any.

People always resent technological innovations at first

Good thing laser sights have been around for 30ish years for people to figure if they're useful. (Jury is STILL out!)

[Tactical Jackalope]

Iron sights, iron night sights.

TLR-1 for duty. Even for home defense.

Lasers? ...lol...no..

[dayman]

Soldiers/SWAT using them only proves that they work well as an offensive tool.

I have one on my sp101 so that if my wife ever has to use it she'll have the option, and on my bg380 because they come that way. I can see how they could be useful in some situations, but the price point is a little high for me for what you get.

Like almost anything else, if it works for you go for it.

[j3ffr0]

Lasers are superior to iron sights in many self defense situations for one reason -- You can aim your gun and keep your eyes focused on the threat at the same time. You cannot do both properly with iron sights. In high stress situations most people focus on the threat, even if they have had some training. In a low light situation, focusing on the threat isn't a bad thing. Does he have a gun or is he just trying to give you something you dropped? You'd better make sure before you shoot, and a laser allows you to keep your eye on the ball (or the threat as the case may be)

However, lasers are a supplement not a replacement. Lasers are much less useful in full daylight when the sun is out. I can see mine, but I'm definitely quicker with iron sights in that situation. When the sun isn't out, the laser is pretty good.

I also believe lasers could have helped those officers in the Empire State building incident. From the video it looks like it was overcast and light was further dimmed in the area by city buildings blocking the sky. I think fewer civilians would have taken hits. Clearly these officers had difficulty using their iron sights inside of 15 feet in high a high stress situation. Maybe they were point shooting, but so then much for the argument that you don't need to and shouldn't aim at self defense distances.

Bottom line -- Lasers can help people aim precisely in high stress, lower light situations.

[Gaerek]

Soldiers/SWAT using them only proves that they work well as an offensive tool.

There's much wrong with your statement. Let me break it down.

1) Soldiers and SWAT using them doesn't prove that they're good for us civilians. It proves that with what they are doing, and with their rules of engagement, they have some use. Do you spend your time holding insurgents at gun point? Do you spend time clearing out rooms and shooting hostage takers (iron sights would work better in this situation most of the time)? Do you train to effectively use all of the tools at your disposal many hours each week (so you aren't fixated on just the one aiming device)?

2) I boldfaced the word offensive. We, as civilians should never be using our firearms in an offensive capacity. Only defensive. We are reactive in hostile situation, not proactive (because to do so would make us the instigator). Time and time again, it's proven that it's quicker to pick up your iron sights than it is to follow your laser dot. Keep in mind that using a laser sight and training with one trains you to look at your target, and not your sights...a big no no.

3) You assume that soldiers use their lasers as aiming aids. See my post above. They can be used as laser sights, but are rarely used in that way. More likely, they are used as laser designators to paint a target for orbiting aircraft.

4) I think you have watched too many cop movies, because from what I understand the only people who use them on a SWAT team (of course, I don't know every SWAT team in the US) are the shield carriers because it's almost impossible for them to pick up iron sights. And even then, they can use reflex, red dot sights (something like this) with as much, or more effectiveness as a laser. Here's another way to think about it. If you were one of 4 guys clearing a room...which dot is yours? Hollywood has been slapping laser sights on SWAT guns for 20+ years because it looks good on screen. Its just not very effective.

Here's a thread on a police forum where they discuss lasers...notice that most say they have limited usefulness, or aren't even used. Bottom line...Hollywood has made laser sights sexy. They certainly have some usefulness in some specific situations. But for the most part, they're a gimmick that, if anything, isn't any better than iron sights/night sights.

[kcub]

The bottom line is iron sights are useless in low light where they simply can't be seen. If you prefer night sights or point shooting go for it having considered the options. I'm going with a laser.

[Tactical Jackalope]

Originally Posted by kcub

The bottom line is iron sights are useless in low light where they simply can't be seen. If you prefer night sights or point shooting go for it having considered the options. I'm going with a laser.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. But that by far has been one of the worst ones I've seen on this forum.

Chop yours off then and stick to your little laser lol.

[Nanuk]

And your tax dollars paid for it ...... when the problem was evaluated and reported on 3 decades ago ........ and written down, in books available FOR FREE in any public Library, and this being the Information Age, easily found......... yet again, there is proof that there is no functional difference between those who can not read and those who do not read.

Am I slow or just missing your point?

[springer99]

"People always resent technological innovations at first" - Yep, that's certainly true.

"Like almost anything else, if it works for you go for it." - Very good advice.

"Everyone is entitled to an opinion" - Glad you agree with this.

"If you prefer night sights or point shooting go for it having considered the options. I'm going with a laser." - At my age, having used them all, I'm in this camp. In my younger days, plain partridge sights would have been fine, but those days are long gone.

[Tactical Jackalope]

At my age, having used them all, I'm in this camp. In my younger days, plain partridge sights would have been fine, but those days are long gone.

Yes sir.

Just a quick question, because I am not there. I value the opinions of an elder higher, rather than someone of my own age.

You use lasers now? I'm amusing because your vision isn't as good as it once was. I'm sorry to hear. My pops is going in that direction as well.

Also, so your whole life of iron sight usage and being adequate to an extent unknown by me of course, another assumption. So all that time with them has diminished? Or it's just easier for you to use lasers now so you'd rather skip the headache?


Neutral tone. Just trying to understand.

I'm not for lasers. I tried it once, didn't like it.

[Colorado Redneck]

Constantine-go get some reading glasses about 2.5 power and wear those while trying to hit a target with iron sights at 30 feet. That might illustrate the issue some of us are dealing with.

[Sharpsdressed Man]

Some like them, some don't. This is the only one at present that I have that would fit the bill, and it works pretty well in the dark. I can hit a steel plate at 25 yards if I KNOW where it is at (and can't even see it). It also allows me to aim in spite of the sights being occluded when the Walther is equipped with a suppressor (my main reason for having it). Sort of a poor man's SOCOM. It doesn't add that much weight, and being designed to fit the rail and have a fair margin of ergonomics with the switch location, it is workable. The one thing I have found about lasers is that they do not last that long in extreme cold weather. Batteries tend to give up the ooomph in about 20-45 minutes, depending on use, depleted power, and exposure to the cold. If carried next to the body, under garments, and then employed, you stand a better chance of longer use in the cold. [IMG][/IMG] [IMG][/IMG]

[BGutzman]

Are you suggesting that we should carry them because soldiers do?

Yes I am - why because of all military people these are one of the groups who's primary job is direct engagement.

The argument about tracing your laser back to your position is only valid if you think CCW will result in a fire fight... possible, not sure how often it actually happens but given the distance of most CCW contacts Im not sure that's a rational reason to not use one..

Seriously under 25 feet, who's not going to see you if they are presenting an immediate threat to you... No they may not realize you are a ccw carrier but I would guess they most often see you...

[kcub]

So Constantine, you see your irons perfectly well in low light conditions?
This isn't youth, these are super powers.

[Tactical Jackalope]

So a lifetime of point shooting which is subconsciously obtained from using iron sights, just diminishes like that and you NEED a laser?

I'm asking if you need it.

Or are just more comfortable with it.


Trust me, when it pops off. You won't be looking down the sights. What makes anyone think the same with a laser? For search and find scenarios. Cool I guess, then what when you find. Or worse. They find you because of that bright shiny red beam?

[kcub]

Point shooting and using the irons are not the same thing, dude.

[Smit]

All in all I still consider a laser add-on to be more of an intimidation factor than anything else. Practical for quick targeting? Maybe, but again I think you are better off focusing on the sights from the get-go. Too much stuff going on in a time-sensitive stressful situation can be bad.

[Tactical Jackalope]

Point shooting and using the irons are not the same thing, dude.

Aren't we talking "iron sights" in low light situation vs laser?

They're in the same chapter.

Again, you won't be looking down the iron sights once there is a target engaged.