Tactical light on glock - should they be used for home defense?

[FITASC]

Whats the difference? Pest is a pest.

One that is raiding the garbage can like a racoon versus an armed intruder?
Okaaaaaay.

Le sigh, like I've said a number of times now, the layout of homes is not always the same.

Nice drama - of course layouts are different - but if the intruder is in the same room as me, that's a little too close for my comfort zone to worry about turning on a flashlight

[AK103K]

One that is raiding the garbage can like a racoon versus an armed intruder?
Okaaaaaay.

Well, you never know just what you got going on, until you get there and see, now do you?

[TunnelRat]

I'm going to take a low light pistol class Saturday and will report back what I learn. My concealed carry G26 has no rail to mount a light but my G17 does. I'm planning on taking several hand held lights along with my G26 but I'll also take the G17. I'd really like to get better with the firearm I carry, so I'll concentrate on the G26.

My EDC gun is also my bedside gun. The larger G17 or an AR with a light might be a better choice for home defense but I don't bother to open the safe twice a day. Perhaps this class will change my mind.

That sounds pretty cool, definitely let us know.

[Sharkbite]

but if the intruder is in the same room as me, that's a little too close for my comfort zone to worry about turning on a flashlight

If its dark in that room...how do you know what(who) you are shooting at. An armed intruder...some drunk guy in the wrong house...your teenage daughters boyfriend sneaking in/out..

Target ID is always your responsibility. Cant take back that fired shot

[TXAZ]

That's what gun owners need, a "Back" button, to take back the errant shot.

[Jim243]

Well target identification is a good thing, saved my daughter when she decided to come in (snick into the house) at 3:00 AM without telling us she had left (17 yrs old at the time, now 28). Light and gun was pointed at the floor in-front of her but the gun light was sufficient to tell me who was there. Last time she ever pulled that stunt.

I don't remember when was the last time I heard of a burglar turning on the lights when robing a house, usually they cut the breakers or the line into the house so they can not be ID'ed if the lights where turned on by a home owner. Of course some are not that smart, or they would be breaking in during the day when no one was home but at work. (most are done during daylight hours.) Now, breaking into someone's garage at night is a common occurrence, but motion sensing lights can help avoid that from happening. You will need some form of light, and I would still prefer one that mounts on the gun and can also be used for aiming when the sights are not visible in the dark. Unless you have night sights on the gun which most people don't.

It is nice to be able to blind someone who has a gun or knife in their hand, it will give you a 5 to 10 second advantage till their eyes can focus again. During that time you can tell if they are trying to raise their pistol (justifiable cause) and stop them. A light mounted on a taser works just as well.

I personally would rather have one hand free to do things like open doors or even turning on a light switch or grabbing a table to turn over and use as a shield. But if you want to have something in both hands that's your call.

Be sure to double lock your doors and let the dogs roam the house at night, and by all means stay safe.

Jim

[2damnold4this]

On the subject of lights for defense, what are your thoughts on the different switch types available for hand held lights? Many Surefire lights intended to be used in the hand have a momentary on tail cap switch while other lights have a click type tail cap. What are the advantages and disadvantages to each style of switch for a hand held light?

[Skans]

And what if the intruder just happens to be between you and the light switch for that room?

I have lots of light switches, seriously, I do. It really is easier and more effective, in my house, to simply flip a switch if you need to. That way I can see everything in a large room rather than just where I point my gun.

As I picture someone actually trying to use a weapon-mounted light, I have this vision of Barnie Fife shaking his gun all about just trying to see what's in the dark room!

[TunnelRat]

Nice drama - of course layouts are different - but if the intruder is in the same room as me, that's a little too close for my comfort zone to worry about turning on a flashlight

Lol, it was a joke not drama. I have a room in my house that is easily 30 ft across. Certainly feasible for two people to be in the same room. Like I said, different houses.

I have lots of light switches, seriously, I do. It really is easier and more effective, in my house, to simply flip a switch if you need to. That way I can see everything in a large room rather than just where I point my gun

The spill on most weapon lights is quite large. Going from dark to illuminated with the weapon mounted light and even in the large room I describe above I can see pretty much anything in my line of sight. We're talking a lot more lumens than a basic flashlight. That said if you have the switches rock on. My point was there are times for other people when that might not be the case.

As I picture someone actually trying to use a weapon-mounted light, I have this vision of Barnie Fife shaking his gun all about just trying to see what's in the dark room!

You may have that picture in your head, but it's one that doesn't really fit.

[Don P]

My thought on lights mounted on guns. I have to ask who lives in a house that is so dark that you cannot see during night time hours WITHOUT the lights on?? Just my opinion I don't need a light on my HD gun. Most of us have lived in our homes for some time, thus knowing the layout, furniture location and the such. A great advantage over the intruder. As stated by previous posts, extra do-hickies to fool with and saying here I am
In closing I have never in 24 years in my house never been had the occasion that it was so dark that I couldn't see and needed a light.

[TunnelRat]

In closing I have never in 24 years in my house never been had the occasion that it was so dark that I couldn't see and needed a light.

Some of us live in the sticks, and it gets pitch black out.

Most of us have lived in our homes for some time, thus knowing the layout, furniture location and the such. A great advantage over the intruder.

Fair point. I'd mention though that some of us also live with wives, children, dogs, etc. I'm not pressing that trigger until I know for as certain as possible at whom I am firing. Hence me wanting a light.

[Sharkbite]

In closing I have never in 24 years in my house never been had the occasion that it was so dark that I couldn't see and needed a light.

There are 3 things that we need light for in a tactical siituation.
1. To identify the threat as a THREAT
2. To navigate thru the environment we are in
3. To see the sights for accurate shot placement

The above post only deals with one of those factors, and in my opinion not the most important of them.

Very little light is needed to move around a house without tripping over furniture. To ID a vague shadowy figure POSITIVELY as a deadly threat that you must shoot, takes a lot more light

[Tactical Jackalope]

I love all these "rabbit out of the hat" scenarios... Answer the question and stop being contrarians all the time.

OP, yes... They're good to have. Like the gun, it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.* Know when you should and shouldn't use it. People are assuming it'll stay on or something. There are "temporary" switches, usually on either side.

How to know when to use it or not? Simple. Take a night time defense course. I've learned a lot from those courses. Another thing people don't put into consideration, when you wake up at 3am and you have that natural "night vision" eye sight, aren't you ultra sensitive to the first bundle of light you see? You feel "blinded" and if you shut it off right after, you've lost your night vision for a little while.


So yes, it's a double edged sword. But again. *It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.* This is something we live by when we are armed citizens. This isn't any different.

[fastbolt]

TunnelRat I'd not assume the newspaper found all the instances. It didn't list one I'd read and was thinking about when I came across that article.

Also, nowhere did I say or infer that LE weapon-light training was uniformly available, or if so, produced superior interest on the part of the million cops in the country to develop skillset beyond whatever it took to get through a class.

Yes, private citizens interested in shooting classes, training, competition & practice may acquire better skills in shooting than cops who only see their gun as a piece of equipment they don't particularly enjoy using. Not surprising.

However, one of the problems often encountered by private citizens is that they aren't usually experienced in frequently facing dangerous situations, let alone trained in doing so. Operating equipment without stress is one thing, like shooting at a range, and yet often another thing when trying to do so while experiencing serious stress.

Then, there's the difference in stress between just being watched by other shooters on a range (like in an IDPA competition), or suddenly believing there's an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death to yourself or a loved one.

If LE, trained to encounter potentially dangerous situations, and often more experienced in doing so than regular citizens, can make mistakes when using a piece of equipment, how much more so might a regular citizen be likely to make a mistake when experiencing his/her first perceived dangerous situation? Relevant, good training can help, whether it be LE or private citizen.

People make the mistake of hitting the accelerator pedal instead of the brake pedal under sudden stress (surprise, fear, etc), and do so more often than some folks might think.

How is that different than having a 'trigger' finger find the trigger, instead of the light switch, under stressful conditions? Drivers also usually have a LOT more experience in selecting the correct pedal for normal circumstances in their vehicles every day, and yet drivers still make mistakes in selecting the proper pedals under sudden stress all the time.

Now, think about using triggers and light switches on firearms may get only infrequent use or practice. Whether it be cop or a regular citizen, when it comes to using equipment, and knowing when to use equipment, familiarity, training and experience can be helpful. High risk/Low Frequency events deserve careful consideration.

[TunnelRat]

However, one of the problems often encountered by private citizens is that they aren't usually experienced in frequently facing dangerous situations, let alone trained in doing so. Operating equipment without stress is one thing, like shooting at a range, and yet often another thing when trying to do so while experiencing serious stress.

Then, there's the difference in stress between just being watched by other shooters on a range (like in an IDPA competition), or suddenly believing there's an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death to yourself or a loved one.

This applies to all people and is rather obvious. Unless you want to do training where we try to kill each other, there is no perfect simulation of life and death events. We make the best facsimile we can, even in police training.

If LE, trained to encounter potentially dangerous situations, and often more experienced in doing so than regular citizens, can make mistakes when using a piece of equipment, how much more so might a regular citizen be likely to make a mistake when experiencing his/her first perceived dangerous situation? Relevant, good training can help, whether it be LE or private citizen.

This is the argument I anticipated you'd use, and in fact it's why I mentioned it above. So because an extremely small percentage of officers both have poor muzzle discipline and make a mistake when it comes to activating a weapon light, then a citizen will do the same? The use of a firearm by itself is dangerous and there are plenty who have negligent discharges and kill loved ones. This does not mean other private citizens are doomed to the same fate. The same logic applies to weapon lights. There will always be those that lack proper diligence when using a product and result in injury.

People make the mistake of hitting the accelerator pedal instead of the brake pedal under sudden stress (surprise, fear, etc), and do so more often than some folks might think.

How is that different than having a 'trigger' finger find the trigger, instead of the light switch, under stressful conditions? Drivers also usually have a LOT more experience in selecting the correct pedal for normal circumstances in their vehicles every day, and yet drivers still make mistakes in selecting the proper pedals under sudden stress all the time.

A straw man if I ever saw one. Yes humans are fallible, no one is saying they aren't. Not all drivers hit the accelerator instead of the brake. Not even most drivers, it's a small subset. You're applying what happens to a small minority and casting it on the whole. By the same logic we wouldn't allow anyone to own firearms in the first place because far more people will die in a year from violating the fundamental rules of safety than anything as specific as weapon lights.

Now, think about using triggers and light switches on firearms may get only infrequent use or practice. Whether it be cop or a regular citizen, when it comes to using equipment, and knowing when to use equipment, familiarity, training and experience can be helpful.

Please point out to me where I said training and experience are not helpful. In fact I said the opposite.

On the Streamlight TLR-1 HL I use the toggle is outside the trigger guard by a noticeable margin. The motion to activate the light involves me pushing my extended finger downward, away from the trigger. When I activate the light, my finger is left in a position where the tip of my finger is beyond the front of the trigger guard. I then have to make a deliberate motion to bend the finger to get it back into the trigger guard. It's designed in a way to keep the user from negligently pressing the trigger, at least as much as possible (which is all we can expect from any product).

High risk/Low Frequency events deserve careful consideration.

Sure. Everything in life deserves consideration. But if you're going to allow extremely low percentage events to dictate what you do and don't do, then you will find you cannot/will not do anything. I'm not at any point here throwing caution to the wind. What I'm doing is pointing out that low risk events, while they should be considered, don't condemn a practice on the whole because of the negligence of a few. That was the point of my original response to your article.

[fastbolt]

This applies to all people and is rather obvious.

I agree, but just because something may appear obvious to some folks, that doesn't mean it's prudent to allow the 'obvious nature' of something to result in complacency.

This is the argument I anticipated you'd use, and in fact it's why I mentioned it above. So because an extremely small percentage of officers both have poor muzzle discipline and make a mistake when it comes to activating a weapon light, then a citizen will do the same? The use of a firearm by itself is dangerous and there are plenty who have negligent discharges and kill loved ones. This does not mean other private citizens are doomed to the same fate. The same logic applies to weapon lights. There will always be those that lack proper diligence when using a product and result in injury.

My point was that if people who have received some degree of training, supplemented by experience, may still make mistakes when following their training, then it might be prudent for folks without the benefit of such training and experience to approach such practices with due care and consideration.

A straw man if I ever saw one. Yes humans are fallible, no one is saying they aren't. Not all drivers hit the accelerator instead of the brake. Not even most drivers, it's a small subset. You're applying what happens to a small minority and casting it on the whole. By the same logic we wouldn't allow anyone to own firearms in the first place because far more people will die in a year from violating the fundamental rules of safety than anything as specific as weapon lights.

I don't see it as a "strawman argument" in the commonly accepted sense. It wasn't intended as being a superior or misrepresented effort to refute your comments. Instead, it was offered as an example of how a seemingly simple and common skill - like using controls of a car - may get confused in unexpected emergency situations by anyone.

If you'd rather, I could use the example of people using switches on everyday appliances and power equipment may unintentionally try to use them contrary to the desired manner, and stress (or hurry) can sometimes result in mistakes. Making mistakes around triggers (or chainsaws, table saw, etc) can have tragic, albeit unintended results.

It's not a criticism, but an observation and cautionary example using other equipment that's not unfamiliar to a lot of us.

Please point out to me where I said training and experience are not helpful. In fact I said the opposite.

Didn't say you did. Again, it wasn't a criticism, but a simple observation.

... What I'm doing is pointing out that low risk events, while they should be considered, don't condemn a practice on the whole because of the negligence of a few. That was the point of my original response to your article.

I think you meant 'high risk' events?

Risk management and decision making using the combinations of high & low risk and high/low frequency events has been used often enough to help people understand how to gauge risks, and especially in help create training to try and identify and deal with the different combinations of them.

High risk situations that don't occur with common frequency may catch us unprepared to make the correct decisions under stress, and if the potential consequences for the wrong decision/action are dire, it makes sense to try and prepare to deal with such situations without having to 'wing it.

I wasn't 'condemning a practice'.

I was recommending approaching the handling, operation and application of equipment to help prevent unintended problems. Same thing I'd suggest when operating any other inherently dangerous equipment (like chainsaws, table saws & other power tools, operating motor vehicles ... and firearms).

FWIW, I caution the same things when helping train people using hand-held lights at the same time a firearm is being employed, in both training and for actual real world use.

Attention to safety is critical for all of us, especially when using a new type of equipment, including a new configuration of a piece of existing equipment, like attaching a light to a familiar firearm.

That's all.

[Jim243]

extra do-hickies to fool with and saying here I am

I view it more like "here I come" than here I am. If it gives an intruder an extra 30 seconds to get out the door without my having to point anything at him then I think that is a good thing.

Stay safe.
Jim

[Snyper]

Some of us live in the sticks, and it gets pitch black out.

That's why they make "night lights"

A couple in the right locations will light up the intruder and leave you in the shadows.

A mirror on the wall in the right place will let you see around corners

[Sharkbite]

That's why they make "night lights"

Its a rare "night light" that provides enough illumination to POSITIVELY identify a threat. A black gun in a hand is HARD to see, a small knife or screwdriver even more so.

What im hearing here is those that think ambient light or night lights are sufficient are thinking just seeing a vauge figure in the house is enough to justify shooting. I STRONGLY disagree. Just seeing someone in my house does not give me the MORAL justification to use deadly force...even if my state gives me the legal justification to do so.

A POSITIVE identification that the person is a threat and MUST be shot to prevent harm to me or my family is needed before I press the trigger

[TunnelRat]

My point was that if people who have received some degree of training, supplemented by experience, may still make mistakes when following their training, then it might be prudent for folks without the benefit of such training and experience to approach such practices with due care and consideration.

You're just repeating yourself. I read the same comment above. Yes a very small percentage of officers violate both muzzle discipline and can't properly use a light. No one is saying don't use caution.

I don't see it as a "strawman argument" in the commonly accepted sense. It wasn't intended to as being a superior or a misrepresented effort to refute your comments. Instead, it was offered as an example of how a seemingly simple and common skill - like using controls of a car - may get confused in unexpected emergency situations by anyone.

If you'd rather, I could use the example of people using switches on everyday appliances and power equipment may unintentionally try to use them contrary to the desired manner, and stress (or hurry) can sometimes result in mistakes. Making mistakes around triggers (or chainsaws, table saw, etc) can have tragic, albeit unintended results.

It's not a criticism, but an observation and cautionary example using other equipment that's not unfamiliar to a lot of us.

I don't believe you're trying to misrepresent my argument, but I believe you're advocating the fallibility of humanity as your argument as if me advocating weapon lights was arguing them to be infallible. The examples you give are that because people are fallible in other skills they will be fallible when using a weapon light. I've explained the motions required to activate one common form of weapon light. It causes you to move your finger AWAY from the trigger. When activating that light, my finger is as far as possible from the trigger, unless I weren't holding the pistol. I'm unaware of any weapon light that causes you to put your fingers in the trigger guard and if such a product exists I would suggest against it and get one of the other products instead. Can people misuse it? Sure, just like people can misuse any product. But forecasting doom (which might not be your intent but is how what you're saying reads) based of the worst possible outcome that is very unlikely is somewhat disingenuous in my opinion.

Risk management and decision making using the combinations of high & low risk and high/low frequency events has been used often enough to help people understand how to gauge risks, and especially in help create training to try and identify and deal with the different combinations of them.

High risk situations that don't occur with common frequency may catch us unprepared to make the correct decisions under stress, and if the potential consequences for the wrong decision/action are dire, it makes sense to try and prepare to deal with such situations without having to 'wing it.

I wasn't 'condemning a practice'.

I was recommending approaching the handling, operation and application of equipment to help prevent unintended problems. Same thing I'd suggest when operating any other inherently dangerous equipment (like chainsaws, table saws & other power tools, operating motor vehicles ... and firearms).

FWIW, I caution the same things when helping train people using hand-held lights at the same time a firearm is being employed, in both training and for actual real world use.

Attention to safety is critical for all of us, especially when using a new type of equipment, including a new configuration of a piece of existing equipment, like attaching a light to a familiar firearm.

That's all.

All I did was point out that the article you link to is discussing an extremely small percentage of users of weapon lights that violated both safety practices and managed to misuse the light. You keep saying that while low in probability the risk in terms of damage is high so it shouldn't be ignored. Once again, no one is saying to ignore risk. I'm merely putting that risk in perspective by bringing up the both the training of the users of the product (to point out that I don't think they should be used as a benchmark for if a product can be used safely) and the fact that the percentage of those affected is very low.

[fastbolt]

You seem hooked on being defensive about selection of a weapon-mounted light. No need. Just because I personally prefer not to use one on my handguns (but prefer them on some rifles and shotguns), that doesn't mean I've advocated (now or previously) against their adoption and employment for the appropriate reasons and circumstances.

Look at it this way.

I've had any ample number of instances, while working with both cops and private citizens (volunteered to help teach small classes for 10 years) to watch how average owners/users experienced unexpected issues just when using their own handguns, under the average 'stress' of having to demonstrate proficiency or doing some range drill.

I've long since lost track of the instances where someone meant to press their magazine release, but kept pushing on a slide stop lever .... meant to depress a decocking lever, but pushed their magazine release ... meant to decock, but pressed another control ... meant to release the slide to forward, but dropped their magazine ... meant to insert their magazine, but did so with it oriented backwards ... grasped their locked back slide to release it, but pushed forward without first retracting it and releasing it from the locked back condition ... etc, etc.

Most of the folks were quite surprised to have made such obvious mistakes, and had no explanation for why they'd done so.

In other words, owners/users who were already familiar with their guns, but did something different than intended under stress and making surprising (to them) mistakes.

Lights & lasers? No particular shortage of some owners who have experienced unexpected difficulties in manipulating the switches that required finger activation, while also trying to shoot, or trying to decide when to stop shooting, during normal range drills and qual courses-of-fire. These were usually folks who were comfortable and relaxed in their confidence of being familiar with operating their assorted weapon-mounted lights ... right up to the moment they were required to do something unexpected, or faced with rapidly changing drill situations and conditions ... and then they experienced things like 'hand/finger confusion', startle responses, muscle tremors, etc.

Now, would some further training and practice have helped prevent such things for some or all of those people? Well, equipment & goal specific training does seem to be beneficial for many people when it comes to performing tasks, especially under pressure, and especially when it's supplemented by some sort of periodic refresher training and practice.

I keep offering my thoughts that when someone decides to use some particular piece of equipment, such as a weapon-mounted light, they simply might consider working to become educated and knowledgeable about its proper and safe operation, and carefully consider how its addition to their gun may require some additional training, practice and experience to help make its adoption and usage as safe as possible. Any reason to disagree?

If someone starts to think of their light-equipped gun as a sort of 'flashlight', and becomes complacent about muzzle discipline, it's not a good thing, right?

When a light is held in the hand, it's just a light.

When that light is then attached to a firearm intended for use as a dedicated defensive weapon, it's still a light, but it's also now integral to a deadly weapon, and a higher level of care and caution are merited in its operation and usage.

I suspect you'd not disagree.

So what's the problem?

[TunnelRat]

I don't have a problem. I think you're beating a dead horse at this point. No one ever said people are infallible. No one ever said people shouldn't be cautious. I think the statistics show that many people use weapon lights safely while a small percentage don't. No product is perfectly safe when humans are in the loop. I have no problem with people get more training if possible. In fact I advocated it. All I did was point out the limitations of the article you presented and you keep doing this back and forth with me. There is no need. I agree that people should consider the potential complications of adding gear. While I do like weapon mounted lights, right next to that pistol at night is a 4sevens tactical light that I can manipulate with one hand. I see the benefits and disadvantages to both ways.

[Snyper]

Its a rare "night light" that provides enough illumination to POSITIVELY identify a threat. A black gun in a hand is HARD to see, a small knife or screwdriver even more so.

What im hearing here is those that think ambient light or night lights are sufficient are thinking just seeing a vauge figure in the house is enough to justify shooting. I STRONGLY disagree. Just seeing someone in my house does not give me the MORAL justification to use deadly force...even if my state gives me the legal justification to do so.

A POSITIVE identification that the person is a threat and MUST be shot to prevent harm to me or my family is needed before I press the trigger

I'm positive anyone in my house at night uninvited is a threat.

If you can't identify them just from your "night light" then obviously it's not bright enough to be of use

A light attached to your gun just tells them where to shoot

[TunnelRat]

A light attached to your gun just tells them where to shoot

And walking around turning on the lights tells them where to expect you to come from. If a night light allows you to positively identify the threat then you have a better night light than I've seen. You're right that someone uninvited is a threat, but if you do shoot at a silhouette in the night and it turns out that person was unarmed you may find your time in court longer than you hoped. You may well win the physical battle but the court battle comes into play too and justifying deadly force, even in very pro personal protection states, can be tricky. But it's your house, your call.

[Sharkbite]

I'm positive anyone in my house at night uninvited is a threat.

HOW do you KNOW that? To the degree needed to take a life?

Teenage daughters "friend" sneeking in/out. Drunk neighbor in the wrong house. The list of mistaken identity events can go on and on.

Without ADEQUATE light on the issue this is a tragedy about to happen.

Having attended a number of highend low-light classes and worked with weapons mounted lights alot, id rather have it and not need it..then need it and not have it.