Red dot on a carry pistol - worth it to mill a slide or nah?

[paul73]

None of that makes red dots a bad idea.

when i was still a junior officer forced to be on patrols, in any discharge weapon scenario, not a single time a red dot would be of any help, ever. it would only be a distraction, and a bad one. just one more stupid thing to think of. and i am tired to even try to explain why, because reasons. that is all. do not want to trust me - don`t, what do i care.

and, no one shoots civilians at 50 yards range from handguns in urban settings, unless you are a gangster who does not care where your bullet gonna fly if you miss your shot. a gangster, or a complete idiot who does not comprehend the consequences of your actions. humans are not paper targets on a stands you smoke in 3 seconds in packs of 5.
a whole conversation here got a pretty retarded turn anyway.

ps. and pure military patrols on the hostile territory would be a very different thing. no one talks about that here.

 

[PappyM3]

Just one more thing to snag as the gun leaves holster. I assume daily carry you’ve got a snug IWB or OWB on the strong side under some layer of clothing and are not carrying Han Solo style..

I have not had snag problems with this optic and it’s curved back. Maybe an enclosed red dot will snag, but I haven’t tried to concealed carry one.

 

[M1911]

when i was still a junior officer forced to be on patrols, in any discharge weapon scenario, not a single time a red dot would be of any help, ever. it would only be a distraction, and a bad one. just one more stupid thing to think of. and i am tired to even try to explain why, because reasons. that is all. do not want to trust me - don`t, what do i care.

and, no one shoots civilians at 50 yards range from handguns in urban settings, unless you are a gangster who does not care where your bullet gonna fly if you miss your shot. a gangster, or a complete idiot who does not comprehend the consequences of your actions. humans are not paper targets on a stands you smoke in 3 seconds in packs of 5.
a whole conversation here got a pretty retarded turn anyway.

ps. and pure military patrols on the hostile territory would be a very different thing. no one talks about that here.

If iron sights would be of help then a red dot would be better, because the red dot allows you to see the dot while focusing on the target. For older people like me, iron sights simply don’t work anymore.

While many defensive shootings occur at very short distances, not all do. Some survivors of shootings say they never saw their sights. But quite a few distinctly remember seeing their sights. It is a mistake to assume that all defensive shootings will be the same.

The most recent 30-40 yard mall shooting shows that civilian shootings can, indeed, occur at extended distances and be completely justified.

Just like anything else, red dots have advantages and disadvantages.

 

[PappyM3]

when i was still a junior officer forced to be on patrols, in any discharge weapon scenario, not a single time a red dot would be of any help, ever. it would only be a distraction, and a bad one. just one more stupid thing to think of. and i am tired to even try to explain why, because reasons. that is all. do not want to trust me - don`t, what do i care.

and, no one shoots civilians at 50 yards range from handguns in urban settings, unless you are a gangster who does not care where your bullet gonna fly if you miss your shot. a gangster, or a complete idiot who does not comprehend the consequences of your actions. humans are not paper targets on a stands you smoke in 3 seconds in packs of 5.
a whole conversation here got a pretty retarded turn anyway.

ps. and pure military patrols on the hostile territory would be a very different thing. no one talks about that here.

The recent guy who stopped the mall shooter and also quite a few police shooting videos analyzed by Donut Operator disagree with your assessments.

 

[paul73]

The recent guy who stopped the mall shooter and also quite a few videos analyzed by Donut Operator disagree with your assessments.

and if that recent guy would miss and his bullet would find a kid hiding in the next shop behind that mall shooter? what also happened recently, i think, in some other scenario?

anyway, that is the difference between my assessment and the assessment done by the mall hero. and i am not afraid to state - i am no damn hero. not at my age and life experience.

so, i guess it boils down to that - red dots are for heroes. wanna feel like a hero - get one. done deal.

 

[M1911]

so, i guess it boils down to that - red dots are for heroes. wanna feel like a hero - get one. done deal.

I’m old enough that I need reading glasses. I simply can’t use iron sights anymore. As you yourself said, hitting a bystander would be a terrible thing. A red dot allows me to aim far better than I could with iron sights, and to do so faster, making it less likely that I would hit a bystander.

You don’t want to use a red dot. That’s fine. But your assertions about them are simply incorrect. They have advantages and disadvantages.

 

[PappyM3]

and if that recent guy would miss and his bullet would find a kid hiding in the next shop behind that mall shooter? what also happened recently, i think, in some other scenario?

anyway, that is the difference between my assessment and the assessment done by the mall hero. and i am not afraid to state - i am no damn hero. not at my age and life experience.

so, i guess it boils down to that - red dots are for heroes. wanna feel like a hero - get one. done deal.

The guy stopped a mass shooter from killing who knows how many people. You’re saying he shouldn’t have?

Further, you completely ignored the fact that there are a whole lot of police shootings at those 25-50+ yards with handguns, recorded on video, done safely with red dots.

 

[paul73]

25-50+ yards with handguns, recorded on video, done safely with red dots.

nothing done at 50 yards with a handgun is 'done safely', it is not a rifle. it is done out of necessity, and, again, you mix the civilian self defense weapon use case with a police task force.

as of a mall shooter - yes, he should not have done that shot from that far, in the mall. he lucked out, and it is great that he lucked out. most people with less luck or experience would not.
if you do not admit that - ok, it is your choice as well.
and to use what he did as a sample of the use case scenario is also, unethical.

 

[Artifact]

Just one more thing to snag as the gun leaves holster. I assume daily carry you’ve got a snug IWB or OWB on the strong side under some layer of clothing and are not carrying Han Solo style..

internet issue maybe…..never ever had an issue with it getting snagged, stuck or whatever.

 

[M1911]

nothing done at 50 yards with a handgun is 'done safely', it is not a rifle. it is done out of necessity, and, again, you mix the civilian self defense weapon use case with a police task force.

as of a mall shooter - yes, he should not have done that shot from that far, in the mall. he lucked out, and it is great that he lucked out. most people with less luck or experience would not.
if you do not admit that - ok, it is your choice as well.

He hit 8 out of 10 shots, which is a far better hit rate than most police shootings at 20’. That wasn’t luck and you know it.

 

[NHCraigT]

Its prob has already been stated:

A pistol with RDS is simply not for everyone. It's a whole new shooting concept to get used to (with a learning curve) that will require a lot of practice to consistently bring the pistol up and into position correctly, to sight align the dot.

I've read many posts from new RDS pistol owners who end up regretting their purchase, as they have great difficulty with the significant shooting change needed.

The above being said, I am not against a pistol with an RDS, as that is my current carry configuration.

The point is that IMHO, I definitely suggest that anyone considering an RDS pistol, try to shoot one before making a purchase, to make sure that "its for them".

 

[eboos]

nothing done at 50 yards with a handgun is 'done safely', it is not a rifle. it is done out of necessity, and, again, you mix the civilian self defense weapon use case with a police task force.

as of a mall shooter - yes, he should not have done that shot from that far, in the mall. he lucked out, and it is great that he lucked out. most people with less luck or experience would not.
if you do not admit that - ok, it is your choice as well.
and to use what he did as a sample of the use case scenario is also, unethical.

Given the potential harm of doing nothing weighed against the potential harm of missed shots, it appeared as though he had a clean line of fire with little to no possible collaterals. To do nothing would have been unethical. To do nothing would have been unthinkable.

 

[PappyM3]

nothing done at 50 yards with a handgun is 'done safely', it is not a rifle. it is done out of necessity, and, again, you mix the civilian self defense weapon use case with a police task force.

as of a mall shooter - yes, he should not have done that shot from that far, in the mall. he lucked out, and it is great that he lucked out. most people with less luck or experience would not.
if you do not admit that - ok, it is your choice as well.
and to use what he did as a sample of the use case scenario is also, unethical.

A whole lot of nope there. 50 yard shots can absolutely be done safely and ethically. It’s really not an extreme range for pistols. Sure, someone with a normal handgun isn’t going to be getting the several inch groups that bullseye shooters get, but you can still get torso hits relatively easily with practice.

As for the guy who stopped the mall shooter, I’m just glad it was him there and he took that potential risk instead of you. You wouldn’t risk maaaaybe wounding someone in the distance in order to stop the near-certain imminent deaths of multiple people.

And no, I’m not talking about police task forces. I’m talking about a lone patrol officer out on the street making distance shots handily with optics on their pistols.

 

[paul73]

I’m just glad it was him there and he took that potential risk instead of you

i am also very glad about it, as a matter of fact.

 

[eboos]

I will also dare to say: if you cannot hit the torso of a man sized target at 40 yards you need to spend a little more time on the range. I am not talking about 10X shots. I am not talking about all alphas. Just placing shots in target. Mall Hero was undeniably skillful under stress, but his skill is far from unobtainable for the average shooter.

 

[JRT]

Its prob has already been stated:

A pistol with RDS is simply not for everyone. It's a whole new shooting concept to get used to (with a learning curve) that will require a lot of practice to consistently bring the pistol up and into position correctly, to sight align the dot.

I've read many posts from new RDS pistol owners who end up regretting their purchase, as they have great difficulty with the significant shooting change needed.

The above being said, I am not against a pistol with an RDS, as that is my current carry configuration.

The point is that IMHO, I definitely suggest that anyone considering an RDS pistol, try to shoot one before making a purchase, to make sure that "its for them".

You may be correct but it doesn’t have to be a steep learning curve. I drilled on a 365XL with sights that didn’t co-witness. It took some time to quickly find the dot but I’ll also add if you’re struggling the dot is up and left.

I’ve since bought two additional RDS pistols with irons that co-witness and if I had started that way the curve would have been minimal.

A lot of the opposition in this thread is based off the experience of early converters. Switching to a RDS is easy now, at least it can be easier if you have the right equipment and an open mind.

 

[M1911]

Its prob has already been stated:

A pistol with RDS is simply not for everyone. It's a whole new shooting concept to get used to (with a learning curve) that will require a lot of practice to consistently bring the pistol up and into position correctly, to sight align the dot.

I've read many posts from new RDS pistol owners who end up regretting their purchase, as they have great difficulty with the significant shooting change needed.

The above being said, I am not against a pistol with an RDS, as that is my current carry configuration.

The point is that IMHO, I definitely suggest that anyone considering an RDS pistol, try to shoot one before making a purchase, to make sure that "its for them".

It certainly has a learning curve. I can say that for some months after I first got one, I was doing the dot lasso game. It's all down to training -- lots and lots of dryfire draws to a target in the basement. If you're not willing to do that, if you're not willing to change the battery once a year, if you're not willing to check that the dot is working and the glass is clean, then yes, it isn't for you. They are also expensive, so that's an issue as well. Advantages and disadvantages.

I suspect that it might be easier for new shooters to adapt to a red dot than for us troglodytes who have been shooting irons for decades.

 

[Broc]

This thread turned pretty retarded.

This is simple:
- if you want a red dot, carry with a red dot.
- if you don't want a red dot, don't use one.

In my opinion - whatever you do, you should always practice to be able to hit a human size target as fast as possible, which means most of the time you won't be able to aim (dot or sights).

My personal reasons to not use a dot:

1. Takes more space.

2. One more part that can fail - I like my CCW as simple as possible, no safety, no dots - everything can and will fail when you need it. For example, the other day at the range I engaged the safety on my 1911 because I didn't grab it properly. In a self defense situation that would have been pretty bad.

3. No matter how the red dot is designed, there is always the possibility it can get caught on something. The more stuff hanging out of the gun the greater the possibility it will get caught on something. Even if it hasn't happened while practicing.

Those are my personal reasons.

The dot does have advantages, like making it easier to aim in low light, making it easier on the eyes if you are old or have some sort of problem, making it easier to aim at longer ranges ...

it is up to you to compare positives vs negatives and make a deaicion based on your personal situation.

Whatever you do, you need to practice A LOT.
200 rounds per month, in my opinion, is not A LOT.

 

[Mesatchornug]

A lot of the opposition in this thread is based off the experience of early converters.

I expect this is a lot of it. There seem to be some assumptions that probably include "You won't have time to turn it on" that are obviated by Shake-Awake or other always-on solutions.

My two delaying tactics remain my (admittedly minor) astigmatism in both eyes, and (like Mike) I don't want to spend the money. I then excuse it with "I still have young enough eyes that irons are ok."

 

[Broc]

I expect this is a lot of it. There seem to be some assumptions that probably include "You won't have time to turn it on" that are obviated by Shake-Awake or other always-on solutions.

My two delaying tactics remain my (admittedly minor) astigmatism in both eyes, and (like Mike) I don't want to spend the money. I then excuse it with "I still have young enough eyes that irons are ok."

I would choose an "Always ON" dot.
Maybe shake awake is extremely reliable, I don't know. But everything can fail.

A NES member that used to be a sponsored shooter gave a good tip for dots, he told me before turning the dot on, to draw and aim and make sure the target was always in the center. Do that a few times, then turn the dot on and it will lower the chances I would have to chase the dot.

 

[Mesatchornug]

A NES member that used to be a sponsored shooter gave a good tip for dots, he told me before turning the dot on, to draw and aim and make sure the target was always in the center. Do that a few times, then turn the dot on and it will lower the chances I would have to chase the dot.

I took a class with Mike Seeklander in the spring. He basically said a similar thing. If the frame is consistent and the target is in the middle of the window, you're already most of the way there.

 

[paul73]

he told me before turning the dot on, to draw and aim and make sure the target was always in the center

you are getting to what i dislike the most. a distraction. with irons when it is critical - you draw and plant a shot. with a dot - you draw and then cannot stop but think, hmm, where is my dot there? ohh, here it is. ok. bang.
for most with a well practiced draw it means that your off shot with irons could have been 5-7 inches lower/higher before you adjusted it, but usually with not that much of the horizontal off. matters not on a human sized target at 15yds. with a dot - it may end up to be a no shot, as you will be thinking of where did the dot go. and, well, may be already dead by that time.

i never argue with facts - and it is a fact that once you got on a dot - the next target acquisition speed is much faster, it is way more accurate, all the good things.
if you carry for a duty, gun is always warm and clean - and check the status of the device religiously - why not.

but if one carries sporadically, gun sits in the dark safe with dot left 'always on' always - it is not going to end well, it is only logic. it will eventually either discharge mid-day, or will be forgotten to be turned off/on. but i think no matter what i say here the other side is on the stubborn mode now, so, to each their own.

 

[Randy Lahey]

Big Dot sites seem less delicate, I like the idea of the red dot sites but personally wouldn’t want that to be on my carry gun.

 

[meh]

I then excuse it with "I still have young enough eyes that irons are ok."

Mine aren't young enough, but I only have slight astigmatism in the dominant eye, so making the defocused front sight look centered in the defocused rear sight works well enough, assuming I'm far enough away that point shooting isn't the better option. I'd get a red dot on my carry gun if I wanted one. I have a Leupold Deltapoint Pro on one of my target/hunting style revolvers, so I think I know what I'm missing out on by not having one on my carry gun. I'm OK with it.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

it is a totally bad idea to put a red dot on a carry gun. it is not needed there and will fail you when you`ll need it.

I respectfully submit that this is an opinion masquerading as fact. It is possible to have irons co-witnessed with a red dot.

 

[Quite_Exasperated]

Given the potential harm of doing nothing weighed against the potential harm of missed shots, it appeared as though he had a clean line of fire with little to no possible collaterals. To do nothing would have been unethical. To do nothing would have been unthinkable.

So he has an ethical obligation to protect people who would not provide for their own security and statistically more than half of them would remove his right to protect himself?

 

[eboos]

So he has an ethical obligation to protect people who would not provide for their own security and statistically more than half of them would remove his right to protect himself?

Yes

 

[paul73]

I respectfully submit that this is an opinion masquerading as fact. It is possible to have irons co-witnessed with a red dot.

i respectfully agree. all i say is a my humble opinion.
pappy`s p365 has no co-witness from what can be seen there, unless it is built in into his holosun, though, or marked on case of the RDS.

 

[Broc]

you are getting to what i dislike the most. a distraction. with irons when it is critical - you draw and plant a shot. with a dot - you draw and then cannot stop but think, hmm, where is my dot there? ohh, here it is. ok. bang.
for most with a well practiced draw it means that your off shot with irons could have been 5-7 inches lower/higher before you adjusted it, but usually with not that much of the horizontal off. matters not on a human sized target at 15yds. with a dot - it may end up to be a no shot, as you will be thinking of where did the dot go. and, well, may be already dead by that time.

i never argue with facts - and it is a fact that once you got on a dot - the next target acquisition speed is much faster, it is way more accurate, all the good things.
if you carry for a duty, gun is always warm and clean - and check the status of the device religiously - why not.

but if one carries sporadically, gun sits in the dark safe with dot left 'always on' always - it is not going to end well, it is only logic. it will eventually either discharge mid-day, or will be forgotten to be turned off/on. but i think no matter what i say here the other side is on the stubborn mode now, so, to each their own.

My opinion ... that is why co-witness dot with sights is the way to go if carrying with a dot.

It also add a level of redundancy should the dot fail.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I'm seeing a parallel here between the attitude towards red dots and the attitudes that were common regarding semi-auto handguns when the vast majority of police were issued revolvers. "Unreliable - the semi auto will jam just when you need it"; "no real advantage - police don't engage in gunfights requiring more than 6 rounds".

The competition world seems to be a step ahead of the LE/Mil world as the downside to pushing the envelope is a low match score, not death. Competiton shooters were using red dot sights on ARs long before they became the military norm; same for red dots on pistols today. Also, as with the revolver->semi auto transition, quality is improving. The red dots of today (both flat screen and tube style) are much more rugged and reliable than the Tascos of the old days.

Another oft overlooked downside of red dots in the police world is the need for additional training and practice to make acquisition of the red dot instinctive.

If you were standing next to a bad guy an officer had to take out from a distance, would you prefer that officer use iron sights or a red dot?