Crimson Trace Special Report

This is a discussion on Crimson Trace Special Report within the Related Gear & Equipment forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Read it by clicking on the link below. It's a pdf file. I hate pdf pages but, read it anyway. It's interesting. It's a good ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27

Thread: Crimson Trace Special Report

  1. #1
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,053

    Crimson Trace Special Report

    Read it by clicking on the link below. It's a pdf file. I hate pdf pages but, read it anyway.
    It's interesting.
    It's a good "read" to stay on top of "things" related to defensive shooting in general.
    Real World actual hits by Police Officers have shown a 300% increase when handgun laser technology was used.
    Trust me that all Police Officers are not Gun Dorks who don't know how to hit with their service weapon.
    I am always interested in any technology that proves itself and that will help guarantee a better survival rate for Good Guys on the street. I don't think the laser should be used as crutch or a substitute for good shooting skills but, any worthwhile aid to tip the odds in in favor of the Good Guy is worth some serious consideration.
    Well, anyway read it and weigh in on it.
    I'll be curious as to what you all have to say.
    Make any comments you want to but, please don't comment unless you've read the entire report.
    This thread is about laser sights as presented with actual facts in this Crimson Trace report. And yes, (of course) they are selling a product. I have no objection to a company selling a good product that works.

    Click Here To Read The Crimson Trace Report
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,482
    Scanned thru real quick QK - but hey - you know I am a CT fan! I am about to crash so - no time to read every single word.

    I will state yet again - they are an ADJUNCT and in no way a total system for sighting. They are tho invaluable IMO. That's why I have them on so many guns.!

    The iron sights picture is and always will be paramount but - with CT's you have another invaluable option - and it could well make the difference between surviving and not.

    I will take them any day, despite the cost.
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  4. #3
    XD9
    XD9 is offline
    Member Array XD9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Somewhere in Utah
    Posts
    134
    I've read that report before when I bought my 642 with CT grips. I think the biggest advantage for me is that I don't have to actually site the pistol to get the accuracy that I need. In a real bad situation where you are forced to just point and shoot, this tool is invaluable.
    There are 2 sounds in the world that strike more fear than any others. A click when you should hear a bang and a bang when you should hear a click.

  5. #4
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,657
    Quote Originally Posted by P95Carry
    Scanned thru real quick QK - but hey - you know I am a CT fan! I am about to crash so - no time to read every single word.

    I will state yet again - they are an ADJUNCT and in no way a total system for sighting. They are tho invaluable IMO. That's why I have them on so many guns.!

    The iron sights picture is and always will be paramount but - with CT's you have another invaluable option - and it could well make the difference between surviving and not.

    I will take them any day, despite the cost.
    OK, OK, so I can't put CTs on my USP, you don't have to rub it in. But it's gonna have night sights front and rear.

  6. #5
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,657
    OK, I finally got through the manufacturer's epic.

    I had read most of the recommendations in gun magazines that the article quoted. It's the same guys that pick a new best gun and gadget every month.

    I don't doubt that the accuracy is better with the CTs. I disagree with the article's claim that US LEO is the best trained in the world. Well, maybe they are the best trained in the world but that is a misleading statement. Most only shoot when they qualify and that's easy.

    One concern I have is that we no longer need our sights. We can almost fully depend on the laser - it's faster, more accurate, more intimidating, requires less training - sights are no longer needed.

    The article omitted the confusion that occurs when two or more lasers are involved. Nobody knows which laser is his...you can see the problem. Nor did it point out that a laser works both ways. It discloses your position as well as targeting the BG. While your placing your red dot on the BG, his partner is targeting that red light on your gun!

    A laser can betray position. You have a threat, you turn on the beam, wait it's not a threat, laser off. In the process, the BG may have seen the flash of light.

    Having said all that, I am ordering a set of CTs for my Sig 229R DAK. My concern is that LEO is going to have their training split between laser shooting and sight shooting and they don't get enough sighted shooting as it is. Then when the laser fails, battery or what ever, they're worse off than before.

    BTY, where's a good place to get CTs?

  7. #6
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,482
    One concern I have is that we no longer need our sights. We can almost fully depend on the laser - it's faster, more accurate, more intimidating, requires less training - sights are no longer needed.
    Can't agree Ron - I always describe my CT's as ''adjunctive'' - I'd never place total reliance on them and so use std sights as primary. The fact that the red dot is there when light low enough is a bonus for me.
    The article omitted the confusion that occurs when two or more lasers are involved.
    Just maybe Ron but - the thing that I find with the laser is the feedback from my own - even if another dot was present, I'd know mine by the movement relative to my input - at least I am pretty sure that'd work. The dot becomes an extension of one's arm.
    A laser can betray position.
    It certainly can but - it does OTOH enable sighting without gun in front of torso and so give a benefit as well - even shooting from behind cover usefully.
    BTW, where's a good place to get CTs?
    I got all mine from Impact Guns Ron - prices are close to best and service good I found.
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  8. #7
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,657
    Quote Originally Posted by P95Carry
    Can't agree Ron - I always describe my CT's as ''adjunctive'' - I'd never place total reliance on them and so use std sights as primary. The fact that the red dot is there when light low enough is a bonus for me.
    I agree, but you're a gun guy, not the average officer. The average officer will not be using his laser as an adjunct but as the primary sight. That was the clear theme of the article. I.e. hits are up 300% because they are relying on the laser instead of, not in addition to, the sights. And I dare say that if I find I can shoot 20% faster and more accurately with the CTs, then I'll have a hard time justifying not using the laser as the primary sight.

    The article states that top hangunners, e.g. Todd Jarret, are 20% faster with the CTs than with night sights. It raises the legitimate question, why should we use sights if the laser is 20% faster and hits are up 300% with the laser?

    Quote Originally Posted by P95Carry
    Just maybe Ron but - the thing that I find with the laser is the feedback from my own - even if another dot was present, I'd know mine by the movement relative to my input - at least I am pretty sure that'd work. The dot becomes an extension of one's arm.
    Again I understand that, but one of my instructors says that in when LEOs are in stressful situations and there are three or so lasers flying everywhere, on and off the target, nobody quite knows whose is whose.

    Quote Originally Posted by P95Carry
    It certainly can but - it does OTOH enable sighting without gun in front of torso and so give a benefit as well - even shooting from behind cover usefully.
    I agree again, I'm ordering a CT for my gun. I'm just saying this article was written by the manufacturer and it may not give the honest downsides.

    Quote Originally Posted by P95Carry
    I got all mine from Impact Guns Ron - prices are close to best and service good I found.

  9. #8
    Member Array bubbygator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Sarasota
    Posts
    62
    I'm a fan for many reasons. Had 5 sets, but sold a gun & now only have 4.

    None of the info in the article was new or startling; LEOs and Military from all over are posting in forums that they love the CT's, and the factory can't satisfy civilian demand due to pressure of military contracts. The article's emphasis of the psychological aspects of defensive shooting are applicable regardless of having a CT. Anyone who has watched a new hand with a CT has seen the gross waggle of the spot all over the place. Just having a laser spot won't automatically make your shot hit the target; training is still the key to reliability (as well as safety).

    I have consistently been of the opinion that "de-escalation" of a situation has no place in a civilian vocabulary. LEOs can lawfully use force and threats of force to "de-escalate". But civilian use of a force or threat of force (which targeting with a laser spot certainly is) is NOT unlimited. In fact, civilian threat of lethal force is illegal, and can get you arrested in most states. Laws for civilians recognize lethal force only as a defense against a lethal threat... and unfortunately, if you fire a warning shot, or laser-spot him, or perhaps even cap a guy in the knee who is about to shoot you, the other attorney will claim that you obviously did NOT think you were being lethally threatened, since you did NOT kill him.

    My mind-set is to recognize what is a lethal threat and defend against it with lethal force. If my laser-spot hits a bad-guy's chest, a bullet will be immediately following it. My laser is to help me accurately avoid hitting innocent by-standers during my defense. The best avoidance is to make sure all my fired bullets end up in the bad-guy.

  10. #9
    Senior Member Array KC135's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    742
    And what would the result have been if they spent the big bucks on ammo instead of a battery operated device????
    Keep the shotgun handy!!

  11. #10
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,657
    Quote Originally Posted by ????
    The article's emphasis of the psychological aspects of defensive shooting are applicable regardless of having a CT. Anyone who has watched a new hand with a CT has seen the gross waggle of the spot all over the place. Just having a laser spot won't automatically make your shot hit the target; training is still the key to reliability (as well as safety).
    The above is certainly true, but according to the article, given the same or even less training with the laser, the claimed hit ratio is up 300%. The newbee’s hand also shakes with iron sights, but the point, and I think fact, is that almost anyone can learn faster to shoot using a laser than iron sights and get better hits.

    Quote Originally Posted by ????
    I have consistently been of the opinion that "de-escalation" of a situation has no place in a civilian vocabulary. LEOs can lawfully use force and threats of force to "de-escalate". But civilian use of a force or threat of force (which targeting with a laser spot certainly is) is NOT unlimited. In fact, civilian threat of lethal force is illegal, and can get you arrested in most states. Laws for civilians recognize lethal force only as a defense against a lethal threat... and unfortunately, if you fire a warning shot, or laser-spot him, or perhaps even cap a guy in the knee who is about to shoot you, the other attorney will claim that you obviously did NOT think you were being lethally threatened, since you did NOT kill him.
    A civilian shouldn’t try to de-escalate a “situation”? Wouldn’t it be better to de-escalate if feasible, than to become involved in a life and death fight and the aftermath?

    Granted a civilian may not have the same latitude LEO to apply his weapon, but IF the civilian is justified in presenting his gun, the laser is also justified. Again the key is justification. We are told, and repeated in the article, that in 99% of the cases, the mere presentation of a gun is enough – that’s de-escalation. Just because we are justified to present our weapon doesn’t mean we are obligated to shoot. I see this no different than presenting the gun with a laser turned on.

    It seems like the use of a laser could be easily defended in or out of court, IF (big IF here) the presentation of the gun is justified. The presentation of the gun is a deterrent; the laser is a supplemental deterrent. We can always tell the court that if it hadn’t been for my laser, I would have had no other choice but to fire two rounds into the attacker's COM.

    Quote Originally Posted by ????
    My mind-set is to recognize what is a lethal threat and defend against it with lethal force. If my laser-spot hits a bad-guy's chest, a bullet will be immediately following it. My laser is to help me accurately avoid hitting innocent by-standers during my defense. The best avoidance is to make sure all my fired bullets end up in the bad-guy.
    I concur that that’s a wise mindset, but again, in some 99% of the cases, the mere presentation of the gun is enough and no shots have to be fired. But if shots are required, the laser is purportedly an immense help in maximizing a hit on the bad guy. Police hits were up 300% with the laser.

  12. #11
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,053

    just a thought

    Technology is everywhere. It surrounds us.
    Our U.S.Military folks seem to have nicely integrated very high and extremely advanced technology...with proper training.
    The laser is a tool like any other defensive tool.
    It allows you to move your front sight off of your defensive firearm & place it directly on your intended target.
    In this case I don't think spending more money on ammo as VS laser technology is a real issue since the shooters that were evaluated in this report were already "range qualified" & (for the most part) can probably shoot up all of the practice ammo they want to at no cost to them.
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ

  13. #12
    Senior Member Array tanksoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,133
    I hear/ see this all the time. I think it's a load of BS.

    A suspected mugger draws a knife and advances on your from 25 yards away, you draw your weapon, the mugger retreats. So now you'll be prosecuted because "you obviously weren't in danger, you didn't kill him".

    You're in a Stop & Rob late one night, and a guy comes in, points a un at the clerk and screams "gimme the money or I'll kill everyone in here!". He sees you draw out of the corner of his eye, and drops the weapon in a panic on the counter before you shoot, saying "It isn't real man, it isn't real!!" and runs out of the store. Now you'll be prosecuted for drawing your weapon but not shooting??

    The gun laws that prevent you from "brandishing" your gun are to prevent CCW holders from walking around intimidating people, they are NOT designed to force you to shoot someone to avoid prosecution.


    Quote Originally Posted by bubbygator
    Laws for civilians recognize lethal force only as a defense against a lethal threat... and unfortunately, if you fire a warning shot, or laser-spot him, or perhaps even cap a guy in the knee who is about to shoot you, the other attorney will claim that you obviously did NOT think you were being lethally threatened, since you did NOT kill him.
    "I am a Soldier. I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight." GEN George S. Patton, Jr.

  14. #13
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,482
    This brandishing thing is potentially a PITA.

    I reckon a suitable defence could be that you REACTED to a threat of lethal force and possible harm to your person.

    So - you draw in order to be ABLE to defend. If however the threat retreats or concedes and no shots fired, we still I think can justifiably still claim ''I was in fear for my life'' - and then be in better shape from not having a (justifiable) homicide to deal with.

    I would much prefer being able to defuze thru presentation and not shoot simply because I had drawn - tho some folks claim - ''If I have drawn it is because I am shooting''.

    Fine dividing lines and difficult decision-making. Circumstances will as ever alter events too.
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  15. #14
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,657
    The cold hard fact appears to be that cops can shoot 300% better with the CTs than with iron sights. It's no wonder which one they will depend on the most - the laser. They can shoot better, with less training, they don't have to worry about sight discipline, just truly point and shoot.

    Let's take this example. Suppose we go to an IDPA match and they annouce that we can use CTs in this pilot match. We have CTs on our guns and our match and scores are 300% higher than we have ever scored. Remember 300% better shooting among purported skilled officers. Could we ever go back to iron sights, knowing our score would drop dramatically? I couldn't/wouldn't.

    Could laser sights cause more problems than it solves for LEO? Possible so. It would take extraordinary discipline to not become more and more dependent on the laser. It works! 300% increase among LEO. If they can shoot 300% better with the laser, why would they ever go back to their iron sights? Because the laser fails and now they are in trouble.

    So what problems could possibly come from something that increases hits ratios by 300%? Not that that in itself is a bad thing, but they/we will grow to near total reliance on our laser. Then one day we bring the gun up and for whatever reason, battery, corroded connections, blocked or partially blocked lens, whatever, the laser doesn't come on. What happens? We try to find our dot and/or get the dot on while the BG is using his iron sights to shoot us.

    Or, how about a foreign object deflects the beam so that it no longer shoots where the laser points.

    What about the development of really poor shooting habits. Like not bringing the gun fully up to eye level. Like shooting from the hip and everything between the holster and eye level. The loss of the ability to use the sights. Habitual target focus instead of sight focus. Then the laser goes out and guess what? We have unknowingly developed all these poor habits and now we're worse off than we were before the laser.

    Or we have to make a very precise shot to save the hostage, and we don't realize the laser beam is not concentric to the barrel nor is the beam parallel to the barrel, nor is it above the barrel like the sights are, and we either don't compensate for the laser or we try to shoot with the sights, which we stopped doing long ago. As a hostage under these conditions, would you feel safe?

    I think there is no doubt that almost anyone will see markedly improved shooting using a laser sight. I think also that it is inevitable that the shooter will become far more dependent on the laser than the sights. The question is, "Is that good?"

  16. #15
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,482
    Aha - a ''Tangle length post'' LOL! Good one tho Ron and your main thrust is well valid.

    I would only counter that for myself, in as much as, I have shot so long now that my natural sighting hold and useage is so ingrained I really doubt I can lose it.

    Your point does tho have considerable validity when applied to young and new shooters. So I would say there - starting to shoot and train with CT's can indeed be prejudicial - it could become a prop, when in fact there will almost always be circumstances when either light is too bright or Murphy just decides, your grips ain't workin' today .

    What I am saying then is - as an adjunct for experienced shooters, I think they are invaluable but if I was training new folks with em - I'd pretty much hammer home a LOT of non laser shooting, with std sights only.
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Crimson Trace fit in VM2?
    By gogamecocks in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 15th, 2010, 01:57 AM
  2. PM9 Crimson Trace IWB
    By JCooper in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 22nd, 2010, 12:09 AM
  3. Range Report: Ruger LCR - Crimson Trace
    By clarkston_cz in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 29th, 2009, 11:23 PM
  4. Crimson Trace 642
    By kentuckycarry in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: December 11th, 2006, 07:17 PM
  5. Crimson Trace for my G23 got here!
    By madmike in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: January 18th, 2006, 10:18 PM

Search tags for this page

crimson trace wheelie

,
cts laser sights
Click on a term to search for related topics.