Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
143,595 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
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
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,483 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
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.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,111 Posts
P95Carry said:
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. :biggrin: But it's gonna have night sights front and rear.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,111 Posts
OK, I finally got through the manufacturer's epic. :biggrin:

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?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,483 Posts
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.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,111 Posts
P95Carry said:
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?

P95Carry said:
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.

P95Carry said:
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.

P95Carry said:
I got all mine from Impact Guns Ron - prices are close to best and service good I found.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
And what would the result have been if they spent the big bucks on ammo instead of a battery operated device????
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,111 Posts
???? said:
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.

???? said:
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.

???? said:
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.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
143,595 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,133 Posts
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.


bubbygator said:
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,483 Posts
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.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,111 Posts
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?"
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,483 Posts
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 :biggrin:.

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.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,111 Posts
P95Carry said:
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 :biggrin:.

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.
Yeah, I know, :frown: that was kinda a Tangle Magnum as posts go. Either some things are complicated, or I can't "spit" it out, oh well maybe as I get older.... :biggrin:

As for your remarks, well said Chris! I agree fully about "ingrained", whether it's sighting, grip, or whatever. That has to do in fact with one of my theories about training. Oh, no, could this be the start of another Tangle length post? I'll try to give the short version. :wink:

I believe one reason there is contraversy about what shooting techniques are best and what works best in the street, etc. has to do with ingraining. If the training is insufficient to produce ingraining, under stress, the person will revert to untrained and perhaps "natural" shooting techniques and will be unsuccessful. The resulting assessment is usually that the shooting technique he was taught was wrong, when it really was that the ingraining didn't happen.

I have seen lots and lots of people shoot, in fact every time I take somebody shooting, I first have them shoot without instruction or demo to see how they "naturally" shoot. Without exception it is awful. Hits are all over the place and recoil management is dreadful. It is interesting to see what happens when I teach them good shooting techniques. Hits actully form groups and continue to improve and recoil comes under control. I have yet to see somebody's natural technique come anywhere close to good shooting techniques. But they don't shoot enough to ingrain the techniques. So, the next time we shoot or if I put them on a timer, they tend to revert back to those natural shooting habits and hits spread. I think that's what happens to LEOs, they are trained correctly, but not to ingraining, so when they have to shoot they shoot from their "natural" habits and are not very successful.

OTOH, like you have experienced, because of ingraining, I can't count how many times I've gone to my trained shooting techniques in stressful situations - mostly FOF training and didn't even realize I was doing it - I just do it. It's ingrained, so I guess it has now become "natural" to me.

Hey! Aren't you suppose to be out shooting your new P220 so you can tell us what you think - as if I didn't know already.

Then with the money you have left over, you need to think about a H&K USP. I am more and more impressed with this gun. I can engage the safety before[\b] I do a press check and I can engage the safety before[\b] I cock the hammer to a SA mode. And it shoots! Hmmm, hmmm, hmmm it shoots!

I swear I did it again! (Tangle size i.e.) :frown:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
As much as I am a fan of lasers, I have to agree with Tangle. In my experience with lasers, I find that the optimum sighting position with a laser spot is sighting just above the iron sights. That's our nasty little secret - that Tangle has cleverly ferreted-out. You DO have to train without the laser; or you will eventually find yourself in a position of having the laser out & you're looking over the iron sight wondering WTF do I do now?

I've read some scary court-room stories on some of the other forums. I'm comfortable with my mindset... I won't draw unless I'm being lethally threatened. And then it will be
draw/target/shoot as one action.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,483 Posts
Hey! Aren't you suppose to be out shooting your new P220 so you can tell us what you think - as if I didn't know already.
Hang on!! haha - I am keen but - I ain't actually got it yet.

Have sewn up the deal with Gary but I guess it'll be a good few days away before it reaches my FFL. This evening will of course be 226.

Once I have the gun here then I'll be keen to go excercize it! :smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
1. You can selectively activate Crimson Trace: that is, you can learn to squeeze that part of the grip or not. (Of course, in most models you can turn it off altogether if you choose.)

- This allows you to do instinctive pointing, and then see if you were right! (In fact, I try not to use it for sight aquisition: i.e., I try not to use it to FIND the target--just for confirmation and fine tuning.)

- You can do things which you can't do at most any range, but you can do at home with Crimson Trace...and see if you would have hit your target! Lunge to the left. Lunge to the right. Fall down and shoot. Shoot between your legs. (Ok, ok, I'll stop now and behaive.)

- Because you can activate or not, you can give your position away or not: choosing your moment. (Yes, I know that's not so easy when you've got about 5 quarts of adrynalyn flowing through you.)

2. Yes, you certainly do need to know how to use your sights: I'm not able to see the dot in extremely bright sun light, unless the target is very close indeed.

3. I love Crimson Trace.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,355 Posts
keyboard commandos...ha ha ha ha, good one Chris :)

Everyone's right on this. Bottom line, get em anyway...nifty toy.

(my wholesale $228 for auto's, $158 most wheelies) get mama's ok

Newb's all want to try mine, but can't figgure out why they don't work. I keep mine sighted in at 7 yds, so the red dot is UNDER my iron night sights at close range. Wouldn't want to ruin a perfectly good sight picture in a hostage situation, because that's what I'm looking for. The real secret is no secret, trigger control, flinch prevention, and recoil management. When the newb"s switch it off and start concentrating on the basics and the front sight, they're back on the paper. Then they turn on the laser again and, by golly, now it works!

The 300% boost could be due to better muzzle control by "have to qualify" LEO's. I seriously doubt that's a problem for the vast experience of the members of this forum. I'm impressed. Hip boots aside, Tangle is correct. Ron, get em anyhow, you'll thank me later. I use them for dry fire practice because my eyes aren't 20-10 anymore, and I want to see the slightest quibble in my sight alignment as the hammer drops (a carryover from my target life.) Be advised, they’ll let you know how many cups of coffee you’ve had…kinda like the high power scope can ruin your confidence, but we’re way past that, right?

In my new life, short as it may be, my drills are for the first shot at close range, coming from any of the 4 quadrants. Use a laser? Get the gun to eye level? Use two hands? Not me. If my acquiring a full firing grip well in advance of trouble hasn't sent the vermin scurrying, in the next fraction of a second they won't have a care in the world.

When I grew up, we didn't have laser sights, neither did our brothers, for the most, part in Nam. Now I think they're a great training tool, but, and Tangle has figured this out already, not necessarily for our CC application. Sure, they can be switched on and used as intimidation while holding a BG for the Cops. I don't care about multiple lasers confusing me (how many CC's are going to be around the parking lot or Quick Stop, anyway?) I leave mine off, and I keep my .45 just out of sight.

Euclidean, try this math for me, please. If there are over 2,000,000 defensive uses of the gun (DUF’s) reported annually, and a gun is generally fired in only one out of twenty or thirty presentations, most of which go unreported, what are the real numbers?
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top