What do you think of Crimson Trace from a tactical stand point?

[Aaron1776]

Hate to break the news to you, but your sights also use "line of sight".
And are only good for the range it's sighted in for.
But at the range we are defending ourselves, and the fact you don't have to shoot the gun out of someone's and, means it's good enough.

Attention mall ninjas:

The difference between a laser and your sights is far more dramatic as the laser is much, much farther away from the barrel. Thus at 7 yards, yeah it's not a big difference, at 10 and 25 yards the difference grows, by 50 (assuming you could see the laser) it's even bigger.

Your sights? Not so much.

Why on earth would you spend 150+$ on a sight system that isn't as effective as you can be if you just....I dunno.... TRAINED with your sights?

You can argue that yes, it's only inches at the ranges we're talking about.....but guess what? An inch can really matter.
You can say "oh I won't engage a target that far away". You don't know that.
You can say "oh I'll just use my sights after a certain distance". No you won't because you didn't make your training congruous and your brain is going to default to the easiest thing you trained.

What if you need to make a hostage shot? (Aka that home invader got a hold of your wife) You really gonna introduce yet ANOTHER margin of error into THAT equation?

There is no substitute or shortcut for training. Lasers seem easier, but in reality I've never met a trained individual who used them in a situation other than using a riot shield or face mask. Those trained individuals in my life include:
Cops
SWAT officers
SBT members
Spec Forces
Paratroopers
Concealed Carry Instructors

Why don't these people use them? There is a more reliable, cheaper method that makes your training more congruous and thus more effective.

It's called using your sights

If you really want to excel in skill at arms, you need to stop being gear focused. There is no gear out there that is going to make you a better warrior. You need to train. Anytime you buy gear or guns, remember the mission of the gear/guns, and seek to optimize the gun, not befoul it by hanging all manner of profane tacticool crap on it.

Grips for better ergonimics? Fine
Night sights? Fine
Trigger jobs? Fine
A light attached for home defense? Fine
None of these things reduce the weapons reliability or effectiveness, nor do they make it overly complicated.
Beyond that you're wasting your time. Personally, I don't do anything for a CC gun beyond trigger jobs and night sights. Might add grip tape or some stippling if the gun is really smooth and hard to hold when sweaty.

means it's good enough.

"Good enough" Bah. You'll have to excuse if I don't want the guy whose settles for "good enough" to be the one protecting my family.

 

[Pinchaser]

Attention mall ninjas:

The difference between a laser and your sights is far more dramatic as the laser is much, much farther away from the barrel.

Thus at 10 yards, yeah it's not a big difference, at 25 yards the difference grows, by 50 (assuming you could see the laser) it's even bigger.

> Anyone who is engaging a target with a handgun at 50 yards is a fool.

Your sights? Not so much.

Why on earth would you spend 150+$ on a sight system that isn't as effective as you can be if you just....I dunno.... TRAINED with your sights?

> Laser sights improve target acquisition time for the beginner through the most advanced shooters. The data doesn't lie and has no bias.

You can argue that yes, it's only inches at the ranges we're talking about.....but guess what? An inch can really matter.

> At realistic distances, it's well less than an inch. Someone trying to hit a target at 50 yards shouldn't be carrying a gun anyway and would miss by a minimum of 10 inches, with or without laser sights.

You can say "oh I won't engage a target that far away". You don't know that.
You can say "oh I'll just use my sights after a certain distance". No you won't because you didn't make your training congruous and your brain is going to default to the easiest thing you trained.

What if you need to make a hostage shot? (Aka that home invader got ahold of your wife)

You really gonna introduce yet ANOTHER margin of error into THAT equation?

> Someone has been watching ay too many shoot-em-up bang bang movies....

There is no substitute or shortcut for training. Lasers seem easier, but in reality I've never met a trained individual who used them in a situation other than using a riot shield or face mask. Those trained individuals in my life include:
Cops
SWAT officers
SBT members
Spec Forces
Paratroopers
Concealed Carry Instructors

Why don't these people use them? There is a more reliable, cheaper method that makes your training more congruous and thus more effective.

It's called using your sights

> Lasers are widely used by all of the groups you listed. You have defeated your own argument.

If you really want to excel in skill at arms, you need to stop being gear focused. There is no gear out there that is going to make you a better warrior. You need to train.

> Train indeed. With sights, indeed. Lasers don't replace your gun's sights. They augment their use.

Anytime you buy gear or guns, remember the mission of the gear/guns, and seek to optimize the gun, not befoul it by hanging all manner of profane tacticool crap on it.

Grips for better ergonimics? Fine
Night sights? Fine
Trigger jobs? Fine
A light attached for home defense? Fine

Beyond that you're wasting your time.

> I hope some/all of that helped.

 

[Aaron1776]

> Anyone who is engaging a target with a handgun at 50 yards is a fool.

Tell that to the guy who just saved a cop with a 50 yard pistol shot a few months ago.
(Not that I recommend it. But why not make everything congruous? Use one sight set up for every distance)
> Laser sights improve target acquisition time for the beginner through the most advanced shooters. The data doesn't lie and has no bias.
At what cost? Is that really worth 200$ when you could just.....train?

EDIT: Furthermore that is only true very in dim light or close in. The more light there is, the harder the laser is to spot (same with distance). At ten yards in the bright day time, by the time you spot the laser, you could have seen your front sight post twice.
I know because I tried those crimson trace lasers when they were mounted on other people's guns. I wasn't impressed.
Plus, most intelligent people have night sights. At night when those suckers glow, do you really want to confuse your eyes with the dots from your sights AND the laser? Really? Do you shoot at all? Like ever?
You can mental exercise and lab data it all you want. I want what works in the real world.


> At realistic distances, it's well less than an inch. Someone trying to hit a target at 50 yards shouldn't be carrying a gun anyway and would miss by a minimum of 10 inches, with or without laser sights.
See first response. You're trying to put every life situation into a box and solve the problem with gear. And no, I remember the crimson trace grips a friend of mine had. The difference was about an inch. Perhaps he had them sighted poorly. Knowing him, I doubt it.

> Someone has been watching ay too many shoot-em-up bang bang movies....
Really? Cuz here in Indy I see the results of home invasions all of the time.
And actually I got that idea out of a news article I read the other day. Nice try though.

> Lasers are widely used by all of the groups you listed. You have defeated your own argument.
Read what I wrote. I said "except when using riot shields and face masks".

You're right. They do use lasers. When do they use them? When wearing gas masks, IR goggles (forgot to mention that one), and using shields. AKA When they can't see their sights. (When are you realistically going to be in that postition?)

Gee? Think there could be a reason for that?

> Train indeed. With sights, indeed. Lasers don't replace your gun's sights. They augment their use.
That's bullcrap. You know very well your eye is going to focus on the laser under pressure rather than your sights. Esp with your average gun owner who is just going to watch the laser and rely on it. Or at best it'll confuse the eyes.

This is a common Mindset issue here on INGO

Look at my new tacticool laser guided cappaccino maker/ swiss army knife attachment!!!!! Now I'll be a GREAT shooter!!!

This my friends, is the mark of a mall ninja. People who hang crap on their guns because it "enhances XYZ"

Mindset> Training> Gear

 

[FireBirdDS]

Hate to break the news to you, but your sights also use "line of sight".
And are only good for the range it's sighted in for.
But at the range we are defending ourselves, and the fact you don't have to shoot the gun out of someone's and, means it's good enough.

I tried a laser for a little while. At the range I found it really distracting and hard to focus on. Even at 5-8 yds it was bouncing all over the target. It came down to either focusing on the red dot or focusing on my sight.

Train indeed. With sights, indeed. Lasers don't replace your gun's sights. They augment their use.

Both cannot be used at once as the are competing for your dominate eye's attention and focus. It cannot be "co-witnessed" like a reflex sight. And under stress I cannot be left trying decide what I'm going to focus in on. Lasers are battery-driven, and anything battery-driven is governed by Murphy's Law.

 

[oldguyguns]

Great discussion !!Just received a CT for the Ruger P380 I have on order. Now I know what to think about and try while using it. Thanks for all the comments!!

 

[Aaron1776]

I tried a laser for a little while. At the range I found it really distracting and hard to focus on. Even at 5-8 yds it was bouncing all over the target. It came down to either focusing on the red dot or focusing on my sight.

Both cannot be used at once as the are competing for your dominate eye's attention and focus. It cannot be "co-witnessed" like a reflex sight. And under stress I cannot be left trying decide what I'm going to focus in on. Lasers are battery-driven, and anything battery-driven is governed by Murphy's Law.

THIS.

Remember we were asked about the TACTICAL use of lasers, not the range/competition use for lasers.

Under stress, your brain/eyes work differently. Lasers do nothing to help that and will only confuse it. Lasers also run out of batteries, are subject to refraction, short circut, etc. Iron sights don't.



I'll repeat. Lasers are great for those wearing gas masks, IR goggles, and using ballistic or riot shields.

And for mall ninjas.

 

[turnandshoot4]

Lasers are a crutch.

They SEEM like a great idea dry firing in the basement. The actual use on a range, in a class, or at a competition that lack of training really shows up.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

You know, you can have a laser AND train. Its simply false to say that if you have a laser you'll have a "lack of training." That's the main argument against them I keep seeing, "you won't learn to use your irons". The same logic says you shouldn't use a scope or a red dot. Or, you could go ahead and train on both. I know how to use irons, and continue to train with them. Putting a laser on a gun doesn't suck that knowledge out of my head.

The laser grips on my 1911 are dead nuts perfect at 25y and have less than an inch of variation from 0-50y. That's less variation than the irons on my M-16, and I do pretty good with it.

Like I said earlier, there's a time for retention shooting, a time to point shoot, a time to find the front sight, and a time to get a full sight picture. A laser can work its way into that continuum pretty easily.

 

[Aaron1776]

You know, you can have a laser AND train. Its simply false to say that if you have a laser you'll have a "lack of training." That's the main argument against them I keep seeing, "you won't learn to use your irons". The same logic says you shouldn't use a scope or a red dot. Or, you could go ahead and train on both. I know how to use irons, and continue to train with them. Putting a laser on a gun doesn't suck that knowledge out of my head.

The laser grips on my 1911 are dead nuts perfect at 25' and have less than an inch of variation from 0-50'. That's less variation than the irons on my M-16, and I do pretty good with it.

Like I said earlier, there's a time for retention shooting, a time to point shoot, a time to find the front sight, and a time to get a full sight picture. A laser can work its way into that continuum pretty easily.

I always appreciate your posts dude.

But remember that we were asked about the tactical use of lasers, not the training value. If you want to use them as a training aid then fine. They are at their best use then. Relying on them tactically is a poor option for many reasons...which is what we were asked about.

I have used a red dot mounted on my rifle. Under pressure, my eyes go straight to the red dot and forget about my iron sights.
The same is true with lasers. Luckily with a red dot, it doesn't dissappear at 10 yards during the middle of the day (unlike crimson trace lasers) so you're not losing time trying to spot it. Thus it's actually quite helpful.

Crimson Trace lasers lose their value quickly as range extends and confuse the sight picture for a lot of people. If your brain/eyes can handle it, then good on you. You're the first person I've talked to who didn't find it to be a giant distraction.

At short range in dim light your eye catches the laser fast and quickly becomes a huge crutch for 90% of laser users, who then fail to excel. (in my experience and in the experience of many others)

Perhaps your individual experience was different, but I've seen a lot of people either try them and abandon them for serious defensive use, or stay crappy marksmen.

You can always find a use for these mall ninja tools....that's why they were invented....but rarely are they worth their cost and often they inadvertently become a liability. Much like the 300$, 45 degree angle sights I see mall ninjas hang on their precision AR-15s....
Is it really worth the 200$ (or whatever the absurd cost is) for what you're getting? When you could just use your sights????? You know....for free???

Probably not...especially when you factor in how people are tempted to missuse them.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

But remember that we were asked about the tactical use of lasers, not the training value.

I wasn't talking about the training value, I was talking about the often mentioned false dichotomy of having a laser and being poorly trained vs only using irons and being well trained. Statements like "they are a crutch...your lack of training will show when it fails..." type posts. You can be both well trained and use lasers, or you can be poorly trained and not have lasers.

Again, I'll simply point out there are times looking for a full sight picture will get you killed. That doesn't mean sights are useless. It just means you need to train, not just stand in a static position and put holes in a static target, and see what works at what ranges. A laser doesn't replace your sights any more than retention shooting replaces them, but if you don't know when to use either than you've failed yourself in your training regimen.

 

[d012]

Good is my vote. I like the deterrent use of the laser, that red/green dot on the body is bad on the psyche. Sighting in the laser is must also.

 

[Aaron1776]

I wasn't talking about the training value, I was talking about the often mentioned false dichotomy of having a laser and being poorly trained vs only using irons and being well trained. Statements like "they are a crutch...your lack of training will show when it fails..." type posts. You can be both well trained and use lasers, or you can be poorly trained and not have lasers.

Again, I'll simply point out there are times looking for a full sight picture will get you killed. That doesn't mean sights are useless. It just means you need to train, not just stand in a static position and put holes in a static target, and see what works at what ranges. A laser doesn't replace your sights any more than retention shooting replaces them, but if you don't know when to use either than you've failed yourself in your training regimen.

Ahh I see what you're saying now.

I think the argument that "they are a crutch" is quite valid in that 90% of people who use lasers end up using them as crutches and suffer from the aforementioned problems that myself and others listed when they try to use them improperly. Plus crimson trace lasers, as I understand, turn on by gripping the gun. Thus they're always there to distract you. (Or at least that was my experience) At the ranges where I don't have time to find my sights or even just a flash picture (as within a few feet) chances are I'll be indexing and firing anyway.

So again....cost of lasers vs just using the gun.....gonna have to go with "no" to the lasers on this one.

However, I see what you're saying. You can find a valid use for them........I just argue that the valid use is limited, not worth the cost, and better suited for those wearing IR goggles to work.

 

[tradertator]

What is the more likely scenario:
A) You're saving a hostage, making a 50 yard shot, in a perfect isosceles stance, with a full sized combat styled firearm
B) Your out and trouble presents itself. Your carrying a small handgun; Not because it works the best, but because it's comfortable and your wife would ***** if you wore the drop leg holster to dinner.
For the last 10 years, I've found myself carrying a 2" snubby revolver 90% of the time with no rear sight, and a bead on the front. Call me "mall ninja" all you like, but I feel much more confident with a set of Crimson Trace grips on it. Most often, bad **** happens after dark in close quarters, and a laser can be a great aiming aid. There's a good chance you might not even get a chance to look at your sights. It's quite possible I could have my left hand extended out to push back an aggressor with my right elbow bent in holding the gun close to me so it's less like to be stripped.
Just like any tool, there are times when it's the right one for the job.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Thus they're always there to distract you.

Do find looking at your target distracting? Isn't that the theory behind the much beloved RDS, you can have both eyes open (as you probably will under stress) and you can focus on your target (as you probably will under stress) and still have good accuracy.

I used a laser regularly when I carried a Taser. Not once did I find it distracting or have to hunt for it, even in day light. Ditto CT's on a 1911.

As far as your 90% comment, probably, but so what? That's irrelevant to someone who's willing to get quality instruction and train. I'd say that more than 90% of handgun owners either leave it in a nighstand or occasionally do static fire at stationary targets. That's also irrelevant in understanding the proper application of a handgun.

 

[TheWiredFox]

Do find looking at your target distracting? Isn't that the theory behind the much beloved RDS, you can have both eyes open (as you probably will under stress) and you can focus on your target (as you probably will under stress) and still have good accuracy.

So, I am new-ish to guns and this forum, and this comment brings up a question I have asked a
few military friends of mine, and gotten vague answers. The comment infers that to normally aim, you close one eye, get a full sight picture while looking at (the target / the front sight). Somehow the RDS allows you to keep both eyes open and look specifically at your target (which is not otherwise the case)?

So my question is (shooting irons on AR or pistol):
Am I supposed to
1. Close one eye OR
2. Leave both open
And
A. Look at the front sight post OR
B. Look at the target

And why?

Thanks,
TheWiredFox

 

[lovemachine]

Lasers...on a Carry Gun?

Here's a good article about the PROS of a laser.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

So, I am new-ish to guns and this forum, and this comment brings up a question I have asked a
few military friends of mine, and gotten vague answers. The comment infers that to normally aim, you close one eye, get a full sight picture while looking at (the target / the front sight). Somehow the RDS allows you to keep both eyes open and look specifically at your target (which is not otherwise the case)?

So my question is (shooting irons on AR or pistol):
Am I supposed to
1. Close one eye OR
2. Leave both open
And
A. Look at the front sight post OR
B. Look at the target

And why?

Thanks,
TheWiredFox

It depends on the range and what you are doing. For slow, accurate fire MOST of us will need to close our non-dominant eye when using irons. There are folks who've trained themselves to focus enough with their dominant eye to not actually need to close the other one, but they are the exception. You want to focus on the front sight, the target and the rear sights should both be a bit blurry.

With a RDS, you leave both eyes open. The red dot will sort of hover in mid air as your brain combines the two pictures. You can close your non-dominant eye with a RDS and not hurt anything, but you are losing part of the advantage of using one.

 

[mayor al]

At this time in my 'firearms career' I tend to return to the tried and true techniques I have learned in my 70 years. I am not opposed to messing around with a laser, but I don't take them too seriously when it comes to using a firearm for protection (even in drills). I get upset when that red-dot on the target jumps around like I have Parkinson's...I do shake a little but seem to get better control when using regular handgun sights instead of the laser.

So for me, I would use it for a gimick, but I would not have one mounted on one of my guns for HD work.

 

[TheWiredFox]

Optimum?

...There are folks who've trained themselves to focus enough with their dominant eye to not actually need to close the other one, but they are the exception.

So, this means the best way to use irons is with both eyes open? This would require focusing on the target, else you get a double image of the target.
So...

You want to focus on the front sight, the target and the rear sights should both be a bit blurry.

Closing one eye and focusing on the front sight is the second best way, but is more common?

With a RDS, you leave both eyes open. The red dot will sort of hover in mid air as your brain combines the two pictures. You can close your non-dominant eye with a RDS and not hurt anything, but you are losing part of the advantage of using one.

So if I follow the logic, if you train 'the best way' an RDS is generally irrelevant unless it is dark or at minimum is comparable to tritium night sights.

To get this on topic of lasers, the laser dot is 'theoretically' directly in line with your sights / barrel. Therefore you have a 'third point of reference' that increases your 'theoretical' sight radius. As you draw your weapon and are taking aim (with both eyes open, so far) you have a reference of 1. your hand and 2. the laser dot. As you approach 'full site picture' all three references start to line up (assuming you get a perfect 'trained professional' draw). The laser dot should be on top (in your vision), front sight directly below that, and the rear sight below that. When you get to full sight picture the laser dot should not be visible.

If you need to pull the trigger before you get full sight picture, you know where you are aiming.
And just like an RDS, you don't need to close one eye to get an aim point (assuming you do), and you stay focused on the target (instead of your front sight) until you maybe shut one eye for your sights.

I think a major problem is the notion that you close an eye and focus on your sight. A laser and an RDS can be useful tools and even teaching aids to sight properly with both eyes open and keep focused on your target.

Are they used like that? Well, it doesn't sound like it.

Those are my thoughts.

TheWiredFox

 

[BehindBlueI's]

*IF* you can successfully do it, yes, both eyes open is better. You are more likely to shoot with both eyes open in a stressful situation anyway unless you train a lot (and not just static shooting, actual stressed shooting). I cannot, when I try I pull my shots left. I find it easier to train to close my left eye than to shift focus to my right eye with it still open. YOU STILL MUST FOCUS ON THE FRONT SIGHT, not the target. One or or both eyes don't change that, which is why its difficult to train yourself to do. Essentially, you have to train your brain to ignore what your non-dominant eye is seeing. Some folks recommend putting scotch tape over the lens of your shooting glasses and slowly peeling it away as a method to do this.

An RDS is far from irrelevant. You don't have to "align" an RDS, if you can see the dot that's where the bullet should hit. It also "floats" so you don't have to choose between focusing on the sight and on the target. Focusing on a front sight still requires you to align it with the rear sight for accuracy work. An RDS if faster, all else being equal.

The laser allows you to focus on the target exclusively.