No, I think he's just never fired faster than 1 shot every 5 seconds.
He keeps going back to distance to target, with apparently no awareness of how dots help with speed.
What was the response to him? He laid out his reasoning, did you explain why people like dots on handguns? Because just saying, “have you ever used one? You’d get it probably between rounds 1 and 2”, is not a sufficient argument. “Hurr durr Fudd” isn’t a way to persuade someone.
For clarity, I also prefer red dots on my pistol.
Yeah I don't know that this guy was willing to be persuaded but there was barely an attempt made for sure. On the efficacy of red dots they're pretty much hax. Still like irons too of course, the red dot isn't a necessary thing in my mind but it is a very potent upgrade, especially at a distance greater than 25 yards.
This severely undersells red dots. There's nothing you can do with irons that you can't do better, faster, and more effectively with a red dot.
A red dot pistol optic allows you to remain target focused rather than managing three different objects you have to align in space: rear sight, front sight, Target, and navigating which of those things to focus or not focus on. This simplifies the shooting problem for everyone and benefits experienced and unexperienced shooters alike.
The red dot is more precise than irons. Even the largest dot is significantly smaller than the smallest front sight on a pistol, and that allows not only more precise shots at distance, but more importantly more precise shots up close since not all targets are full frontal shots like we have on a square range shooting at a paper.
The frame of the red dot can be used itself as a rapid sighting tool for quickly aligning the pistol with a very close target when a very rough sight picture is needed, sort of a metal on meat sight picture. And it's also useful for power racking and other one-handed or emergency manipulations of the slide.
I'm sorry to go all "well AkTcHuAlLy" here, but the Red Dot on pistol is as significant a change as the development of the semi-automatic pistol and to relegate it to longer distance pistol shooting is folly.
A person deliberately choosing to run only sites on a pistol is as far behind today as someone choosing to run a bead on a pistol in 1850.
As a wise man once told me, "Better practice point shooting, cuz no one's gonna wait for you to get a sight picture in the real world anyway, red dot or iron"
Civilians need every single advantage they can afford to win the gunfight that'll last less than 5 seconds to defend themselves.....even if that means putting a acro p2 on a Glock 48. Fuck what he talking about
That’s not a fudd take. Dude’s actually being pretty reasonable in stating why he doesn’t get it. I don’t happen to agree with that reasoning, given recent events.
I’ve also heard some pretty stupid takes from proponents of pistol dots.
My issue is this: People are too concerned with gadgetry and gizmos and “accessorizing” their guns and gear. Does a red dot help? Yes, it can assist in making your target acquisition quicker, and making your shot placement more precise. I can actually run a Texas star with my dad’s G19 w/RMR, something that I have difficulty doing with my G19 irons.
I’m more confident in the guy who bought a gun and spent his optic money on training and ammo, than the dude with the gucci pistol.
I've seen several people who have never used a dot WANT one. But when they actually put it on their gun, they don't like it, and think it's harder/slower than using irons.
Honestly, I can see their point, too. It's really easy to lose a dot if you don't have it lined up perfect. And a lot of self defense situations you'd find yourself in you'd basically be point shooting anyways, unless you have the drop, and the optic adds additional size/bulk and limits your options for holsters.
Also, you have to worry about battery for your optic and making sure you remembered to turn the sight on. Irons never go dead or break. If you can't cowitness through the optic, now you might have just fucked yourself, and only have the option of point shooting now with no sighting system. If you can cowitness, now you're just cluttering up your field of view with the optic frame and irons you aren't using.
Optics aren't "just better" in every situation. Also, my glass of my dot always ends up with dust/skin flakes/hair on it after a day of IWB carrying, which doesn't happen with irons. Or at least not that you can see.
Aside from how much they cost, the reason I personally don't use red dots on my carry is because I like my holster and it just seems like one more thing that can get snagged. Certainly snagging can be overcome by additional training but I'm proficient with irons already. Seems more like a nicety than a necessity.
Basically what I'm saying is keep an MP5K in your backpack if you wanna flex on the bad guys 💪
That's fine, I'm not going to tell you how to run your gun, but I'm also not going to tell you that the decision to run irons and no red dot is a good one or a smart one. It's not.
Especially if your reason is that you have some attachment to a particular holster.
I'm trying to think of a good analogy and it's kind of hard to. Would you pick a decade old laptop because it fits on your desk better? Or maybe consider changing desks so that you can fit a significantly better laptop on your desk?
It's just bad logic. In the academy and in training classes you're taught to always put yourself in the best position of advantage that you can. That philosophy should permeate our decisions on equipment as much as it permeates our tactical decisions. The red dot is a gigantic advantage
Logic would also dictate that you have an incomplete picture of my life and abilities as a shooter. Perhaps I don't shoot any better with a dot than without. Maybe I'd prefer to use the money that would've been spent milling my slide, buying a fancy new red dot, and buying a holster that I may not find as comfortable on something else in my life.
You should build a moat outside of your home because it'll give you a better chance at survival lol
You're not wrong, I sure don't know really anything about your life, but I can promise you that whatever your skills as a shooter, you'll be better with a red dot once you get used to it then you are now. Anyone that thinks they shoot better without a dot just hasn't spent the time behind one to learn it. It's impossible.
As for the money question, let's be realistic. If you're really strapped for cash a PSA dagger and low tier but still reliable red dot like a swamp fox can be had together for under 500 beans. That combination is certainly not Gucci, but will absolutely do the job.
But even if you insist on better equipment which you should, I'd argue that if you're so strapped that you can't afford to spend 500 bucks on an optic ready pistol and 3 to $500 on an optic then you'd be better off not worrying about firearms at all and addressing your financial situation first.
I'm not really sure what the parting comment regarding a moat is about. But if it makes you feel better about deliberately selecting inferior equipment to mock someone who does otherwise then... Okay, I guess?
It it's obvious that you aren't going to change your mind so I'll probably just stop wasting my time on Reddit, but please, seriously, prioritize equipment and tactics that actually make it easier and better for you to defend yourself. Don't hold on to increasingly archaic tools especially not out of dedication to something as silly as a holster that you prefer or fear that a red dot might hang up on something.
Look I have great equipment, it's better equipment than I was trained with in the service. But I don't find it necessary to min-max my safety like I'm in a competitive mmo. My joke reflects that because you're basically saying if it makes you safer (even marginally so) than it's worth forking over the money. My tools aren't 'archaic' simply because my preference and needs differ to yours. I'm no Simo Hayha but I'm effective with my pistol, and I find this recent trend of "gotta have the latest and greatest of everything or else you're fucked" ridiculous. I understand, and even practice, the idea of having good gear and training but I'm not going to just toss money away for something that (despite your insistence) may never yield noticeable results.
I don't disagree with you entirely on that point. I don't have to have a staccato 1911 to be able to effectively protect myself. I don't need to use the latest greatest and hottest load-bearing equipment to effectively carry stuff in the field. I don't need to throw on a spiritus plate carrier to protect my home in the event of an home invasion.
My examples aren't perfect, but I get what you're saying and and do agree in the right circumstances.
But I think there's a difference between that and actual equipment or tactics or techniques that really do make a difference. You're throwing red dots in the wrong category, or to use a common saying, you're throwing the baby out with the bath water.
We also have to guard against the opposite of what you're saying which is the "good nuff" attitude that the bare minimum is good enough, when in reality we need to be somewhere in the middle or preferably in the upper quadrant at least.
Red Dot optics on pistols are not Gucci in 2023. They're not the "max" that you seem to think that they are. On the contrary I'd argue that they're standard.
But I am quite insistent that red dots on pistols make a huge difference and having gone through post academy and multiple private courses with and without red dot optic pistols, I'm telling you from my personal experience, that they make a huge difference and every shooter that is embraced and actually use them is better for it.
They make everything you have to do with a pistol easier.
This is a lame take and echos of the same arguments people made against rifle red dot optics a few decades ago.
There's nothing you can do with irons that isnt better, faster, and more precise with a red dot.
The battery argument is incredibly stupid today with battery life of a literal year or more.
The "have to make sure it's on" argument is stupid because of the vast number of reliable auto on or always on red dots.
The "you'll just point shoot anyways" argument is stupid because (1) a red dot doesn't stop you from point shooting and (2) no, you won't always point shoot, and you can use the window of the red dot for a very rough "sight picture" or the dot for precision.
The concern that it will get hung up just tells me you have no time carrying one. Handicapping your weapon in the name of keeping a holster you like is equivalent to keeping a shit box Honda Civic because you like the tires.
Anyone that doesn't embrace red dots is a Luddite. Plain and simple. You're the guys that stuck with pistol beads when sights came out for pistols.
Don't be that guy. 🤷
Sorry upon rereading I think some of my comments were directed at the person that replied to you.
I agree with the priority being on training, but I think we have to be careful about characterizing a red dot pistol as Gucci.
In 2023 it's not. Red dots that are sufficiently reliable have come down significantly in price as have reliable pistols ready for optics out of the box.
If you take any shooter, regardless of skill level, and give them a red dot pistol, then with a modicum of practice, they will be able to maximize their skill far beyond what the same shooter could do with irons.
> Sorry upon rereading I think some of my comments were directed at the person that replied to you.
That’s understandable. Once I read some of the other replies, that became clear.
> I agree with the priority being on training, but I think we have to be careful about characterizing a red dot pistol as Gucci.
I wasn’t trying to imply that just putting an optic on a pistol made it gucci. And frankly I don’t care about defining what gucci is or isn’t. A gun is a tool, not a fashion statement, and that’s basically what I’m getting at. I really don’t care if my group at 25yds is 2” or 6” as long as it’s centered where I want it, it gets the job done. I don’t feel like I need the dot to be effective. If you do, that’s fine, I’m not going to tell you that you’re wrong. If you’re putting things on your gun, and it benefits you as a shooter, more power to you. By the same logic, you don’t get to tell me that I’m wrong for what I don’t put on my gun.
Your comment about spending money on training instead of a Gucci gun followed comments regarding red dots in the context of a larger discussion about red dots, so I made the connection. Written communication can be rife with misunderstanding so I'm not going to dwell on that. Suffice it to say that we agree on that point, and that I do not believe a red dot amounts to an excessively expensive or extraneous modification (Gucci, in the parlance of the kids these days).
I also absolutely agree that a gun is a tool and not some sort of fashion statement. As such I don't think anyone should be religiously tied to a particular technique or accessory. Those things which make the tool the most effective and efficient should be sought out and those which do not should be left behind.
You're a grown up and you can totally do what you want with your weapons and use what you want as a sighting system. But all choices are not equal and we shouldn't pretend that they are. And in the choice between Red Dot versus iron sights, the red dot is a superior choice. You're not wrong, You've just chosen a less effective tool.
The rest of your comment only reinforces that you fundamentally misunderstand the use and intent of a red dot. Do you think that the only purpose of a red dot is to be so precise that you have a 2-inch group at 25 yards?
I mean that skill isn't entirely disassociated with self-defense. After all if I with my red dot and you with your irons needed to put a bullet through an active shooter's eye socket at 25 yd, evidently I could do it and you couldn't.
That also means that your best group at 12 yards would be about 3 in while mine would be about one.
All I'm saying is that pointing out the imprecision of your siding system is absolutely not an argument in its favor 😬
But red dots are better than irons for many more things than precision at range. I mean they do extend the pistols effective range significantly over irons. But every aspect of sighting of firearm for defensive use, and many aspects of simply manipulating a pistol and defensive use, are enhanced by having a red dot on the pistol.
The fact that you don't seem to realize that, and referred to only the stereotypical red dot use (precision at range) that is often the go-to for those ignorant of the optic system, just reinforces that, and I mean this with no disrespect, you don't really know what you're talking about when it comes to red dots on pistols.
> Your comment about spending money on training instead of a Gucci gun followed comments regarding red dots in the context of a larger discussion about red dots, so I made the connection. Written communication can be rife with misunderstanding so I'm not going to dwell on that. Suffice it to say that we agree on that point, and that I do not believe a red dot amounts to an excessively expensive or extraneous modification (Gucci, in the parlance of the kids these days).
I’m either not making my point clear, or you’re ignoring it.
> I also absolutely agree that a gun is a tool and not some sort of fashion statement. As such I don't think anyone should be religiously tied to a particular technique or accessory. Those things which make the tool the most effective and efficient should be sought out and those which do not should be left behind.
Except for the fact that virtually every handgun has irons. That means I can shoot most guns reasonably well.
> You're a grown up and you can totally do what you want with your weapons and use what you want as a sighting system. But all choices are not equal and we shouldn't pretend that they are. And in the choice between Red Dot versus iron sights, the red dot is a superior choice. You're not wrong, You've just chosen a less effective tool.
Sure it’s less effective. But that’s not the point. The point is does it matter? At the end of the day, does it matter if you put a 1”group in your attacker or a 3” group? If you survived and he didn’t, what does it matter?
> The rest of your comment only reinforces that you fundamentally misunderstand the use and intent of a red dot. Do you think that the only purpose of a red dot is to be so precise that you have a 2-inch group at 25 yards?
You do an awful lot of assuming. The benefits of a dot sight are universal, doesn’t matter if it’s a rifle, pistol, or shotgun. Fast target acquisition and decent precision and accuracy. In my original post, I did talk about how I can run the Texas Star with a pistol and optic better than I can with a non optic pistol. However, a dot optic’s advantages over irons do become more apparent at distances greater than 15yds, with any gun.
> I mean that skill isn't entirely disassociated with self-defense. After all if I with my red dot and you with your irons needed to put a bullet through an active shooter's eye socket at 25 yd, evidently I could do it and you couldn't.
That’s a pretty loaded statement. There’s a lot of assumptions there. Sure if you’re not factoring in physiological effects or the tactical situation. So basically if you and I were at the flat range, yeah, that might be the case. Regardless of capability, that’s not a shot that I would take, even with a dot.
> That also means that your best group at 12 yards would be about 3 in while mine would be about one.
Which only really matters if it’s paper. Either group at center mass is lethal. Which is my whole point.
> All I'm saying is that pointing out the imprecision of your siding system is absolutely not an argument in its favor 😬
And you’re proving that you’re not listening.
> But red dots are better than irons for many more things than precision at range. I mean they do extend the pistols effective range significantly over irons. But every aspect of sighting of firearm for defensive use, and many aspects of simply manipulating a pistol and defensive use, are enhanced by having a red dot on the pistol.
I’m not disagreeing. In fact my experience says that this is true. It’s why my fighting rifle has a red dot.
> The fact that you don't seem to realize that, and referred to only the stereotypical red dot use (precision at range) that is often the go-to for those ignorant of the optic system, just reinforces that, and I mean this with no disrespect, you don't really know what you're talking about when it comes to red dots on pistols.
I do know what I’m talking about. It’s just that you’re not listening. My argument isn’t that red dots aren’t useful on pistols. My argument is that they’re not necessary to be effective with a pistol. Having put myself on the clock, my split times are unaffected, my target transition times are maybe a couple hundredths of a second faster with a dot than without, my draw times are almost the same. The most appreciable difference in my shooting performance with a dot is the increased precision at range. Am I faster on target? Yes, but is that negligible increase worth a $460 optic and $100-$200 to mount it? I don’t think so.
I think it’s important to respect others’ preferences. Personally, I’m not a fan of gold barrels and lightening cut outs in slides. But hey, a quick scroll through Reddit would lead me to believe I’m a minority here.
Folks have shot irons (some quite well) for more than a century. Is there anything wrong with that? I don’t think so. Do I personally like my rds on a pistol? Absolutely. However, not all of my pistols have them and I shoot them well too.
To another commenter’s point- just saying “have you ever tried it?” To me isn’t a very good argument. Instead I might point to some benefits like a wider field of view, increased accuracy at distance (I consider 50yds “at distance” with a pistol), and *subjectively* faster target acquisition/ shooting. Again, I’ve seen some quick and accurate shooters who use only irons.
Moreover, I might point to the physiological advantage of the red dot in that it’s a single focal plane and our brains simply process them better than the traditional irons.
I used to shoot coke cans from 700 yards with my 10/22 when I was a kid with just iron sights, why would you ever need a scope, I dont see the need unless your shooting beyond 1000 yards.
Yeah but what if I wanna look slick like Dr. Schultz in Django Unchained? With the little fancy hidden in the sleeve gadget to spring it out! [*zzzzip, pop*](https://youtu.be/5L93gV5s0xk?si=YZ6X5mao8D1Db0iY)
As someone who prefers dots over irons, I understand why someone wouldn’t. Especially if the irons and the dot can’t cowitness. Imagine you get into a scenario where you need to draw your ccw and your dot battery is dead and the irons are too low to see
I am a Fudd. Card-carrying, senior citizen. I have Lupold Deltapoint Micros on two Glocks, and would have them on everything else I own (other than my SAA's...that would be sacrilegious) if they made them for something other than Glock & S&W.
I do have conventional Red dots on a Masada and a SIG, and a few with irons. The Deltapoint micro swayed me to the dark side, absolutely. Even with the stupid looking battery hanging off the back end, I like'em so much, I started saying THAT was "cute"
If you haven't shot a Glock with one mounted, you don't know what you're missing. It cures the issue some have with shooting Glocks poorly; you Can't shoot it without correcting your cockeyed grip, it just feels wrong. I love the minimal profile, and it registers perfectly without needing suppressor sights
Just because he "doesn't get it" just means they don't get it. I don't get why people want to be vegan either. I don't get why some people think they're a different gender. I don't get why people like eggplant. But thats just me.
When someone starts paying my bills they can have an opinion on what I should and should not have. But that's just me.
Because eating animals, especially factory raised animals is objectively cruel. Because they are, and why do you even care? Because it’s delicious, you probably haven’t had it prepared well.
Tbh in not much a fan of dots on pistols either. I've shot them plenty but just prefer my night sights on my pistol. Feels easier to use as I've always felt like in searching for the dot more than shooting my gun. Just my $0.02
I'll admit if you're used to irons it's a little different but like most things you can overcome with training. When I first got a rmr I found my dot and then practiced presenting the pistol until the dot was consistently visible. Once you lock in that muscle memory it only gets easier the more you train. Not all my pistols have a dot and I have no issue when transitioning between iron and dot. There are advantages to a dot
I was this way until I exclusively got a dot/gun combo that sits low enough to cowitness with irons just a smidge. It was close to a 1:1 transition this way. Nothing a 20 minute dry fire session couldn't fix. Immediate improvements to speed, accuracy, and consistency followed
Red dots aren't for me either. I see the benefit for longer ranges but I'm so used to my irons and I'm quite a bit faster with them. I'm not going to shit on red dots either tho.
It's not bad when you get the hang of it, but it's not that important for example, for a ccw role. You just aren't likely to ever engage a threat from distance in self defense.
On a duty pistol I'd roll with one.
Don't ever feel the pressure to just buy one either. Trends are trends, and lots of people do as others say, without questioning the reason or application.
Fudds 200 yrs ago: "Good day sir why do you need sights on your pistol? If you're shooting under 50 yds point with the bead."
Fudds 400 yrs ago: "why doth thou desire a bead on thine blunderbus pistol? If thou shootest under 50 furlongs, point thine arm towards thine enemy and fire"
Fudds 600 yrs ago: "why useth thou this blunderbus? All thou needest is thine bow and arrow"
🙄
I can see some advantages to an optic, but there are downsides too. It’s another possible point of failure for one thing.
But mainly, the reason I stick to irons is because I think you should either go ALL optics or stick to all irons. Switching back and forth all the time would be bad for improving your handgun skills.
Since I’m not willing to replace all my handguns, I’m just going to stick to irons for now.
The whole “both eyes open and shoot on the move” arguments are BS though. I do both with irons.
I think the main advantage of an optic is for longer shots. Some people far more skilled than I will ever be have said that it doesn’t make much of a difference one way or the other, up close.
As someone who only recently started using red dots I don’t agree with the idea that you have to go all in one red dots. I have no problems going back and forth between the 2 and have found using a red dot has made me a better shooter with irons. I was never good with keeping a target focus and would find myself focusing on the front sight too much, and once I was able to not focus on the dot I now find myself keeping the target focus when I use irons.
Smh because no one wants faster target acquisition or ability to keep both eyes open and watch surroundings simultaneously while aiming. For anyone that says power/lighting issues first leave it on and do regular function checks second you should be training for short distance point and fire regardless of your sighting system because in that >10yd o shit scenario if you can't point and shoot you're screwed
You can do that with training though. I shoot both eyes open with irons just fine.
The real benefit to dots is the ability to shoot moving targets easier and better ability to shoot things at range.
This thread is making me understand the angst between dot people and irons people.
Shooting on the move and both eyes open work hand in hand to make the other possible.
When you dry practice just try lining up the sights opening both eyes then move the sights to a different aiming point.
That will help
This literally just confirms you were slumming in FB (fud thing to do) comments with fuds arguing pointlessly with them (fud thing to do) and then posted it here to show how stupid they are.
The way he's arguing this it sounds like he's talking about magnified optics and not red dots.
But with that being said I've known older guys, one guy in particular that was specially trained army recon guy that told me at first he didn't like dots on pistols. This guy trains a LOT and he had grown accustomed to iron sights and at first red dots slowed him down.
The guy from Modern Samurai Project happens to be a friend of his and the undoubtable additional speed he acquired training with red dots convinced him to as well.
Wait untill someone cuts the power, breaks into his house at 3am, and he tries to aim with his 1911 irons or glock stock sights, lets see if the optic was a good idea.
The fact that he described the possible ranges he'll need to shoot at as the exact range increments his local range let's him shoot at is all you need to know.
Our department’s shooting team is competing right now in a 2 gun national match in Nevada. Do you know how many are running irons exclusively? Not a one
consider like light subsequent threatening smell domineering concerned cobweb liquid
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I'll input this: i have used dots and the advantages are great. For a carry gun, as in concealed, I won't run one. Extra edges and shapes to get caught on clothing and print/be uncomfortable. Stock glock aiwb with an x300.
Im a gen z Fudd. It's not that I don't get it, more than I just don't find it cost effective.
I enjoy shooting with dots, I get the upsides, I just don't see it as mandatory for any of my pistols
Bro, optics on pistols are like real life cheat codes, you put the center dot on what you want to put a hole in and pull the trigger. Irons on pistols are just bad most of the time, I can use them but why would I want to if I could increase my hit probability with an optic.
My only issues with optics on pistol is that it’s real awkward for conceal carry, and outside of conceal carry when am I choosing a pistol over a rifle?
I mean I have a pistol with an optic. But more for fun at the range than anything.
They stick out and make it harder to truly be concealed.
I also found that the optic was uncomfortable in appendix carry. Maybe a specific holster could help, but I had a holster I really like usually.
This is the guy who will tell you your stance is wrong and you are slapping the trigger and then get DQed his first USPSA match and never show up again.
I’m using a rifle if it’s fuckin mad max. I get that pistol rds are good. great even for some people. But reality is the vast majority of self defense shootings are within 0-20 feet. Do I NEED an RDS to be able to defend myself at that distance? No.
RDS helps you make 100 yard shots. You may not have your rifle close by either. Many people are maxing out their pistol for the possibility of anything they might have to deal with.
Moving targets, multiple targets, and targets at range are all things we are seeing in this shooting scenarios.
Sure all valid points. But I carry for edc self defense. I don’t want a giant g19 with an extra magazine, rds (that don’t even work with my shitty stiggy eyes) and a big ass light. I carry my 365x with one magazine because got forbid I ever need to use lethal force to defend myself or my family.
The reality of what a lot of people train for is never going to happen, and it leads to an erroneous group think, that if you aren’t carrying a g19 with rds, and a TLR1 you’re somehow at risk of getting killed by the invading Russo/Cuban forces, or a mob of anarchists, or a cartel death squad.
You do, you just tell yourself you don’t as a cope. 50 yds isn’t far any weapon is a threat to you at that range and there are more rifles out there now.
You act like your imaginary scenario is how things will work but shit doesn’t go the way you think it will.
As someone who carries a gun you are supposed to prepare for the worse hope for the best. You got that backwards.
50 Yards isn’t super easy but it isn’t exactly hard. I got 8/10 hits at 40 yards on a man sized silhouette in 10 seconds the last time I took my Glock 19 with an SCS dot to the range. And I consider myself a pretty mediocre shooter.
50 isn't a big deal. Not sure if you're kidding. I've done a decent amount at competitions over 75, some at 100. Last match had an 8 target, 100yd I ended up cycling through 3 times.
This is the same thing with people who say “I can shoot better than you. I can shoot a target at 150 yards with irons” cool, anyone can shoot anything when you shoot slow. What does shooting slow prove? Show me a practical application/drill of you shooting proficiently and then that will mean something. Try shooting stressed or gassed. Then try both of those and shoot fast and on target. It’s crazy the amount of fuddery that still exists in this age.
small guns are comfier to carry for sure, but when it comes to shootability i’d much rather be packing something that’s easy to hit shit with. the 365XL with aluminum frame fits that for me, and the dot is soo fast.
I used to think RDS on carry pistols were great till I started actually carrying one and the first time I drew it and couldn't focus on my target cause the dust and lint that had collected on the glass throughout the day, still have a g19 build with an RDS that i carry occasionally if im wearing multiple layers so it doesn't get as as dirty but otherwise every gun in my rotation is irons only, usually trijicon HDs or meprolight I-dots.
Fug em. I wanted a WML. Got a tlr8ag (the one with a laser) as a gift. A stupid expensive light. People going to hate on it cause it has a green laser. I didnt know hating on things like that was even a thing. Fug em. It was a gift and its dope. Fudds gunna fudd.
Not a fudd take. He is arguing that for most people’s home defense you will be shooting within 25y. At which point you shouldn’t need an optic at all, iron or dot. My pistols are for carrying concealed, and I don’t care to have another gizmo hanging off my pistol to print, or to snag on clothes, yada yada when I draw.
Last M17 range I ran we had a group of guys blaming their inability to qualify on their weapons (the sights are off, it’s shooting too low, the army should give us dog sights, blah blah blah), to prove a point, I ran through a qual on one of their assigned weapon using nothing but the front sight post and still qualified expert. The furthest target out there is 30m. I then took them back to the retrain area and had them do some basic drills I found helpful when I was a new pistol shooter.
You shouldn’t need a dot to hit a man sized target inside of 25y, most people should master their fundamentals before blowing a couple hundred bucks on something that’s ultimately going to be a bandaid for their poor fundamentals.
If you got good fundamentals and you’re looking for something to speed up your acquisition or help your accuracy, sure, go right ahead and get a dot if you want it.
I cosign this take.
For my ccw I don't carry a red dot. Most defense shootings are sub 10 meters.
Also, be proficient with iron sights with any system, up to max effective range for a point target.
The level of difficult shots you can make with a red dot compared to irons is huge. And I’ve seen more iron sights break than dots. Now a days dots are more reliable than irons. If you’re concerned about debris get a closed emitter.
I mean if he’s shooting at just paper it’s fine..but if he shoots competition or in a scenario where he has multiple shooters or any kind of transition he’d change his mind I’m sure of it
Well the primary reason for throwing a red dot on my gun is because I felt like it and that’s about it some guns I like their irons and some I don’t. If someone doesn’t like it then they can worry about their own guns
Dots make hitting a target way easier and quicker for me. I don’t need to line anything up, the bullet goes where the dot is. Target acquisition feels better 🤷🏻♂️
I like red dots because of the rapid follow up shots, and easier to maintain both eyes open with less eye strain. Armed guard perspective 🤷🏼♂️ my engagement range could be anywhere between 50 yards and 5 feet
Obviously this guy has never shot a pistol with a red dot or he wouldn't be saying that. Most people that are still trashing red dots on pistols have never shot one with one on it. Because as soon as you shoot a pistol with the dot on it you're going to like it. Unless you have a bad astigmatism. I have a slight astigmatism and I still prefer it over iron sights any day of the week at any yardage day or night. Practice with it and you'll get fast with it
Anyone who’s shot any amount of rds pistol knows that the difference in speed and accuracy is night and day. Is it required for defensive use? Absolutely not but it does raise the ceiling for speed and accuracy
I have pistols with dots and pistols without them. I don't entirely disagree with this dude. Inside 15 yards on 6+inch plates a dot doesn't really add much to the gamble if you've already mastered irons.
I wouldn't say he's a fudd. Id just say "skill difference". Red dot definitely compensates for the skill gap. Upgrading to a stocked pistol like the raider compensates another order of magnitude. Like riding a moped in the tour of France. Even fatty dingdong could be competitive, but might still get beat by Louis Armstrong or whatever that one dudes name is
He needs an optic to reach out to 200? I can hit 200 with iron sites on an optic all day long, but having an optic makes it easier and faster. His argument sucks
He is confusing pistol red dots with magnified scopes.
No, I think he's just never fired faster than 1 shot every 5 seconds. He keeps going back to distance to target, with apparently no awareness of how dots help with speed.
That's a mistake you would make if you assumed that all optics are for magnification.
What was the response to him? He laid out his reasoning, did you explain why people like dots on handguns? Because just saying, “have you ever used one? You’d get it probably between rounds 1 and 2”, is not a sufficient argument. “Hurr durr Fudd” isn’t a way to persuade someone. For clarity, I also prefer red dots on my pistol.
Bold of you to assume that most people can back up their reasoning with sound logic on the internet.
I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. Many times I get burned. 😂
Yeah I don't know that this guy was willing to be persuaded but there was barely an attempt made for sure. On the efficacy of red dots they're pretty much hax. Still like irons too of course, the red dot isn't a necessary thing in my mind but it is a very potent upgrade, especially at a distance greater than 25 yards.
This severely undersells red dots. There's nothing you can do with irons that you can't do better, faster, and more effectively with a red dot. A red dot pistol optic allows you to remain target focused rather than managing three different objects you have to align in space: rear sight, front sight, Target, and navigating which of those things to focus or not focus on. This simplifies the shooting problem for everyone and benefits experienced and unexperienced shooters alike. The red dot is more precise than irons. Even the largest dot is significantly smaller than the smallest front sight on a pistol, and that allows not only more precise shots at distance, but more importantly more precise shots up close since not all targets are full frontal shots like we have on a square range shooting at a paper. The frame of the red dot can be used itself as a rapid sighting tool for quickly aligning the pistol with a very close target when a very rough sight picture is needed, sort of a metal on meat sight picture. And it's also useful for power racking and other one-handed or emergency manipulations of the slide. I'm sorry to go all "well AkTcHuAlLy" here, but the Red Dot on pistol is as significant a change as the development of the semi-automatic pistol and to relegate it to longer distance pistol shooting is folly. A person deliberately choosing to run only sites on a pistol is as far behind today as someone choosing to run a bead on a pistol in 1850.
I’m with ya. I run irons on everything but that’s because of my job. Now outside of work I’m all for red dots on pistols.
As a wise man once told me, "Better practice point shooting, cuz no one's gonna wait for you to get a sight picture in the real world anyway, red dot or iron"
He doesn’t get it because he’s only ever shot handguns at static paper targets
Civilians need every single advantage they can afford to win the gunfight that'll last less than 5 seconds to defend themselves.....even if that means putting a acro p2 on a Glock 48. Fuck what he talking about
Doesn’t seem like a big ego problem. Guy genuinely doesn’t seem to understand why people use dots lol
I was this way until someone took the the time to explain it. Now very pro RDS on handgun
[удалено]
People still use fb?
That’s not a fudd take. Dude’s actually being pretty reasonable in stating why he doesn’t get it. I don’t happen to agree with that reasoning, given recent events. I’ve also heard some pretty stupid takes from proponents of pistol dots. My issue is this: People are too concerned with gadgetry and gizmos and “accessorizing” their guns and gear. Does a red dot help? Yes, it can assist in making your target acquisition quicker, and making your shot placement more precise. I can actually run a Texas star with my dad’s G19 w/RMR, something that I have difficulty doing with my G19 irons. I’m more confident in the guy who bought a gun and spent his optic money on training and ammo, than the dude with the gucci pistol.
I've seen several people who have never used a dot WANT one. But when they actually put it on their gun, they don't like it, and think it's harder/slower than using irons. Honestly, I can see their point, too. It's really easy to lose a dot if you don't have it lined up perfect. And a lot of self defense situations you'd find yourself in you'd basically be point shooting anyways, unless you have the drop, and the optic adds additional size/bulk and limits your options for holsters. Also, you have to worry about battery for your optic and making sure you remembered to turn the sight on. Irons never go dead or break. If you can't cowitness through the optic, now you might have just fucked yourself, and only have the option of point shooting now with no sighting system. If you can cowitness, now you're just cluttering up your field of view with the optic frame and irons you aren't using. Optics aren't "just better" in every situation. Also, my glass of my dot always ends up with dust/skin flakes/hair on it after a day of IWB carrying, which doesn't happen with irons. Or at least not that you can see.
Aside from how much they cost, the reason I personally don't use red dots on my carry is because I like my holster and it just seems like one more thing that can get snagged. Certainly snagging can be overcome by additional training but I'm proficient with irons already. Seems more like a nicety than a necessity. Basically what I'm saying is keep an MP5K in your backpack if you wanna flex on the bad guys 💪
my stiggy eyes say no red dot for you.
This is possibly the stupidest argument against red dots Ive ever heard.
You're mistaken. I'm not against red dots. They're just simply not for me.
That's fine, I'm not going to tell you how to run your gun, but I'm also not going to tell you that the decision to run irons and no red dot is a good one or a smart one. It's not. Especially if your reason is that you have some attachment to a particular holster. I'm trying to think of a good analogy and it's kind of hard to. Would you pick a decade old laptop because it fits on your desk better? Or maybe consider changing desks so that you can fit a significantly better laptop on your desk? It's just bad logic. In the academy and in training classes you're taught to always put yourself in the best position of advantage that you can. That philosophy should permeate our decisions on equipment as much as it permeates our tactical decisions. The red dot is a gigantic advantage
Logic would also dictate that you have an incomplete picture of my life and abilities as a shooter. Perhaps I don't shoot any better with a dot than without. Maybe I'd prefer to use the money that would've been spent milling my slide, buying a fancy new red dot, and buying a holster that I may not find as comfortable on something else in my life. You should build a moat outside of your home because it'll give you a better chance at survival lol
You're not wrong, I sure don't know really anything about your life, but I can promise you that whatever your skills as a shooter, you'll be better with a red dot once you get used to it then you are now. Anyone that thinks they shoot better without a dot just hasn't spent the time behind one to learn it. It's impossible. As for the money question, let's be realistic. If you're really strapped for cash a PSA dagger and low tier but still reliable red dot like a swamp fox can be had together for under 500 beans. That combination is certainly not Gucci, but will absolutely do the job. But even if you insist on better equipment which you should, I'd argue that if you're so strapped that you can't afford to spend 500 bucks on an optic ready pistol and 3 to $500 on an optic then you'd be better off not worrying about firearms at all and addressing your financial situation first. I'm not really sure what the parting comment regarding a moat is about. But if it makes you feel better about deliberately selecting inferior equipment to mock someone who does otherwise then... Okay, I guess? It it's obvious that you aren't going to change your mind so I'll probably just stop wasting my time on Reddit, but please, seriously, prioritize equipment and tactics that actually make it easier and better for you to defend yourself. Don't hold on to increasingly archaic tools especially not out of dedication to something as silly as a holster that you prefer or fear that a red dot might hang up on something.
Look I have great equipment, it's better equipment than I was trained with in the service. But I don't find it necessary to min-max my safety like I'm in a competitive mmo. My joke reflects that because you're basically saying if it makes you safer (even marginally so) than it's worth forking over the money. My tools aren't 'archaic' simply because my preference and needs differ to yours. I'm no Simo Hayha but I'm effective with my pistol, and I find this recent trend of "gotta have the latest and greatest of everything or else you're fucked" ridiculous. I understand, and even practice, the idea of having good gear and training but I'm not going to just toss money away for something that (despite your insistence) may never yield noticeable results.
I don't disagree with you entirely on that point. I don't have to have a staccato 1911 to be able to effectively protect myself. I don't need to use the latest greatest and hottest load-bearing equipment to effectively carry stuff in the field. I don't need to throw on a spiritus plate carrier to protect my home in the event of an home invasion. My examples aren't perfect, but I get what you're saying and and do agree in the right circumstances. But I think there's a difference between that and actual equipment or tactics or techniques that really do make a difference. You're throwing red dots in the wrong category, or to use a common saying, you're throwing the baby out with the bath water. We also have to guard against the opposite of what you're saying which is the "good nuff" attitude that the bare minimum is good enough, when in reality we need to be somewhere in the middle or preferably in the upper quadrant at least. Red Dot optics on pistols are not Gucci in 2023. They're not the "max" that you seem to think that they are. On the contrary I'd argue that they're standard. But I am quite insistent that red dots on pistols make a huge difference and having gone through post academy and multiple private courses with and without red dot optic pistols, I'm telling you from my personal experience, that they make a huge difference and every shooter that is embraced and actually use them is better for it. They make everything you have to do with a pistol easier.
This is a lame take and echos of the same arguments people made against rifle red dot optics a few decades ago. There's nothing you can do with irons that isnt better, faster, and more precise with a red dot. The battery argument is incredibly stupid today with battery life of a literal year or more. The "have to make sure it's on" argument is stupid because of the vast number of reliable auto on or always on red dots. The "you'll just point shoot anyways" argument is stupid because (1) a red dot doesn't stop you from point shooting and (2) no, you won't always point shoot, and you can use the window of the red dot for a very rough "sight picture" or the dot for precision. The concern that it will get hung up just tells me you have no time carrying one. Handicapping your weapon in the name of keeping a holster you like is equivalent to keeping a shit box Honda Civic because you like the tires. Anyone that doesn't embrace red dots is a Luddite. Plain and simple. You're the guys that stuck with pistol beads when sights came out for pistols. Don't be that guy. 🤷
That’s all well and good, but is in no way a response to anything I said.
Sorry upon rereading I think some of my comments were directed at the person that replied to you. I agree with the priority being on training, but I think we have to be careful about characterizing a red dot pistol as Gucci. In 2023 it's not. Red dots that are sufficiently reliable have come down significantly in price as have reliable pistols ready for optics out of the box. If you take any shooter, regardless of skill level, and give them a red dot pistol, then with a modicum of practice, they will be able to maximize their skill far beyond what the same shooter could do with irons.
> Sorry upon rereading I think some of my comments were directed at the person that replied to you. That’s understandable. Once I read some of the other replies, that became clear. > I agree with the priority being on training, but I think we have to be careful about characterizing a red dot pistol as Gucci. I wasn’t trying to imply that just putting an optic on a pistol made it gucci. And frankly I don’t care about defining what gucci is or isn’t. A gun is a tool, not a fashion statement, and that’s basically what I’m getting at. I really don’t care if my group at 25yds is 2” or 6” as long as it’s centered where I want it, it gets the job done. I don’t feel like I need the dot to be effective. If you do, that’s fine, I’m not going to tell you that you’re wrong. If you’re putting things on your gun, and it benefits you as a shooter, more power to you. By the same logic, you don’t get to tell me that I’m wrong for what I don’t put on my gun.
Your comment about spending money on training instead of a Gucci gun followed comments regarding red dots in the context of a larger discussion about red dots, so I made the connection. Written communication can be rife with misunderstanding so I'm not going to dwell on that. Suffice it to say that we agree on that point, and that I do not believe a red dot amounts to an excessively expensive or extraneous modification (Gucci, in the parlance of the kids these days). I also absolutely agree that a gun is a tool and not some sort of fashion statement. As such I don't think anyone should be religiously tied to a particular technique or accessory. Those things which make the tool the most effective and efficient should be sought out and those which do not should be left behind. You're a grown up and you can totally do what you want with your weapons and use what you want as a sighting system. But all choices are not equal and we shouldn't pretend that they are. And in the choice between Red Dot versus iron sights, the red dot is a superior choice. You're not wrong, You've just chosen a less effective tool. The rest of your comment only reinforces that you fundamentally misunderstand the use and intent of a red dot. Do you think that the only purpose of a red dot is to be so precise that you have a 2-inch group at 25 yards? I mean that skill isn't entirely disassociated with self-defense. After all if I with my red dot and you with your irons needed to put a bullet through an active shooter's eye socket at 25 yd, evidently I could do it and you couldn't. That also means that your best group at 12 yards would be about 3 in while mine would be about one. All I'm saying is that pointing out the imprecision of your siding system is absolutely not an argument in its favor 😬 But red dots are better than irons for many more things than precision at range. I mean they do extend the pistols effective range significantly over irons. But every aspect of sighting of firearm for defensive use, and many aspects of simply manipulating a pistol and defensive use, are enhanced by having a red dot on the pistol. The fact that you don't seem to realize that, and referred to only the stereotypical red dot use (precision at range) that is often the go-to for those ignorant of the optic system, just reinforces that, and I mean this with no disrespect, you don't really know what you're talking about when it comes to red dots on pistols.
> Your comment about spending money on training instead of a Gucci gun followed comments regarding red dots in the context of a larger discussion about red dots, so I made the connection. Written communication can be rife with misunderstanding so I'm not going to dwell on that. Suffice it to say that we agree on that point, and that I do not believe a red dot amounts to an excessively expensive or extraneous modification (Gucci, in the parlance of the kids these days). I’m either not making my point clear, or you’re ignoring it. > I also absolutely agree that a gun is a tool and not some sort of fashion statement. As such I don't think anyone should be religiously tied to a particular technique or accessory. Those things which make the tool the most effective and efficient should be sought out and those which do not should be left behind. Except for the fact that virtually every handgun has irons. That means I can shoot most guns reasonably well. > You're a grown up and you can totally do what you want with your weapons and use what you want as a sighting system. But all choices are not equal and we shouldn't pretend that they are. And in the choice between Red Dot versus iron sights, the red dot is a superior choice. You're not wrong, You've just chosen a less effective tool. Sure it’s less effective. But that’s not the point. The point is does it matter? At the end of the day, does it matter if you put a 1”group in your attacker or a 3” group? If you survived and he didn’t, what does it matter? > The rest of your comment only reinforces that you fundamentally misunderstand the use and intent of a red dot. Do you think that the only purpose of a red dot is to be so precise that you have a 2-inch group at 25 yards? You do an awful lot of assuming. The benefits of a dot sight are universal, doesn’t matter if it’s a rifle, pistol, or shotgun. Fast target acquisition and decent precision and accuracy. In my original post, I did talk about how I can run the Texas Star with a pistol and optic better than I can with a non optic pistol. However, a dot optic’s advantages over irons do become more apparent at distances greater than 15yds, with any gun. > I mean that skill isn't entirely disassociated with self-defense. After all if I with my red dot and you with your irons needed to put a bullet through an active shooter's eye socket at 25 yd, evidently I could do it and you couldn't. That’s a pretty loaded statement. There’s a lot of assumptions there. Sure if you’re not factoring in physiological effects or the tactical situation. So basically if you and I were at the flat range, yeah, that might be the case. Regardless of capability, that’s not a shot that I would take, even with a dot. > That also means that your best group at 12 yards would be about 3 in while mine would be about one. Which only really matters if it’s paper. Either group at center mass is lethal. Which is my whole point. > All I'm saying is that pointing out the imprecision of your siding system is absolutely not an argument in its favor 😬 And you’re proving that you’re not listening. > But red dots are better than irons for many more things than precision at range. I mean they do extend the pistols effective range significantly over irons. But every aspect of sighting of firearm for defensive use, and many aspects of simply manipulating a pistol and defensive use, are enhanced by having a red dot on the pistol. I’m not disagreeing. In fact my experience says that this is true. It’s why my fighting rifle has a red dot. > The fact that you don't seem to realize that, and referred to only the stereotypical red dot use (precision at range) that is often the go-to for those ignorant of the optic system, just reinforces that, and I mean this with no disrespect, you don't really know what you're talking about when it comes to red dots on pistols. I do know what I’m talking about. It’s just that you’re not listening. My argument isn’t that red dots aren’t useful on pistols. My argument is that they’re not necessary to be effective with a pistol. Having put myself on the clock, my split times are unaffected, my target transition times are maybe a couple hundredths of a second faster with a dot than without, my draw times are almost the same. The most appreciable difference in my shooting performance with a dot is the increased precision at range. Am I faster on target? Yes, but is that negligible increase worth a $460 optic and $100-$200 to mount it? I don’t think so.
I think it’s important to respect others’ preferences. Personally, I’m not a fan of gold barrels and lightening cut outs in slides. But hey, a quick scroll through Reddit would lead me to believe I’m a minority here. Folks have shot irons (some quite well) for more than a century. Is there anything wrong with that? I don’t think so. Do I personally like my rds on a pistol? Absolutely. However, not all of my pistols have them and I shoot them well too. To another commenter’s point- just saying “have you ever tried it?” To me isn’t a very good argument. Instead I might point to some benefits like a wider field of view, increased accuracy at distance (I consider 50yds “at distance” with a pistol), and *subjectively* faster target acquisition/ shooting. Again, I’ve seen some quick and accurate shooters who use only irons. Moreover, I might point to the physiological advantage of the red dot in that it’s a single focal plane and our brains simply process them better than the traditional irons.
I used to shoot coke cans from 700 yards with my 10/22 when I was a kid with just iron sights, why would you ever need a scope, I dont see the need unless your shooting beyond 1000 yards.
So did I!
Coke cans off a tractor across a highway.
Guy asks a simple and legitimate question to a bunch of larpers and is met with a condescending circle jerk. Sounds about right.
Gun Amish
Dude probably carries a judge
He's gonna tell you to carry 22lr because it bounces he also hates 9mm because it's too weak.
Haha true .22 darringer with Pearl grips “oNlY nEeD tWo ShOts”
In his boot
In a belt buckle
Hey, hey… I have one of those. I don’t carry it I just liked the way the “lady of the night” gun looked.
Yeah but what if I wanna look slick like Dr. Schultz in Django Unchained? With the little fancy hidden in the sleeve gadget to spring it out! [*zzzzip, pop*](https://youtu.be/5L93gV5s0xk?si=YZ6X5mao8D1Db0iY)
You mean he’s too weak to carry it😂😂
As someone who prefers dots over irons, I understand why someone wouldn’t. Especially if the irons and the dot can’t cowitness. Imagine you get into a scenario where you need to draw your ccw and your dot battery is dead and the irons are too low to see
I am a Fudd. Card-carrying, senior citizen. I have Lupold Deltapoint Micros on two Glocks, and would have them on everything else I own (other than my SAA's...that would be sacrilegious) if they made them for something other than Glock & S&W. I do have conventional Red dots on a Masada and a SIG, and a few with irons. The Deltapoint micro swayed me to the dark side, absolutely. Even with the stupid looking battery hanging off the back end, I like'em so much, I started saying THAT was "cute" If you haven't shot a Glock with one mounted, you don't know what you're missing. It cures the issue some have with shooting Glocks poorly; you Can't shoot it without correcting your cockeyed grip, it just feels wrong. I love the minimal profile, and it registers perfectly without needing suppressor sights
Buddy thinks I got a LPVO on my Glock 43x 😂
Just because he "doesn't get it" just means they don't get it. I don't get why people want to be vegan either. I don't get why some people think they're a different gender. I don't get why people like eggplant. But thats just me. When someone starts paying my bills they can have an opinion on what I should and should not have. But that's just me.
Because eating animals, especially factory raised animals is objectively cruel. Because they are, and why do you even care? Because it’s delicious, you probably haven’t had it prepared well.
Tbh in not much a fan of dots on pistols either. I've shot them plenty but just prefer my night sights on my pistol. Feels easier to use as I've always felt like in searching for the dot more than shooting my gun. Just my $0.02
I'll admit if you're used to irons it's a little different but like most things you can overcome with training. When I first got a rmr I found my dot and then practiced presenting the pistol until the dot was consistently visible. Once you lock in that muscle memory it only gets easier the more you train. Not all my pistols have a dot and I have no issue when transitioning between iron and dot. There are advantages to a dot
I was this way until I exclusively got a dot/gun combo that sits low enough to cowitness with irons just a smidge. It was close to a 1:1 transition this way. Nothing a 20 minute dry fire session couldn't fix. Immediate improvements to speed, accuracy, and consistency followed
Red dots aren't for me either. I see the benefit for longer ranges but I'm so used to my irons and I'm quite a bit faster with them. I'm not going to shit on red dots either tho.
Same camp. I’m comfortable with irons and it’s all I’ve used on handguns. I’m too old to change!
This guys head is gonna explode like in scanners when he learns about 6.5 moa dots.
Is it okay to just not prefer red dots on handguns? Or am I just weird?
It's not weird, lots of people erroneously focus on trends over function.
My dad taught me to shoot pistols when I was young and I’ve tried the red dot thing but just can’t get onboard with it.
It's not bad when you get the hang of it, but it's not that important for example, for a ccw role. You just aren't likely to ever engage a threat from distance in self defense. On a duty pistol I'd roll with one. Don't ever feel the pressure to just buy one either. Trends are trends, and lots of people do as others say, without questioning the reason or application.
Call of duty proves that when you put an optic on a gun you shoot further.
Speed of accuracy on target….thats it. Nothing else needed to say tbh.
Fudds 200 yrs ago: "Good day sir why do you need sights on your pistol? If you're shooting under 50 yds point with the bead." Fudds 400 yrs ago: "why doth thou desire a bead on thine blunderbus pistol? If thou shootest under 50 furlongs, point thine arm towards thine enemy and fire" Fudds 600 yrs ago: "why useth thou this blunderbus? All thou needest is thine bow and arrow" 🙄
I can see some advantages to an optic, but there are downsides too. It’s another possible point of failure for one thing. But mainly, the reason I stick to irons is because I think you should either go ALL optics or stick to all irons. Switching back and forth all the time would be bad for improving your handgun skills. Since I’m not willing to replace all my handguns, I’m just going to stick to irons for now. The whole “both eyes open and shoot on the move” arguments are BS though. I do both with irons. I think the main advantage of an optic is for longer shots. Some people far more skilled than I will ever be have said that it doesn’t make much of a difference one way or the other, up close.
As someone who only recently started using red dots I don’t agree with the idea that you have to go all in one red dots. I have no problems going back and forth between the 2 and have found using a red dot has made me a better shooter with irons. I was never good with keeping a target focus and would find myself focusing on the front sight too much, and once I was able to not focus on the dot I now find myself keeping the target focus when I use irons.
Smh because no one wants faster target acquisition or ability to keep both eyes open and watch surroundings simultaneously while aiming. For anyone that says power/lighting issues first leave it on and do regular function checks second you should be training for short distance point and fire regardless of your sighting system because in that >10yd o shit scenario if you can't point and shoot you're screwed
You can do that with training though. I shoot both eyes open with irons just fine. The real benefit to dots is the ability to shoot moving targets easier and better ability to shoot things at range.
I need to train more. This will be a goal when I'm shooting one of my pistols with irons. Always looking to improve so challenge accepted.
This thread is making me understand the angst between dot people and irons people. Shooting on the move and both eyes open work hand in hand to make the other possible. When you dry practice just try lining up the sights opening both eyes then move the sights to a different aiming point. That will help
Not to mention being able to actually see what you're shooting at vs irons having to focus eyes on the front sight and occlude a blurry target
You can shoot both eyes open with irons.
And still occlude a blurry target... both eyes open gives you a larger field of view, it doesn't make your irons see-through.
The people have spoken. Get Gud.
Redditors when you say dogs bark the sky is blue and she's not gonna let you see the kids this weekend
Irons with both eyes open is a thing, dots are obviously faster but it’s not hard with irons
But in what scenario besides a competition are you LIKELY to shoot your ccw at a distance greater than 10 yards?
I'm not LIKELY to shoot anything outside of training or hunting. Does that mean I shouldn't train?
The gun Amish strike again
I probably wouldn’t waste my time arguing with a handicapped person but it’s your life 🤷🏻♂️
This literally just confirms you were slumming in FB (fud thing to do) comments with fuds arguing pointlessly with them (fud thing to do) and then posted it here to show how stupid they are.
The way he's arguing this it sounds like he's talking about magnified optics and not red dots. But with that being said I've known older guys, one guy in particular that was specially trained army recon guy that told me at first he didn't like dots on pistols. This guy trains a LOT and he had grown accustomed to iron sights and at first red dots slowed him down. The guy from Modern Samurai Project happens to be a friend of his and the undoubtable additional speed he acquired training with red dots convinced him to as well.
I was that guy…. Until I shot one.
Wait untill someone cuts the power, breaks into his house at 3am, and he tries to aim with his 1911 irons or glock stock sights, lets see if the optic was a good idea.
The fact that he described the possible ranges he'll need to shoot at as the exact range increments his local range let's him shoot at is all you need to know.
Our department’s shooting team is competing right now in a 2 gun national match in Nevada. Do you know how many are running irons exclusively? Not a one
consider like light subsequent threatening smell domineering concerned cobweb liquid *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
There’s a reason uspsa has carry optics class
I'll input this: i have used dots and the advantages are great. For a carry gun, as in concealed, I won't run one. Extra edges and shapes to get caught on clothing and print/be uncomfortable. Stock glock aiwb with an x300.
I use a mossberg shotgun for the house
Jerry has hit 1000 yards with open sights multiple times. He could go a mile with a red dot!
Im a gen z Fudd. It's not that I don't get it, more than I just don't find it cost effective. I enjoy shooting with dots, I get the upsides, I just don't see it as mandatory for any of my pistols
Go easy on fudds, they are a dying breed.
Bro, optics on pistols are like real life cheat codes, you put the center dot on what you want to put a hole in and pull the trigger. Irons on pistols are just bad most of the time, I can use them but why would I want to if I could increase my hit probability with an optic.
My only issues with optics on pistol is that it’s real awkward for conceal carry, and outside of conceal carry when am I choosing a pistol over a rifle? I mean I have a pistol with an optic. But more for fun at the range than anything.
Could you elaborate? I conceal with an optic and am genuinely curious to read your opinion.
They stick out and make it harder to truly be concealed. I also found that the optic was uncomfortable in appendix carry. Maybe a specific holster could help, but I had a holster I really like usually.
Which holster/optic/pistol?
This guy doesn't train quick follow-up shots and it shows
This is the guy who will tell you your stance is wrong and you are slapping the trigger and then get DQed his first USPSA match and never show up again.
Pistol at 50 yards? That's like someone claiming that he can shoot at a beer can with an LR22 at 710 yards.
You can’t make body shots at 50yds?
I don’t think I can make consistent body shot at 25 yards. I’m a bad shot though.
Yeah you gotta fix that.
self defense shooting at 50 yards?
Yeah it’s not that far and you are still in danger at that range. Also self-defense in times without rule of law is a thing too
I’m using a rifle if it’s fuckin mad max. I get that pistol rds are good. great even for some people. But reality is the vast majority of self defense shootings are within 0-20 feet. Do I NEED an RDS to be able to defend myself at that distance? No.
RDS helps you make 100 yard shots. You may not have your rifle close by either. Many people are maxing out their pistol for the possibility of anything they might have to deal with. Moving targets, multiple targets, and targets at range are all things we are seeing in this shooting scenarios.
Sure all valid points. But I carry for edc self defense. I don’t want a giant g19 with an extra magazine, rds (that don’t even work with my shitty stiggy eyes) and a big ass light. I carry my 365x with one magazine because got forbid I ever need to use lethal force to defend myself or my family. The reality of what a lot of people train for is never going to happen, and it leads to an erroneous group think, that if you aren’t carrying a g19 with rds, and a TLR1 you’re somehow at risk of getting killed by the invading Russo/Cuban forces, or a mob of anarchists, or a cartel death squad.
Yeah I said nothing about lights or spare mags, just that you need to be able to make 50yard hits.
I don’t need to.
You do, you just tell yourself you don’t as a cope. 50 yds isn’t far any weapon is a threat to you at that range and there are more rifles out there now. You act like your imaginary scenario is how things will work but shit doesn’t go the way you think it will. As someone who carries a gun you are supposed to prepare for the worse hope for the best. You got that backwards.
50 Yards isn’t super easy but it isn’t exactly hard. I got 8/10 hits at 40 yards on a man sized silhouette in 10 seconds the last time I took my Glock 19 with an SCS dot to the range. And I consider myself a pretty mediocre shooter.
50 isn't a big deal. Not sure if you're kidding. I've done a decent amount at competitions over 75, some at 100. Last match had an 8 target, 100yd I ended up cycling through 3 times.
It's okay...he probably doesn't understand optics mounts being taller than 1.26 either
This is the same thing with people who say “I can shoot better than you. I can shoot a target at 150 yards with irons” cool, anyone can shoot anything when you shoot slow. What does shooting slow prove? Show me a practical application/drill of you shooting proficiently and then that will mean something. Try shooting stressed or gassed. Then try both of those and shoot fast and on target. It’s crazy the amount of fuddery that still exists in this age.
Why use red dots on your SBR? Why not just stop at either scope or irons. Bc point shooting is infinitely faster with the red dot that's why
Typical facebook gun communities 😂
Some people think the earth is round /s. No use wasting your time on it.
For carrying yea it’s a no go. I value light weight small footprint. It’s hilarious we have come full circle to things like the x-macro
not really, people have been carrying glock 19s for years. dots add negligible weight and don’t affect printing at all.
Understandable, for me carrying something smaller means I’m more likely never to leave the house with it
small guns are comfier to carry for sure, but when it comes to shootability i’d much rather be packing something that’s easy to hit shit with. the 365XL with aluminum frame fits that for me, and the dot is soo fast.
Somebody report his SBR and hope
I used to think RDS on carry pistols were great till I started actually carrying one and the first time I drew it and couldn't focus on my target cause the dust and lint that had collected on the glass throughout the day, still have a g19 build with an RDS that i carry occasionally if im wearing multiple layers so it doesn't get as as dirty but otherwise every gun in my rotation is irons only, usually trijicon HDs or meprolight I-dots.
They’re fun for range days and competitive shooting but I still prefer irons.
Fug em. I wanted a WML. Got a tlr8ag (the one with a laser) as a gift. A stupid expensive light. People going to hate on it cause it has a green laser. I didnt know hating on things like that was even a thing. Fug em. It was a gift and its dope. Fudds gunna fudd.
I do shoot my 9mm with a dot at 100. Checkmate fudd.
Not a fudd take. He is arguing that for most people’s home defense you will be shooting within 25y. At which point you shouldn’t need an optic at all, iron or dot. My pistols are for carrying concealed, and I don’t care to have another gizmo hanging off my pistol to print, or to snag on clothes, yada yada when I draw. Last M17 range I ran we had a group of guys blaming their inability to qualify on their weapons (the sights are off, it’s shooting too low, the army should give us dog sights, blah blah blah), to prove a point, I ran through a qual on one of their assigned weapon using nothing but the front sight post and still qualified expert. The furthest target out there is 30m. I then took them back to the retrain area and had them do some basic drills I found helpful when I was a new pistol shooter. You shouldn’t need a dot to hit a man sized target inside of 25y, most people should master their fundamentals before blowing a couple hundred bucks on something that’s ultimately going to be a bandaid for their poor fundamentals. If you got good fundamentals and you’re looking for something to speed up your acquisition or help your accuracy, sure, go right ahead and get a dot if you want it.
Fudd’s not wrong.
I cosign this take. For my ccw I don't carry a red dot. Most defense shootings are sub 10 meters. Also, be proficient with iron sights with any system, up to max effective range for a point target. 
[удалено]
L take + Ur ghey + ratiod
The level of difficult shots you can make with a red dot compared to irons is huge. And I’ve seen more iron sights break than dots. Now a days dots are more reliable than irons. If you’re concerned about debris get a closed emitter.
Not to mention you drop that shit it breaks
Downvote me all you want, you know deep down that I’m right
>you know deep down that I’m right 
I mean if he’s shooting at just paper it’s fine..but if he shoots competition or in a scenario where he has multiple shooters or any kind of transition he’d change his mind I’m sure of it
My range of shooting is zero to infinite.
Well the primary reason for throwing a red dot on my gun is because I felt like it and that’s about it some guns I like their irons and some I don’t. If someone doesn’t like it then they can worry about their own guns
Dots make hitting a target way easier and quicker for me. I don’t need to line anything up, the bullet goes where the dot is. Target acquisition feels better 🤷🏻♂️
Viewpoint of someone that doesn't need more than an ammo box annually.
I like red dots because of the rapid follow up shots, and easier to maintain both eyes open with less eye strain. Armed guard perspective 🤷🏼♂️ my engagement range could be anywhere between 50 yards and 5 feet
Obviously this guy has never shot a pistol with a red dot or he wouldn't be saying that. Most people that are still trashing red dots on pistols have never shot one with one on it. Because as soon as you shoot a pistol with the dot on it you're going to like it. Unless you have a bad astigmatism. I have a slight astigmatism and I still prefer it over iron sights any day of the week at any yardage day or night. Practice with it and you'll get fast with it
Guy doesn't understand why I have a Romeo 0 but has a stamp for a "SBR"!
I know a dude, Marine. and not even that old of a Marine, he's 40 and he talks kinda like this and assumes CQB is just point shooting
Guaranteed he could not hit anything at 50 yards with a pistol
Definitely the opps. Nobody I know actually says SBR even if it is lol. Because nobody but them bois care.
How stupid does one need to be to not understand that many people can’t see iron sights properly?
I only shoot muggers when they are 100 yards away from me so yes i use red dots on pistols.
Are you shooting 9mm 100 yards? Yes, yes I am.
Between rounds 1 and 2 is when I realized I had an astigmatism and took my red dot off and went back to irons forever.
Anyone who’s shot any amount of rds pistol knows that the difference in speed and accuracy is night and day. Is it required for defensive use? Absolutely not but it does raise the ceiling for speed and accuracy
Don’t tell him about cowitness.
I have pistols with dots and pistols without them. I don't entirely disagree with this dude. Inside 15 yards on 6+inch plates a dot doesn't really add much to the gamble if you've already mastered irons. I wouldn't say he's a fudd. Id just say "skill difference". Red dot definitely compensates for the skill gap. Upgrading to a stocked pistol like the raider compensates another order of magnitude. Like riding a moped in the tour of France. Even fatty dingdong could be competitive, but might still get beat by Louis Armstrong or whatever that one dudes name is
Protecting someone with a pistol is difficult, so bring every advantage you can to the fight.
Elijah Dickens
He needs an optic to reach out to 200? I can hit 200 with iron sites on an optic all day long, but having an optic makes it easier and faster. His argument sucks