JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
No personal experience, yet.

Police departments are already issuing them. Could mean something.
Yes it means most cops can't shoot and they (departments ) want to make it as easy as possible / reduce their liability , also just like military the qualified applicant pool keeps getting smaller and smaller.

I remember back home when I worked in LE, CLEET actually took a survey gauging how cadets felt having to use a firearm and about half said they would prefer to not have to carry one at all .

That was 15 years ago IIRC .

For what its worth a lot of officers who have been working for years will not engage in regular practice for a variety of factors, a big one being the training budget for a lot of departments . People don't typically like spending their own money on their work.
 
As my vision deteriorates, it's so much easier to pick up a dot than try to align the front and rear sights with my farsightedness.
I wear my reading glasses for IDPA competition. I can still see the targets, and the sights are more in focus. W/O the glasses, they are very fuzzy. Prob would not work for EDC, one might wear a bifocal tho.

Going to try an RMR on the Ruger 22/45 plinker as soon as I find the right one.
 
I have reflex optics on my combat shotgun as well as my shorty AR. There are 4 reticle choices and I much prefer the circle dot reticle. Using the shotty on the Texas Star rotating steel target is very quick with that aiming aid.
 
I wear my reading glasses for IDPA competition. I can still see the targets, and the sights are more in focus. W/O the glasses, they are very fuzzy. Prob would not work for EDC, one might wear a bifocal tho.

Going to try an RMR on the Ruger 22/45 plinker as soon as I find the right one.
Same here I have to wear my readers to see iron sights , other wise I still have 20/20 .. I think the technology is mature enough at this point it would be fine for EDC assuming you don't go cheap . By that I mean buying a holosun instead of an RMR . If I thought I was going to need to rely on it working I would want the piece of mind the Trijicon would give me
 
I highly recommend an RMR to anyone wanting to take their shooting to the next level. Maybe not for EDC, but for range duty absolutely.
 
Damn near every electronic has components manufactured in china, from your phone to your car. It's unavoidable. It's sad the the manufacturing base was sold out to low wage countries, and while I understand and agree with the sentiment, it's futile.
There is a major difference buying from a non-Chinese country using Chinese components vs buying from a Chinese company. It is only futile if one is unwilling to make the effort.
 
If you are a crappy shot with iron sights, you will still be a crappy shot with a red dot though.
This is kind of what I have always thought but then my experience with dots is limited only to trying others guns that have them and did not see any specific advantage to accuracy with one.

With the few I have shot I had trouble seeing the dot clearly but one I did use onetime was much clearer - but it was also a considerably more expensive version as well however I shoot my Mod 94 with a receiver peep and a globe front at 100 yards better than I shot this particular AR with the high end dot at 50 yards.

I am sure its an individual issue and some do better with dots than others.
 
I think it is just a product/merchandise push for just another add on, but they fail, they need batteries, and in a defense situation its mostly point and shoot, I am worried about the legal implications, if your defense firearm has a RMR on it, and the bad guy survives. What is the jury gonna say about a firearm with an RMR?

For instance, if the bad guy ends up , as an outcome of being shot, becoming a paraplegic/quadriplegic/etc, would the jury and judge think the RMR was used to pinpoint these shots so that the bad guy would suffer instead of die?

I would hate to see that medical bill or the amount of money they would make a person in a defensive situation pay to settle for the bad guys new quality of life.

For me, its a hard pass on a pistol.
 
I think it is just a product/merchandise push for just another add on, but they fail, they need batteries, and in a defense situation its mostly point and shoot, I am worried about the legal implications, if your defense firearm has a RMR on it, and the bad guy survives. What is the jury gonna say about a firearm with an RMR?

For instance, if the bad guy ends up , as an outcome of being shot, becoming a paraplegic/quadriplegic/etc, would the jury and judge think the RMR was used to pinpoint these shots so that the bad guy would suffer instead of die?

I would hate to see that medical bill or the amount of money they would make a person in a defensive situation pay to settle for the bad guys new quality of life.

For me, its a hard pass on a pistol.

Have you ever tried one on a pistol? I agree with some of what you said here and I too was once against them. Still kinda am for SD for reasons you posted but for the range or field use they are really handy.
 
I think it is just a product/merchandise push for just another add on, but they fail, they need batteries, and in a defense situation its mostly point and shoot, I am worried about the legal implications, if your defense firearm has a RMR on it, and the bad guy survives. What is the jury gonna say about a firearm with an RMR?

For instance, if the bad guy ends up , as an outcome of being shot, becoming a paraplegic/quadriplegic/etc, would the jury and judge think the RMR was used to pinpoint these shots so that the bad guy would suffer instead of die?

I would hate to see that medical bill or the amount of money they would make a person in a defensive situation pay to settle for the bad guys new quality of life.

For me, its a hard pass on a pistol.
That's an interesting theory that seems to have no basis in reality since red dots on rifles are nearly the standard now and to my knowledge there has never been such an argument made regarding people shot with rifles equipped with red dots.

Some police forces are even allowing them on duty pistols, generally speaking, using what police use is advisable from a legal standpoint because any argument against the firearm/accessories would attempt to portray the entire police force in a negative light rather than 1 civilian.
 
That's an interesting theory that seems to have no basis in reality since red dots on rifles are nearly the standard now and to my knowledge there has never been such an argument made regarding people shot with rifles equipped with red dots.

Some police forces are even allowing them on duty pistols, generally speaking, using what police use is advisable from a legal standpoint because any argument against the firearm/accessories would attempt to portray the entire police force in a negative light rather than 1 civilian.

I know for certain that WA state SWAT uses Glock 34s with RMRs. @No_Regerts can confirm this (that's how I found out :D)
 
There is a major difference buying from a non-Chinese country using Chinese components vs buying from a Chinese company. It is only futile if one is unwilling to make the effort.
China benefits either way. I said it's futile because products sold from china are unavoidable in the technological era. We can pretend to avoid it, but china is getting theirs.
 
I think it is just a product/merchandise push for just another add on, but they fail, they need batteries, and in a defense situation its mostly point and shoot, I am worried about the legal implications, if your defense firearm has a RMR on it, and the bad guy survives. What is the jury gonna say about a firearm with an RMR?

For instance, if the bad guy ends up , as an outcome of being shot, becoming a paraplegic/quadriplegic/etc, would the jury and judge think the RMR was used to pinpoint these shots so that the bad guy would suffer instead of die?

I would hate to see that medical bill or the amount of money they would make a person in a defensive situation pay to settle for the bad guys new quality of life.

For me, its a hard pass on a pistol.
:rolleyes:

All this fabricated "what is jury and judge going to think" cracks me up. It at boils down to did this guy need to get shot and did you mean to shoot him, the rest is speculation nonsense. There is a reason LE and military are going to red dot on handgun, they are superior. Also, it is nothing new that the defensive shooting world picks up on things first tried through the competition world.
 
would the jury and judge think the RMR was used to pinpoint these shots so that the bad guy would suffer instead of die?
Anything is possible but I'd say this is pretty far-fetched. I doubt this would ever come up as most wouldn't know an RMR from being a gun sight to meaning rare, medium rare.

Kind of like the long debated issue with using reloads in self defense guns.

In all the self defense shooting stories or news articles I have ever heard or read about I have never seen anything ever mentioned about the ammo used.
 
I don't personally like them on my carry guns. At common defensive ranges (3-10 yards) I'm faster with irons, and the extra bulk/weight is not a welcome addition.
Now for general range use, competition, or hunting, they can definitely be advantageous. Shooting a handgun at distance is easier with a red dot, and transitioning from target to target is faster and more consistent. I love them, just not on my EDC.
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top