Poll Red Dot or Not on your CCW weapon?

[ZeroFoxGiven]

FN PUREVIEW™ : Military-Grade Holographic Micro Red Dot Sight - FN HERSTAL

fnherstal.com

Prism is the reticule etched into glass, holographic are worse for me tbh. Tried an eotech had so much bleed off and stars.

Thank you though

 

[grandpapeepap]

Is that you johnny ringo?

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

Three on my CCW all 3 bone stock out of the box. No trigger mods, No grip tape, No Optics. Just don't want to deal with grief of batteries, weight, concealability, dust, pre defensive use, and or DA Prosecutors / Civil Lawyers post shoot. YMMV

• G19
• G43X
• P365X

 

[Gawernator]

DA Prosecutors / Civil Lawyers post shoot. YMMV

• G19
• G43X
• P365X

FUD. Unsourced, made up, nonsense

 

[bcj68]

FUD. Unsourced, made up, nonsense

Just 2 cents from someone who might know a thing or two about post-shooting investigations...

While ideally, it should be about if you were legally justified in using deadly force, I have seen very peripheral issues get thrown against the wall to see what sticks. The items you give them to throw (modified trigger, de-activated safety system, inappropriate backplates, etc...) the more stuff your attorney will have to counter.

However, that being said, the articulable benefits of a red dot for target focus, speed, and accuracy are hard to ignore, and can easily be argued away by any decent attorney. That is, IF you train with it and don't use it as a "looks cool" accouterment. Instead of using front sight focus you are using target focus and superimposing the dot on your threat. You can see what they are doing, and can then make the best decision on if/when to fire. But this is a perishable skill, as is shooting. If you buy a gun for self defense, practice with it. Train, take a class. Be better than the bare minimum to pass a qualification.

Sorry for the rant. It's just that we have this nascent ccw culture finally taking off. It will only take one bad shooting for politicians to go onto the warpath even more so. The better we do at being excellent and safe gun handlers, the less likely it will be for it to occur. And hopefully (OK...I'm an optimist...) the state will see the changes in CCW law were never some threat for people's safety, but an enhancement to it.

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

FUD. Unsourced, made up, nonsense

While ideally, it should be about if you were legally justified in using deadly force, I have seen very peripheral issues get thrown against the wall to see what sticks. The items you give them to throw (modified trigger, de-activated safety system, inappropriate backplates, etc...) the more stuff your attorney will have to counter.

This is my thinking as well. While it should not matter, it may be brought up in the eventual Civil Case. I would venture if any of us have to use a firearm in self defense (in California) we have two things that will come of it. Cleared of any criminal charges (easier bar) and there will most likely be a Civil Case brought by the dead dudes family.

I don't need a red dot for my use case as a CCW.

 

[Gawernator]

Just 2 cents from someone who might know a thing or two about post-shooting investigations...

While ideally, it should be about if you were legally justified in using deadly force, I have seen very peripheral issues get thrown against the wall to see what sticks. The items you give them to throw (modified trigger, de-activated safety system, inappropriate backplates, etc...) the more stuff your attorney will have to counter.

However, that being said, the articulable benefits of a red dot for target focus, speed, and accuracy are hard to ignore, and can easily be argued away by any decent attorney. That is, IF you train with it and don't use it as a "looks cool" accouterment. Instead of using front sight focus you are using target focus and superimposing the dot on your threat. You can see what they are doing, and can then make the best decision on if/when to fire. But this is a perishable skill, as is shooting. If you buy a gun for self defense, practice with it. Train, take a class. Be better than the bare minimum to pass a qualification.

Sorry for the rant. It's just that we have this nascent ccw culture finally taking off. It will only take one bad shooting for politicians to go onto the warpath even more so. The better we do at being excellent and safe gun handlers, the less likely it will be for it to occur. And hopefully (OK...I'm an optimist...) the state will see the changes in CCW law were never some threat for people's safety, but an enhancement to it.

I’m a criminal defense investigator and have never seen any case or case law stating that a lawful shoot is deemed unlawful because of a red dot optic (commonly used by military, police and the public).

Can you provide even one case to backup your claims?

 

[Gawernator]

This is my thinking as well. While it should not matter, it may be brought up in the eventual Civil Case. I would venture if any of us have to use a firearm in self defense (in California) we have two things that will come of it. Cleared of any criminal charges (easier bar) and there will most likely be a Civil Case brought by the dead dudes family.

I don't need a red dot for my use case as a CCW.

If they’re gonna sue you it doesn’t matter if you have a red dot or not LMAO. Better hope you have good CCW liability insurance or can afford an attorney.

 

[Nomad]

This is my thinking as well. While it should not matter, it may be brought up in the eventual Civil Case. I would venture if any of us have to use a firearm in self defense (in California) we have two things that will come of it. Cleared of any criminal charges (easier bar) and there will most likely be a Civil Case brought by the dead dudes family.

I don't need a red dot for my use case as a CCW.

I'm curious why you would think a prosecutor or civil attorney would use legal gun attachments/modifications against you, but you're not concerned that 2 out of 3 of your CCW's are off roster? I mean having two Glocks as your potential ccw seems like an easier target with all the press the Glock ban gets.

 

[bcj68]

I’m a criminal defense investigator and have never seen any case or case law stating that a lawful shoot is deemed unlawful because of a red dot optic (commonly used by military, police and the public).

Can you provide even one case to backup your claims?

No - that’s why I said the odds are in favor of the red dot - it brings too many positives. All I’m saying is that how you set up your gun using some items (like a trigger or safety deletion) CAN give the prosecutor or plaintiffs attorney something to play with. (Like the AZ officer who had a questionable phrase on his AR dustcover).

In some counties, such as Alameda and Contra Costa - the county prohibits the use of lights and red dots on CCW guns. (Don’t ask me why - bad decisions based on bad theories…).

Maybe I wasn’t super clear on that - so I apologize. Red Dots are not necessarily a criminal issue - unless you miss and hit an innocent person due to being a bad shooter with a red dot and they’d have to prove that…. Civilly I suspect someone will try to make hay with it at some point but as long as the facts are good you should be good.

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

If they’re gonna sue you it doesn’t matter if you have a red dot or not LMAO. Better hope you have good CCW liability insurance or can afford an attorney.

Very true and I agree. I (we) will all most likely have a Civil Trial after a shooting even if we are cleared of criminal charges. My personal belief (and yes I know I am in the minority here) is (a) I don't need a Red Dot to shoot well in a shelf defense scenerio and (b) there is nothing to defend relating to "modifications" even if such modifications enhance the accuracy. Again just my opinion for my use case.

I'm curious why you would think a prosecutor or civil attorney would use legal gun attachments/modifications against you, but you're not concerned that 2 out of 3 of your CCW's are off roster? I mean having two Glocks as your potential ccw seems like an easier target with all the press the Glock ban gets.

The offroster guns were approved by a Government Agency the San Mateo County Sheriffs upon issuing my permit so less concerned about those.

Again I'm specifically speaking to a Civil Case NOT a criminal case. A Civil Case has a lower bar of proof to get a jury award. Can a prosecutor get 12 Liberal Jurors in the SF Bay Area to see my "Fastfire", "SpitFire", "Defender", "Venom", "Viper" "Strikefire", "Crossfire" as some sort of Evil Feature? Maybe.

"Members of the Jury, the defendant Mr Harley Low Rider ST mounted a Aftermarket Laser Beam Aiming device to the top of his Semiautomatic GLOCK pistol to be able to target and take down this poor boy who just need to "borrow" the car of the gun toting defendant to go to church"

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

In some counties, such as Alameda and Contra Costa - the county prohibits the use of lights and red dots on CCW guns. (Don’t ask me why - bad decisions based on bad theories…).

Yep and imagine your Civil case is in Alameda or Contra Costa County. Do you think a lawyer on a Civil Case will bring up a red dot. You bet they will.

 

[MrWilly]

Very true and I agree. I (we) will all most likely have a Civil Trial after a shooting even if we are cleared of criminal charges. My personal belief (and yes I know I am in the minority here) is (a) I don't need a Red Dot to shoot well in a shelf defense scenerio and (b) there is nothing to defend relating to "modifications" even if such modifications enhance the accuracy. Again just my opinion for my use case.



The offroster guns were approved by a Government Agency the San Mateo County Sheriffs upon issuing my permit so less concerned about those.

Again I'm specifically speaking to a Civil Case NOT a criminal case. Civil Case has a lower bar of proof to get a jury award. Can a prosecutor get 12 Liberal Jurors in the SF Bay Area to see my "Fastfire", "SpitFire", "Defender", "Venom", "Viper" "Strikefire", "Crossfire" as some sort of Evil Feature? Maybe

"Members of the Jury, That Harley Dude mounted a Aftermarket Laser Beam to the top of his Semiautomatic GLOCK pistol to be able to target and take down this poor boy who just need to "borrow" the car of the gun toting defendant to go to church"

Good thing he was going to church. At least we know where he is now.

 

[RustVendor]

Very true and I agree. I (we) will all most likely have a Civil Trial after a shooting even if we are cleared of criminal charges. My personal belief (and yes I know I am in the minority here) is (a) I don't need a Red Dot to shoot well in a shelf defense scenerio and (b) there is nothing to defend relating to "modifications" even if such modifications enhance the accuracy. Again just my opinion for my use case.



The offroster guns were approved by a Government Agency the San Mateo County Sheriffs upon issuing my permit so less concerned about those.

Again I'm specifically speaking to a Civil Case NOT a criminal case. Civil Case has a lower bar of proof to get a jury award. Can a prosecutor get 12 Liberal Jurors in the SF Bay Area to see my "Fastfire", "SpitFire", "Defender", "Venom", "Viper" "Strikefire", "Crossfire" as some sort of Evil Feature? Maybe

"Members of the Jury, That Harley Dude mounted a Aftermarket Laser Beam to the top of his Semiautomatic GLOCK pistol to be able to target and take down this poor boy who just need to "borrow" the car of the gun toting defendant to go to church"

that seems like a fantasy out of a cartoon, real court isn't that stupid there are a specific set of jury instructions on these types of things. There isn't a criteria for your weapon having a scary name that's a part of that, it's based on the reasonableness of self defense and not the configuration of the weapon: https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1300/1304/ . An attorney will throw a lot of stuff against the wall and see what sticks, but there are definitely limits and I absolutely have no fear of using an aiming device that will literally make my shots more accurate with less chance of harming others.

 

[CadeH]

How much does it cost to modify your ccw? Att least it sounds like you don't have to wait until renewal to make changes.

Riverside is $16.05 to the Sheriff and Riverside Indoor Shooting Range charged $40 for the qualification, took 10 minutes

 

[MrWilly]

my "Fastfire", "SpitFire", "Defender", "Venom", "Viper" "Strikefire", "Crossfire" as some sort of Evil Feature?

My Osight K feels so uncool.

 

[RustVendor]

My Osight K feels so uncool.

My Vortex Defender actually proves I was defending myself not offending someone else!

 

[JackRydden224]

I have red dots on all my CCW guns with 4 out of 5 being direct mounts. Red dots have proven to be the superior sighting solution.

 

[RustVendor]

Riverside is $16.05 to the Sheriff and Riverside Indoor Shooting Range charged $40 for the qualification, took 10 minutes

that essentially proves that everyone else is being massively overcharged

 

[ButteFlyFisher]

There's a mile of difference between a Punisher backplate/dust cover and a red dot. Most fudd-ery starts with some kernel of truth and then falsely extrapolates it totally irrelevant situations.