Input on red dot vs holographic for Personal Carry

[PaperPuncher]

I am curious if (and I would be surprised if there haven't been) any of you can refer me to online articles about the comparison of a good red dot vs holographic site test...?

I am comfortable shooting without a sight like that, but if they have good documentation th at an experienced shooter will gain critical time compression between the draw of the holstered weapon and bringing up to an accurate shooting stance, I want to read up. ie: how much time IS saved by putting a red dot or holo, on...?

I am sure most of th is has been beat up over and over on here, but I wanted to isolate the better of the two sights and read why.

TIA!

[dsm2nr]

Think about what a prosecutor could do in a case where you had to use your carry handgun with an optic.

[Countryfried Frank]

It would be an interesting discussion in the context of competition shooting (Dot FTW) but in the context of carry I am a solid neither. In general it is harder to break a piece of metal than a dot or laser.

[Paul]

Think about what a prosecutor could do in a case where you had to use your carry handgun with an optic.

Sure they could try to paint you in a "tacticool" light... Much like the argument of what ammo you carry. Some things might be a better or worse idea than others... But at the end of the day, either you're justified in that level of force, or you're not.

[Hmac]

I would be very surprised if any kind of RDS would provide any kind of self-defense advantage inside of 10 yards even if such hardware didn't impair concealability.

[TTS]

Think about what a prosecutor could do in a case where you had to use your carry handgun with an optic.

"You wanted so bad to kill someone that you put a scope on a gun..."

That kind of argument will never hold water, if it did, you would face the same scrutiny about using "bullets even the US Military is banned from using!"

If you want a red dot on a pistol get a Trijicon RMR, everything else is to fragile for daily carry. They are great tool, just make sure you have Iron sight for a back up.

PS

OP, first shot speed is not about finding the dot or the sights, if you are close enough to worry about how fast you can draw, you won't have time for sights. If you want to learn all about pistols with Red Dot's for self defense, go check out warriortalk.com I am not a huge Suarez fan but there is some good info on this topic.

[rtk]

If you want to learn all about pistols with Red Dot's for self defense, go check out warriortalk.com I am not a huge Suarez fan but there is some good info on this topic.

+1 If you like him or not, there is a wealth of info here.

Some that are growing older with failing eye sight need all the help they can get.

[sgruenhagen44]

I would have to say there is no advantage to having an optic on a carry gun.

[PaperPuncher]

all good input, thank you all. I will wander over to warriortalk and read up. I appreciate the input, link and suggestions!!

[dsm2nr]

Paul, you're right. Either it's justified or not. But when you're judged by 12 conservatives who have never touched a gun, and the prosecutor says, " This is a military style weapon that civilians shouldn't be using. " that could be the difference between justified or not. Just because there's only justified or not, doesn't mean there aren't head games being played in court.

If you want to risk your justifiability based on an RDS being scary or not, that's your prerogative. Good luck.

[bstrawse]

There's a significant amount of discussion around this over on Gabe Suarez's forums - http://warriortalk.com

I highly doubt that the choice of a RDS (or ammunition for that matter) would factor too much into a self defense case. Can anyone point me to examples where this has happened?
b

[Paul]

Paul, you're right. Either it's justified or not. But when you're judged by 12 conservatives who have never touched a gun, and the prosecutor says, " This is a military style weapon that civilians shouldn't be using. " that could be the difference between justified or not. Just because there's only justified or not, doesn't mean there aren't head games being played in court.

If you want to risk your justifiability based on an RDS being scary or not, that's your prerogative. Good luck.

I don't need a RDS so I'm not particularly worried about it. I'm just saying that argument could be made for anything. A semi-automatic pistol is a current military and police style weapon. Why do you need that? People successfully defended themselves for a good 100 years with a revolver before pistols became common place. Too bad they don't make them anymore.... Oh wait.

[dsm2nr]

It could be. Which is why it' would be wise for one to choose their battles. Which is why everyone doesn't carry their race guns for defense.

[Paul]

It could be. Which is why it' would be wise for one to choose their battles. Which is why everyone doesn't carry their race guns for defense.

I guess if I had your mindset, I'd be terrified to carry an M&P.

[bstrawse]

It could be. Which is why it' would be wise for one to choose their battles. Which is why everyone doesn't carry their race guns for defense.

Following your logic, I shouldn't carry a Glock. I mean, I must be trying to be a cop carrying a commonly used law enforcement firearm, right?
b