Night Sights...Really?

[chezuki]

Echo chamber.......

 

[Disposable Heart]

Interesting. We all have different perspectives based upon our different experiences. One's paradigm doesn't necessarily negate another's different paradigm.

Mission drives gear, right? My bedside 1911 has a light but not night sights. My carry gun, which does not have a light, has night sights.

People seem to just want to slap on parts for part sake and not think their weapon's intended mission or what their needs are. They want a one size fits all, "because a cop said" kind of mentality. More power to them, but I've learned in my short tempestuous existence what I do and do not need. Will it fit another's mission? Not really, but it fits my needs just fine. But I'm not going to tailor my capability based on what someone I do not know says, I'm going to base it on a well thought internal dialogue about needs and mission.

I can't tell you how many times I was told garbage by people that were "retired LEO" or "former SWAT"... I learned things like "only trust Glaser Safety Slugs, silver not blue ones" and "you don't need more than 5 rounds" from cops before...

 

[rhino]

I think the biggest issue with people saying "if you can't see your stock sights you won't be able to identify if it's a threat or not" is that they probably haven't much, if any time, actually shooting in low light situations.

Living in the country, having acreage and having a range in my backyard has really changed and expanded the way I view night sights. Prime example when out walking my dog here on the farm under moonlight I can make him out 100 yards away under good moonlight. I can't see regular sights 2 feet in from of my face though, It's just the mass of the slide. When shooting at steel after the sun has set, I can see the steel fine but again, just the mass of the slide without night sights. I could go on and on.

6~ years ago I would have been in the "it's nice but not necessary" camp. Today I can't imagine not running them on my carry guns.

My experience is similar to yours.

 

[worddoer]

I've been in several situations on patrol where there was enough ambient light to identify potential targets AND the tritium in my sights made them easier to see. Thankfully I never had to use them for their intended purpose, but I don't see how sights that are easier to see is ever a bad thing. Night sights generally have better dot patterns/sight pictures than standard factory 3 dot sights as well, which makes it easier to pick up a flash sight picture in the day time. I especially like Trijicon HD sights.

But if this expert says that nobody uses sights anyway, maybe I should just knock them off with a punch and sell them on INGO. Might make the gun a little slicker on the draw, too, since I won't have any sights to snag on my holster. Probably switch to ball ammo as well, is there any real proof that hollowpoints are that much better? Plenty of bad guys have fallen to 9mm ball. Any stories of 9mm ball not working in the same shooting where hollowpoints did work?

Do we even have any actual stories of a Hi-Point not working in a gunfight? Believe me, I've seen plenty of them used for what wound up to be fatal shootings. Why am I blowing all of this money on night sights, hot-shot ammo and overpriced hardware when I could be saving big $$?

Because that's the point, isn't it? Saving money? What other rational reason could you have for not giving yourself every possible advantage in a deadly force situation?

I guess potentially being able to actually see your sights in low light conditions is just silly.

Or maybe I'll just make it up by saving 15% or more on my car insurance by switching to Geico.

That....right there! ^^^^^^^^^^ +100

 

[KJQ6945]

Interesting. We all have different perspectives based upon our different experiences. One's paradigm doesn't necessarily negate another's different paradigm.

I'm not trying to sell you anything, or on anything. You do you, I'll do me.

If I lose in a gunfight, or on hunt, it will be because I ****ed up, not my equipment. I'm getting older, my hearing, my vision, my reflexes aren't what they used to be in my twenties. I have more money now than I did in my twenties. It gets me better equipment. If the equipment can balance out for my deficiencies, and allow me to win, it's not cheating. It's just smart, and night sights are cheap.

There ain't no such thing as a fair fight, get every advantage you can.

 

[Leadeye]

I'm not trying to sell you anything, or on anything. You do you, I'll do me.

If I lose in a gunfight, or on hunt, it will be because I ****ed up, not my equipment. I'm getting older, my hearing, my vision, my reflexes aren't what they used to be in my twenties. I have more money now than I did in my twenties. It gets me better equipment. If the equipment can balance out for my deficiencies, and allow me to win, it's not cheating. It's just smart, and night sights are cheap.

There ain't no such thing as a fair fight, get every advantage you can.

You need a MAC-10.

 

[KJQ6945]

You need a MAC-10.

Was that an offer to sell? If so, I'm interested.

 

[Leadeye]

Was that an offer to sell? If so, I'm interested.

My sons will get mine, you could scare one up on GB.

 

[KJQ6945]

My sons will get mine, you could scare one up on GB.

I'm way more interested in your guns than your boys. You have to sell me one some day, I don't even care what it is.

 

[Trigger Time]

I'm just here to borrow the tape measure

 

[chezuki]

I'm just here to borrow the tape measure

It’s sticky and smells like onions.

 

[Trigger Time]

It’s sticky and smells like onions.

I'll have to verify that

 

[KJQ6945]

It’s sticky and smells like onions.

Is it game worn? Signed?

 

[Trigger Time]

Is it game worn? Signed?

Authenticated?

 

[BE Mike]

Mission drives gear, right? My bedside 1911 has a light but not night sights. My carry gun, which does not have a light, has night sights.

People seem to just want to slap on parts for part sake and not think their weapon's intended mission or what their needs are. They want a one size fits all, "because a cop said" kind of mentality. More power to them, but I've learned in my short tempestuous existence what I do and do not need. Will it fit another's mission? Not really, but it fits my needs just fine. But I'm not going to tailor my capability based on what someone I do not know says, I'm going to base it on a well thought internal dialogue about needs and mission.

I can't tell you how many times I was told garbage by people that were "retired LEO" or "former SWAT"... I learned things like "only trust Glaser Safety Slugs, silver not blue ones" and "you don't need more than 5 rounds" from cops before...

Good point. Consider the source. Unless the retired LEO or SWAT officer is a "gun guy or gal" and has accumulated a lot of knowledge over the years, it is likely that there is little valuable info to be gathered.

 

[BE Mike]

I'm not trying to sell you anything, or on anything. You do you, I'll do me.

If I lose in a gunfight, or on hunt, it will be because I ****ed up, not my equipment. I'm getting older, my hearing, my vision, my reflexes aren't what they used to be in my twenties. I have more money now than I did in my twenties. It gets me better equipment. If the equipment can balance out for my deficiencies, and allow me to win, it's not cheating. It's just smart, and night sights are cheap.

There ain't no such thing as a fair fight, get every advantage you can.

Actually, I'm not against night sights, although the title of the thread would probably make one come to that conclusion. That is my fault. It should have reflected what I really wanted to know...Has anyone heard of night sights actually having been actively used in a gunfight?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

We all have different perspectives based upon our different experiences.

...and lack thereof. Hypotheticals are great until the real world proves different. I asked for one example, just one, of a real world incident where your hypothetical forest ranger was given away by his night sights. Standing in the pitch black woods, radio silent, not moving and a random ne'er-do-well spots his glowing night sights (probably from a tree stand) and utilizes that information somehow. Instead I got a "I'd think." "I'd think" isn't an experience. It's not even a vicarious experience. It's how you imagined something, which is frankly where a lot of gun forum lore comes from. People imagining vs people experiencing.

 

[churchmouse]

Actually, I'm not against night sights, although the title of the thread would probably make one come to that conclusion. That is my fault. It should have reflected what I really wanted to know...Has anyone heard of night sights actually having been actively used in a gunfight?

I have never used mine in a direct gun fight but I have snatched the gun up in a rush heading out to see what just went bump or who in the hell is firing shots one street over. The sights glow let me know exactly where the gun was and how it was oriented. In a rush coming out of sleep this is a real plus to me. As KJQ already stated, I am not the young man with on point reflexes anymore. Dang-it.
Just this aspect alone makes them worth the money to me.

I believe I have already posted this opinion up thread but it bears repeating.

 

[churchmouse]

...and lack thereof. Hypotheticals are great until the real world proves different. I asked for one example, just one, of a real world incident where your hypothetical forest ranger was given away by his night sights. Standing in the pitch black woods, radio silent, not moving and a random ne'er-do-well spots his glowing night sights (probably from a tree stand) and utilizes that information somehow. Instead I got a "I'd think." "I'd think" isn't an experience. It's not even a vicarious experience. It's how you imagined something, which is frankly where a lot of gun forum lore comes from. People imagining vs people experiencing.

I need to check and see just how far away I can see the glow in a pitch dark environment.
Interesting and I am not calling anyone out here. Just curious.

 

[KellyinAvon]

...and lack thereof. Hypotheticals are great until the real world proves different. I asked for one example, just one, of a real world incident where your hypothetical forest ranger was given away by his night sights. Standing in the pitch black woods, radio silent, not moving and a random ne'er-do-well spots his glowing night sights (probably from a tree stand) and utilizes that information somehow. Instead I got a "I'd think." "I'd think" isn't an experience. It's not even a vicarious experience. It's how you imagined something, which is frankly where a lot of gun forum lore comes from. People imagining vs people experiencing.

Welcome back, Kotter.