Since the invention of the handgun in the 15th century mankind has been steadily improving the concept to what we are familiar with today. It is quite possible that we are at a point where the notch-and-post sight configuration has reached it maximum potential, and red-dot sights for the handgun are becoming more mainstream. This is a great trend for shooters for a number of reasons, but it also has a number of drawbacks that should be understood to ensure you have the capability you need when you need it.
Red dots on handguns might be more prevalent now than ever before, and that is certainly the case for tactical use. However, it’s nothing new, and competition shooters have been aware of the benefits of the red dot for speed and accuracy for decades. As far back as the 1960’s, bullseye shooters experimented with the Burris Bullseye Pistol Scope, and in 1975 Swedish manufacturer Aimpoint released the “Aimpoint Electronic”. Following these in the late 80’s was the wildly popular Tasco ProPoint and C-More, both of which are still available today. One does not have to look too hard to find any number of Aimpoint or C-More optics in the hands of thousands of competitive shooters around the world. These systems are remarkably effective for their purposes, but due to their size and durability were not practical for duty use.
For military/law enforcement/concealed carry use, the trend has just started to gain popularity over the last few years. The Glock and Smith and Wesson M&P series lend themselves to being modified for direct acceptance of small red-dots. Additionally, dovetail adapters for many platforms are available that do not require costly permanent modification to the pistol. David Bowie of Bowie Tactical Concepts was an early adopter of small red-dot sights for duty use, as well as a pioneer in the machining of handgun slides to directly mount the sights. Due to the fragile nature of some older sights, adoption by Military and Law Enforcement users was slow-paced for a few years. Recently, with the release of viable optics by industry leaders, their use has skyrocketed and resulted in a huge growth in the development of mounting systems and support products.
The mini-red dot has a lot going for it. It works the same as the Aimpoint or EoTech most people are familiar with on their rifles: Put dot on target, apply fundamentals. You can maintain focus on your target instead of the sight, which is something many shooters struggle with. It removes the variable of aligning the rear notch and front post precisely on target, although it certainly does not make up for poor shooting ability and in no way acts as a substitute for solid shooting technique. In fact, the new user will likely experience a period of growing pains where the dot is difficult to initially acquire, possibly gets lost in recoil, and is generally slower than when shooting irons until they become familiar with it. Once the average shooter is familiar with using the new system they are likely to see improvement all around, although skills of high-level competitive shooters are at a level where they are so fast and accurate with iron sights the advantages of the dots might be less useful or even nonexistent. People who suffer from visual impairments such as astigmatism or “old eyes” can really benefit from the dot, and may be able to regain a level of former accuracy that would have otherwise been impossible due to declining vision. For military users, the ability to shoot through NVGs to preserve light discipline has been proven on the battlefield with the desired results. The red-dot also offers a tremendous improvement in the ability to aim while moving, track moving targets, and shoot from unstable or asymmetric positions. The cost is significant, generally more than the gun it’s going on, and you are tying yourself to a battery powered optic and hoping the electronics hold up to the violent forces of reciprocating on a handgun. We are not out of the woods on that yet, but the popular modern optics that are suitable for duty use have a pretty admirable track record thus far. Of note, open-type sights like the RMR, Docter, J-Point and MRDS have a diode that is easily occluded by dirt, precipitation, lint, etc. and can block the projection of the dot onto the lens. Care must be taken to ensure that his doesn’t happen, on the tubular style sights (such as Aimpoints) the functional parts of the sight are sealed and this isn’t an issue.
Among the most popular sights for modern defensive handguns are the Aimpoint Micro T1, Trijicon RMR series, Leupold Deltapoint, and Insight MRDS. All of these manufacturers are top-tier manufacturers with decades of experience in making electronics or optics for the tactical market. There are pros and cons to each of them that the user will have to weigh and decide. Direct mounting capability can be provided by Mark Housel at L&M Precision Gunworks, David Bowie at Bowie Tactical Concepts, and Doug Holloway at ATEI. Coupled with suppressor height iron sights from Ameriglo, you can have a fast, accurate electronic sighting system with the reliable backup of traditional irons. L&M also provides the ATOM system from Unity Tactical, which represents the current state-of-the-art mounting system for handguns. The ATOM gives the flexibility to use any of the popular red dots mentioned as well as traditional iron sights through the use of interchangeable mounting bases. This allows the user to forego dedicating a slide to one specific sight only to have it rendered obsolete in the future. With the ATOM, you simply get a new plate with the new sight’s footprint and you’re set. This is a huge asset as small electronic sights are likely to evolve and improve in the near future. Any of these setups can be concealable with the proper base gun and holster setup. Support gear is available from Raven Concealment and Safariland among other smaller boutique kydex makers. Safariland developed the excellent 6354DO holsters in conjunction with elite military units to accommodate the Docter, Insight, and Trijicon miniature red-dot sights and is unequaled for a duty rig with your dot.
Years ago, many rifle shooters were skeptical about the adoption of dot sighting systems, their reliance on batteries, failure of their circuitry, and other concerns. Yet today, the battery powered red dot sight is an overwhelming success for duty use on rifles. The same trend is possibly on the horizon for handguns, certainly the technology is at a point where users with a need for their capability would be wise to start looking into trying a red dot sight for themselves.
For more info, check out the following:
Jon Canipe served on Active Duty with the US Army as a Special Forces Weapons Sergeant at 5th SFG(A) and was a Senior Instructor at the JFKSWCS, training SFQC students in planning, unconventional warfare, small unit tactics, CQB, and advanced marksmanship. He is a veteran of multiple combat tours, and still serves in the Army National Guard’s 20th SFG(A) in addition to working as an industry consultant and small arms instructor.
Tags: ATEI Inc., Bowie Tactical Concepts, Canipe, Glock, L&M Precision Gunworks, Unity Tactical
i have a problem with the contention that this is the next step in handgun sighting systems.
it might apply to police officers but for the military and civilian shooters i just don’t see it. for the military, when are you going to go on the offense with your pistol? the handgun will always be a defensive, last resort weapon. the same applies for civilian shooters. you need a optical sight when engaging targets at distance. for a person in the military the rifle will always be preferred for the civilian shooter you had better have a VERY good reason to engage a person beyond 15 feet or so.
so while the author has a very distinguished record, i just don’t see it.
I appreciate your comments and feedback. Their use in elite military units is a fact, however, and there is absolutely an offensive role for the handgun. As for their use by civilians, just check the backlog for work at the popular gunsmiths. It would seem that a lot of people are interested in the technology.
As with most things of a subjective nature, take what you can use and toss the rest aside.
I’ve had a coouple experiences using red dot sights on handguns and see the many advantages of including them on a modern combat or competiton weapon, but I’m a bit wary of their durability, especially during one handed manipulation of the weapon under stress. I would feel a lot more comfortable applying considerable force on the fixed rear irons against my holster, belt or other hard surface in order to cycle the weapon as opposed to potentially changing the point of aim or damaging the optic through using the same techniques with a red dot. I guess if it works, it works, but I don’t have enough experience with a red dot system and am interested in the opinion of those who do.
If optics on pistols is a “problem”, then I guess we should take them off rifles too. See what I did with your argument? If they can make someone a better and more effective shooter, like on a rifle, then it goes without saying they can do the same with a pistol.
i stated what i viewed as holes in the authors article. he replied in kind and while i disagree, i can see that he has experience using the weapons in ODA’s that i don’t have.
putting optics like these on pistols and putting them in the hands of trained operators (real deal, not part time SWAT cops) that use them in the offensive role is one thing.
studying how pistols are used by private citizens and examining the ranges at which most gunfights take place and what it takes to state before a jury of your peers why you felt in danger is something else entirely.
i conceded the point that ODA’s are using these sights to good effect on offensive pistols. i stand by my contention that for civilian shooters its probably just another gimmick.
and to be honest how much stuff haveyou seen on the average rifle that is pure gimmickery that does nothing to help the shooter except empty his bank account.
see what i did with your argument Mike?
One man’s gimmick is another man’s low light or poor eyesight correcting shooting tool.
No doubt there are those that “hot rod” their guns beyond what you or I might consider realistic, but to dismiss the merits of the concept because you don’t have a need for it is foolish at best.
Why do you think that faster sight acquisition would not be beneficial at closer ranges? I’ve never heard of anyone that’s been in a gunfight with a pistol or a rifle ever say they were on the sights to fast… I have read many shooting AAR’s that state things like none of the fire was effective until the shooter got onto the sights and made good hits.
The goal of putting an optic on a pistol isn’t to shoot longer distances it’s to speed up sight acquisition and alignment. Dialing in your accuracy is seldom time or money wasted.
I hope if I ever have to shoot a person as a civilian that they will stand still in front of me presenting a full silhouette with no part of their body obscured. Until I can guarantee that I’ll be saving my pennies to throw an optic on my pistol and practicing more.
The Fight will be what it is not we want it to be.The modern RDS systems are proven on the modern battlefields as well as urban America by Police and civilians alike. Initial resistance to using lights on firearms prove to be unfounded.The same mindset is in play here.We evolve or we stagnate.For most Pistols are used when we can,t carry a long gun.any tool that offers you increased accuracy and speed under less than ideal conditions is always desireable.Your loved ones deserve no less.
I think that one of the reasons so many people don’t see this as useful is that they still see the pistol as the ‘backup’ or ‘sidearm’. With the addition of the red dot sight you truly change what the pistol is capable of. Is it going to now be used to engage targets out to or beyond 100m? No. Does it greatly increase the number of rolls the pistol can fulfill? Yes. It takes a niche weapon and expands its capabilities, something that SOME, not ALL will find exceedingly useful.
Also, I know TSD Combat Systems will do this work on M&P and Glocks and
Lone Wolf will as well. Just two other options.
when i was active duty i took a course with a big sheriff’s dept to the West of Los Angeles that taught their Deputies how to engage targets at max distance without the use of optics. after attending we were hitting targets at carbine distances…not with ease but with astonishing regularity.
that’s why i excluded police from the people that probably didn’t need these optics on their pistols.
i also didn’t realize that ODA’s were using pistols in the offensive role. but when we dial it back to civilian use, he must explain what he saw that made him feel threatened, explain why he could not leave the location and why he was left with no other option but to stand his ground and fight.
hard to do that if you’re killing bad guys with your Glock at 50 feet. if the fight is closer…much closer then you’d be better served with a big dot front sight and to concentrate on it, firing until the attacker is down. additionally if you’re actually serious about this optic-ized pistol then you’re either going to carry only one gun and learn to find that red dot or you’re going to corrupt your training by switching from one engagement method to another. if you’re serious then you’re going to cost yourself several AR-15’s in money to equip all your pistols with holographic sights.
The idea that a civilian or anyone should not be able to engage a threat outside of the ‘standard’ 15 or 21 feet is really closed minded. Churches/places of worship, movie theaters, big box stores, etc all have spaces that are greater than 21 feet where you could be blocked from an exit or have a bad guy between you and a family member or innocents. Why not have the capability to take a shot either through practicing to proficiency or enhancing a concealed carry gun to to allow a user to make a longer shot?
Just today an active shooter at a Sikh Temple in Wisconsin shot and killed an unknown number of people and at least one person is quoted as being witness from a parking lot to the shooter engaging two people outside, stopping to reload and then entering the temple just prior to shooting multiple other people. In all likelihood that witness was more than 21 feet away and could have justified use of deadly physical force because he believed others were in immediate danger.
Rationalizing a ceiling to capability because of averages may be comforting but when the average is your ceiling you are stopping at the 50% mark.
“Your secondary is only your secondary until it becomes your primary”
-Pat McNamara
Michael Seeklander did some really in-depth work looking into the small red dot that may be helpful for folks looking into specific info outside the scope of the above article. Great read…had I seen it sooner I would have just linked to it.
http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/articles/tactics-defensive-issues/future-of-pistol-sights/
http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/articles/tactics-defensive-issues/future-of-pistol-sights-part-2/
Also, before things get out of hand I’d like to point put that there was no mention of who in the military was using this technology. Let’s keep speculation down to a minimum and keep the information accurate.
i understand Jon C but let me add that its not too hard to figure out. if it was SEALs it would be all over the internet. i’m a retired Marine so i can put two and two together…Rangers are high speed but tend to stick to issue weaponry. like i said, if it was SEALs they couldn’t keep it quiet. USAF Special Ops piggy backs off Special Forces while trying to have a Ranger outlook. Marine Special Ops is more traditionalist and are more akin to the Ranger way of business than true small unit Special Ops type work (meaning they operate in relatively large numbers with little weapons specialization).
that really only leaves ODA’s. besides, if you do any research about SOCOM you’ll find that they don’t brag but are really the grand daddy of that force and others follow there lead.
if this coment is outside the box then please delete it.
Stop while you’re ahead. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
ok. then tell me where i’m wrong mike…
Absolutely nothing is true within your post. That was the dumbest thing i have seen all day.
Just switch to a trijicon RWR on the FNP-45. Seriously awesome. Having to re-learn site aquisition, but put the dot on target, squeeze. When I started with the ACOG on my AR, it took apprpriate practice, but one can quickly learn the new system. As previously stated, it may not be for everyone, but if approached with an open mind…
Holsters are a bit of an issue, but systems as put out by Bladetech, Blackhawk work or can be adapted.
Great article.
Excellent article Jon. Never heard of the linked companies before, much appreciated.
For those questioning the practicality of this setup, realize this evolution has been brought on by those with the real world experience. That is the driving force for the need of weapon system modifications such as the rds for pistols. Current operational environments have spawned a number of improvements to weapon system and kit that have challenged the status quo over the past 10 years. Evolution in equipment from properly established lessons learned are important to pushing the bounders of our kit to the next level. On a more micro scale for those in SMU’s and direct action roles, if the RDS offer even a slight edge in engaging and destroy a threat then why not? It might not be for everyone, but don’t knock it till you try it specifically in its intended application.
Soloman, reading your original post I think you might be thinking of the wrong type of optic.
You said: “you need a optical sight when engaging targets at distance.”.
“Red dots” are not for engaging targets at distance.
With Respect,
Andrew
I use a Docter sight on my glocks, and I am a certified Ninja. Went to Ninja school and everything. If you don’t want to use an RDS on your pistol, you don’t have to.
This is America after all, do whatever you want.
Before ATOM I was shooting RMR equipped pistols for 2 years or so. I found the greatest benefit came from shooting on the move, shooting at intermediate distance, and engaging targets from alternate shooting positions. It also gives me a higher confidence shooting for accuracy (small or obscured targets) with speed.
I have switched all of my pistols over to RDS as I do not want to train on different platforms, things like presentation and mechanical offset are something to take into consideration.
FWIW I shoot an M&P9 FS with RMR02.
Awesome article Jon. Keep them coming.
I cant even begin to explain the the amount of average every day people carrying and using redots on there blasters,
they work in low light no light bright light well, they work well in close contact ranges as well really shine under stress at longer range shooting as well…
and for those with aging eyes and multi focal lens eye glasses
they also serve as a one handed manipulation tool
they are a win win across the board from gutter shooting through the window up close or off the top of the window in some cases
and they will only get better……..
IMHO, they are definitely worth looking into. I could see where they would be a benefit however I don’t completely trust the current crop of mini RDSs for this particular application. If enough people get interested I’m sure the technology will come around. People keep trying to make a comparison between red dots on pistols vs rifles and I tend to think there is a big difference between the two as far as durability is concerned. When you mount a RDS on a rifle only the bolt reciprocates…on a pistol the RDS is sloshing back and fourth as fast as slides on handguns go(fast). I’m no engineer but my experience tells me that Mr.Murphy would love a tiny little electronic thingamajiggy slapping around at god knows how fast. Guess it wouldn’t matter that much if you had back up irons though…
Excellent article!
Over the past 30+ months we have been experimenting with small slide mounted RDS and find they can be quite useful as discussed in the article–especially for officers over 40 years of age who are beginning to exhibit vision degradation, when shooting at moving targets or while shooting on the move, in dim lighting or when using NODS, and when shooting at longer ranges.
There are several options to mount a small RDS on duty/CCW handguns; the easiest method is to drift out the standard rear sight and simply add a dove-tail adapter allowing the RDS to bolt on to the side–although this method has proven less efficacious. The lowest profile method and the one that fosters the most natural shooting position is to permanently mil the slide to allow the RDS to sit lower and allow a more natural shooting position. As noted in the article, there are several great gunsmiths offering direct milling; also as discussed, the outstanding Unity Tactical mount is the most versatile mount we have used so far. Keep in mind that several vendors are offering or are about to offer pistols with the slides pre-milled from the factory for RDS mounting.
It does take a lot of dry firing/drawing and several thousand live rounds to become proficient with a handgun equipped with a slide mounted RDS. I am still not as quite as fast using the RDS, however, I am substantially more accurate with the RDS, especially at longer ranges. In addition, the RDS allows me to remain fully focused on the threat and not have to transition back to the front sight prior to firing–this is a major advantage for LE and civilian self-defense.
If I still had perfect vision, I might consider staying with irons given that I am faster with them; however, given the vision changes following my basilar skull fracture a couple of years ago, as well as the onset of middle-age presbyopia, I personally NEVER want to go back to irons…