Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pistol sights

yarchive.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 331 posts

Re: Pistol sights

#61

Post by jdietrich »

duncan_bayne wrote: post #28
binarytransform wrote: post #16

Former JSOC dude here. Circumstances requiring engaging with pistols == bad day for everyone, so only a few things matter. Front sight focus (which implies maintaining equidistance from the rear sight posts), both eyes open, fast presentation, parallel grip, smooth trigger pull, reacquire, repeat as necessary. And optical sights = more things that can break / run out of batteries / fall off and make noise / etc etc.

> Circumstances requiring engaging with pistols == bad day for everyone I've shot a bit, but only rimfire long guns, air rifles, and air pistols. The pistols were harder to shoot by a _long_ margin, and I can imagine it'd get orders of magnitude harder w/ more recoil, noise to promote flinching, etc. etc. So with your comments in mind, and my own limited experience, do you have any idea why every Police-critter here…

Here in the UK, police aren't routinely armed. We rely instead on specialist firearms officers who usually perform a rapid-response role but sometimes patrol high-risk locations.

Over here, it's actually much more common to see a police officer equipped with a sub-machinegun or a carbine rifle than a handgun. Firearms are used as a tactical resource to be deployed as needed, rather than an insurance policy for ordinary officers.

Re: Pistol sights

#62

Post by madengr »

euroclydon wrote: post #20

I have this little drill I do, with a iron sighted handgun or rifle. I give myself no more than 2 seconds to bring the weapon up, acquire the target a shoot. I can pay attention to the rear sights, but then I never hit anything. In this drill, I've found that maintaining a consistent body position, and only paying attention to the front sight yields the best results. I just put the front sight on the target and pull…

I shoot the small size paper plates. If you are missing those, you are shooting too fast. If you are consistently hitting center, you are shooting too slow. 2-3x diameter of the paper plate is about center of mass for a person, so that 3x spread in shot during stress should still result in a hit.

Re: Pistol sights

#63

Post by basseq »

seibelj wrote: post #51

Anyone who is diehard anti-gun for personal use, I recommend taking a pistol class from a reputable organization, and keep an open mind. No one is telling you to get a license or buy a gun, just go take a class. They will teach you all about safety, how to shoot, gun cleaning and maintenance, and all of the basic skills needed to properly own a gun. Then if you are still diehard anti-gun, great! But if you have no ex…

I second this, if only for personal safety. If you ever find yourself in a situation where you're unexpectedly responsible for a firearm, you should know how to engage the safety, eject the magazine, clear the chamber, and ensure the safety of those around you. If you happen to find a handgun, or take one away from a child, knowledge is a virtue.

Re: Pistol sights

#64

Post by leroy_masochist »

It's also important to note for broader context that pistols, despite the number of people who take pistol accuracy seriously, are not really designed for precision marksmanship.

For the use cases that really matter, you won't be taking well-aimed shots, you'll be trying to get rounds out of the weapon in the general direction of the threat as quickly as possible, in order to buy yourself some time and/or space.

The front sight rule is not just the best aiming mechanism for the reasons of geometry described in the article, it's also the quickest way to acquire a basic sight picture under stressful conditions.

Re: Pistol sights

#65

Post by ythn »

hansthehorse wrote: post #60
uberchet wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is good advice. I grew up hunting and shooting, but in adulthood have come to agree that reasonable gun control is really something we have to do. However, the gun vs. anti-gun divide in the US is as pure a split as exists on any policy position. Few on one side know or understand the thinking or positions of any on the other. People who don't shoot often don't know even the most basic things, like what differen…

I believe this pure split you refer to is the fault of the gun control advocates. In the mind of the 2nd amendment folks every compromise they have made has led to that being the new normal to build the next compromise, thus sliding down the slope. Both political parties would do well to soften their purity tests.

Well if one side only ever pushes in one direction and the other side only ever "compromises" to keep from being pushed too far, eventually the one side has everything they want (total gun control) and the other side has nothing.

I'd like to see some compromise in the other direction too. Like "Ok, we'll relax CCP regulations or 'assault weapons' regulations so that normal citizens can have them, but in return we need to ramp up background checks in X and Y ways". That's how compromise should work, but instead with gun control it's very one-sided compromise.

Re: Pistol sights

#66

Post by forkandwait »

seibelj wrote: post #51

Anyone who is diehard anti-gun for personal use, I recommend taking a pistol class from a reputable organization, and keep an open mind. No one is telling you to get a license or buy a gun, just go take a class. They will teach you all about safety, how to shoot, gun cleaning and maintenance, and all of the basic skills needed to properly own a gun. Then if you are still diehard anti-gun, great! But if you have no ex…

Are there any organizations you would recommend for such a class?

Re: Pistol sights

#67

Post by pps43 »

lostboys67 wrote: post #44
binarytransform wrote: post #16

Former JSOC dude here. Circumstances requiring engaging with pistols == bad day for everyone, so only a few things matter. Front sight focus (which implies maintaining equidistance from the rear sight posts), both eyes open, fast presentation, parallel grip, smooth trigger pull, reacquire, repeat as necessary. And optical sights = more things that can break / run out of batteries / fall off and make noise / etc etc.

That reminds me of the quote for we where soldiers once and young "Lt. Colonel Hal Moore: I think you oughta get yourself an M-16. Sergeant Major Basil Plumley: Sir, if the time comes I need one, there'll be plenty lying on the ground. "

When the time comes he needs one, it's already too late to learn how to use it.

Re: Pistol sights

#68

Post by microcolonel »

hansthehorse wrote: post #60
uberchet wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is good advice. I grew up hunting and shooting, but in adulthood have come to agree that reasonable gun control is really something we have to do. However, the gun vs. anti-gun divide in the US is as pure a split as exists on any policy position. Few on one side know or understand the thinking or positions of any on the other. People who don't shoot often don't know even the most basic things, like what differen…

I believe this pure split you refer to is the fault of the gun control advocates. In the mind of the 2nd amendment folks every compromise they have made has led to that being the new normal to build the next compromise, thus sliding down the slope. Both political parties would do well to soften their purity tests.

> In the mind of the 2nd amendment folks every compromise they have made has led to that being the new normal to build the next compromise, thus sliding down the slope.

Given that this is exactly the strategy of the opposing actors, I can see why 2nd amendment advocates take this stance.

If you look at basically any other country where there's still a debate open on this topic, you'll note that it is indeed a slippery slope. Here in Canada, the RCMP (equiv. FBI) can arbitrarily reclassify any firearm and demand that it be confiscated and destroyed (not sold). For example, the other year they reclassified the Ruger 10/22 (IIRC the most popular target shooting rifle in Canada) as a "restricted weapon", requiring an RPAL instead of a PAL.

Funny thing about the Restricted Possession and Acquisition License is that if you have one, you forfeit your chartered protection against unwarranted search and seizure. The government can literally search your home and take your things at any time for any reason without providing justification to a court or record. In fact, they often do.

Let's say the nice lady down the way purchased a 10/22 to do target shooting, and didn't get the memo from the RCMP (10+ years later). Now, she either contravenes the law (most long guns still do not require registration, just license) and lives in fear that the authorities might find that she has a 10/22; or she finds an RFSC to get her RPAL, and the RCMP decides arbitrarily that she should be allowed to have an RPAL (because they have no obligation to issue one, even if they have no reason not to), and now she has no protection against search and seizure in her home.

I might also add that firearms laws in California are basically the same as they are in Canada in many practical senses, except the classification and search and seizure stuff (which would be even more obviously unconstitutional). Most of the firearms used in crimes here in Canada are smuggled or illegally manufactured. Nonetheless, Californians kill each other far more regularly. It's almost as though the argument for gun control is thin and questionable, and the only way to prop it up is through deliberate dishonesty or accidental ignorance.

Re: Pistol sights

#69

Post by rhcom2 »

seibelj wrote: post #51

Anyone who is diehard anti-gun for personal use, I recommend taking a pistol class from a reputable organization, and keep an open mind. No one is telling you to get a license or buy a gun, just go take a class. They will teach you all about safety, how to shoot, gun cleaning and maintenance, and all of the basic skills needed to properly own a gun. Then if you are still diehard anti-gun, great! But if you have no ex…

I couldn't agree more with this. As a liberal gun owner I've often thought that some sort of class for other progressives on gun safety, gun history and gun culture would lead to better and effective gun laws. Yeah 50 caliber sniper rifles, fully auto machine guns and AR-15s look and sound scary... but when it comes to gun crime in this country they're a drop in the bucket compared to hand guns.

Re: Pistol sights

#70

Post by csours »

> "But optical sights small and robust enough to be mounted on a pistol slide are a recent development, and are costly; very few handguns have one mounted."

This is still true, but pistol red dot sights are becoming more prevalent.

Post reply on HN