1 - 3 of 39 Posts
There have been some pretty serious misconceptions put forth in this thread.
I can point shoot just fine out to 7yd. Swell. Me, too. But with a laser on my gun, when I point shoot, I have a visual aiming reference that lets me guarantee more accurate and faster hits. The number of people who miss while point shooting at 7yd (or 5yd or 3yd) is pretty significant. Another major benefit of the laser is that you don't have to have a strong indexed position to "point shoot" accurately. I can hold my gun anywhere -- shoulder point, at my hip, over my head, even between my legs -- and still get equally accurate hits.
You can't see the laser well enough to depend on it. OK, you can't see the laser under every conceivable circumstance and environment. First, most people who complain about the visibility of the laser don't have significant experience with them. Second, even if the laser is only going to help you when lighting is dim, we know that 80%+ of domestic LE and private citizen gun fights occur in reduced lighting. If it's going to be a help 80% of the time and has no downside the other 20%, why not have it?
The laser wobbles around too much. The laser doesn't wobble any more than your bullet path. It simply shows you how big your wobble zone is, something that is hidden when point shooting or using your sights. The benefit is that, because you can see the wobble, you can better control where your shots land.
Lasers aren't useful on small pocket guns. Probably the most popular and universally accepted platform for a built in handgun laser is the S&W j-frame. It's an outstanding example of taking a relatively difficult to shoot gun and maximizing it's ability as an effective fighting tool.
Shooting someone beyond 7yd will get you in trouble with the law. This is utter BS. I'm not aware of a law in any state that specifies the distance at which lethal force is justified. If someone 10yd or 15yd or 25yd away from me is shooting at me, I'm equally justified in defending myself. If I can hit him from that far away, he can hit me. The law may require me to retreat, but only if I can do so safely. I don't consider rounds flying at my head safe. YMMV.
As someone who has been using lasers on handguns for more than a decade, my experience has been that the only people who don't like them are ones who don't understand them and have little (or no) formal training in how to capitalize on their capabilities. The reality is that there are things you can do with a laser on your pistol that you cannot do without a laser on your pistol. You don't want to spend the money, hey, that's your choice. But suggesting that it's a waste of money is simply trying to justify your decision.
I can point shoot just fine out to 7yd. Swell. Me, too. But with a laser on my gun, when I point shoot, I have a visual aiming reference that lets me guarantee more accurate and faster hits. The number of people who miss while point shooting at 7yd (or 5yd or 3yd) is pretty significant. Another major benefit of the laser is that you don't have to have a strong indexed position to "point shoot" accurately. I can hold my gun anywhere -- shoulder point, at my hip, over my head, even between my legs -- and still get equally accurate hits.
You can't see the laser well enough to depend on it. OK, you can't see the laser under every conceivable circumstance and environment. First, most people who complain about the visibility of the laser don't have significant experience with them. Second, even if the laser is only going to help you when lighting is dim, we know that 80%+ of domestic LE and private citizen gun fights occur in reduced lighting. If it's going to be a help 80% of the time and has no downside the other 20%, why not have it?
The laser wobbles around too much. The laser doesn't wobble any more than your bullet path. It simply shows you how big your wobble zone is, something that is hidden when point shooting or using your sights. The benefit is that, because you can see the wobble, you can better control where your shots land.
Lasers aren't useful on small pocket guns. Probably the most popular and universally accepted platform for a built in handgun laser is the S&W j-frame. It's an outstanding example of taking a relatively difficult to shoot gun and maximizing it's ability as an effective fighting tool.
Shooting someone beyond 7yd will get you in trouble with the law. This is utter BS. I'm not aware of a law in any state that specifies the distance at which lethal force is justified. If someone 10yd or 15yd or 25yd away from me is shooting at me, I'm equally justified in defending myself. If I can hit him from that far away, he can hit me. The law may require me to retreat, but only if I can do so safely. I don't consider rounds flying at my head safe. YMMV.
As someone who has been using lasers on handguns for more than a decade, my experience has been that the only people who don't like them are ones who don't understand them and have little (or no) formal training in how to capitalize on their capabilities. The reality is that there are things you can do with a laser on your pistol that you cannot do without a laser on your pistol. You don't want to spend the money, hey, that's your choice. But suggesting that it's a waste of money is simply trying to justify your decision.
Do you really think so? I listed a number of tangible benefits of having a laser. I can probably list a dozen more if you'd like to hear them. I'm not justifying anything, I'm pretty confident that (a) I've got the knowledge and experience to make an educated assessment of the product and (b) there are things I can do with a laser on my gun that I can't do without one.gcwimmer said:Your statement is just as self serving justifying your purchase.
No question, it's up to the individual. But some make more informed choices than others. Calling the laser a "waste of money" isn't very informed.It is all up to the individual.
Maybe Ruger should just integrate a laser into there design if it is a incomplete product and by pass the middle man....Mo Money, Mo Money.
As for why Ruger didn't incorporate the laser, I again wonder if you're being serious or just throwing rocks to see what windows you might break. Ruger makes its money selling guns. Adding a laser (and $100+) to the cost of the gun would drastically impact their market and their sales. Some can't afford a laser. Some don't know they exist (I'd guess that's the vast majority of LCP buyers). And some think they're just too skilled in "gunfighting" to need a laser.
1 - 3 of 39 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Ruger Pistol Forums
A forum community dedicated to Ruger pistol firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Recommended Communities
Join now to ask and comment!
