In case you missed this when it came out a couple weeks ago…it’s worth revisiting, and is certainly worth considering from a home defense/TERAC (Trained and Educated Responsible Armed Citizen) perspective.
“…The current rage in combat optics has to be the zero magnification reflex and/or holographic sight. They’re quick to acquire on close range threats, easy enough to use, have long-lasting batteries and are quite durable. There’s a lot to like. As my current operation requires no response to community threats but threats inside a fairly small dwelling, the zero-mag serves the purpose quite well.
That’s not to say that the zero-mag unit can’t be called on for long distance hits. It’s proved itself on that count. But, to steal a quote from Trijicon’s Frank Martello, LE Programs Supervisor, “A good shot isn’t always a good shooting.” To have a full mission profile capability, you have to do more than just hit a target.
For it to be a good shooting, the shooter must be able to tell why the shot was taken. In modern Use of Force parlance, “C.Y.A.” doesn’t mean what you think it means. “C.Y.A.” is a question – Can You Articulate?
Why did you take that shot? In the words of another trainer, you saw the actor had A.O.J. – he had the ability to kill or cripple, was capable of delivering that force immediately and he acted in such a way to convince you that he was going to use that force now – Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy….”
{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }
I agree that most optics that have some kind of magnifier factor can help in I.D’ing a threat, but we must look at the real situation here. Most LEO and civilian engagements are under 100yds on the long side.
LEO Sniper shootings in the U.S. average 48.7yds nationally. In my mind its not a equipment issue as much as it is a training issue. A reflex type sighting system or old school iron fixed sights are a better option for most shooting needs.
Even a patrol rifle for a LEO on a outside perimeter is just fine with reflex or iron sights.
That Trijicon’s rep is in the business of sales, his main line is magnified optics so of course he will agree with what you wrote.
JB; please see my response to SF medic below. I’d like to hear your input as well.
From the very many large combat action matches Ive seen EO techs and many holographic sights dont do to well over 100 yards. In many situation the ACOG they man in pic has is the best option since you have some 4x for long range and a doctor sight for close quarters.
Overall Ive seen many do awesome with Iron Sights so its the shooter preference.
This is a very passionate subject for me. IMO, the optic you choose for your patrol rifle will determine your capability in any given scenario and may determine who lives or dies. I’ve been fortunate enough to be involved with a lot of formal and informal testing with ALL types of optics on many different weapons platforms. I also spent a considerable time in various combat zones conducting missions in all different types of terrain. With this experience, I have developed some pretty strong opinions on optics choices. I recently consulted for some local LEO agencies on revamping their patrol rifle programs and found some interesting views on optics choices.
Let me say that I do not believe an ACOG to be a good choice for a patrol rifle. I don’t even like the ACOG for standard issue to front line troops. I recommend a zero magnification optic 9 times out of ten for all purpose carbines. I know that Trijicon would have you believe that a 4x optic can be used for CQB and thata top mounted RMR is a good choice as well. I’m here to tell you that is not good advice. In fact, I believe it’s downright negligent to recommend or issue ACOG’s for use in environments that span less than 200m. Even past that distance, a rifleman or patrol officer is better served with a reflex sight.
Shooting with both eyes open with a cover over the optic is a party trick at best and is best used as an example for new shooters who are still learning both eyes open shooting. I have been involved with multiple tests using the covered 4x optic and the results did NOT instill confidence in the ACOG as a CQB optic. Don’t get me wrong, an ACOG is great for a DMR or a belt fed but not for an all purpose carbine for LEO engagement distances. The top mounted RMR is a decent solution but fared poorly for fast paced and stressful close quarters environments. There’s a reason competition shooters are RARELY seen with such setups. The 45° offset optic is SUBSTANTIALLY better at filing the niche and I would recommend it for those that are in a role that requires mid range shooting but still need to plan for CQB distances.
What it really comes down to is TRAINING. A zero magnification optic can makes easy hits out to 400m and is capable of 500m if you know your hold. If the shooter trains to these distances with his reflex optic, he will be able to hit all day. Once you shoot 400m on a regular basis, 200m becomes simple and anything inside 100m becomes second nature. What about PID’ing the threat? Well first of all, the scenarios in the article were flawed. Even so, a 3x or 4x magnifier is specifically designed for those instances.
I choose my gear based on mission priority. For a patrol rifle or even an infantry rifle, that priority is close range threats. Planning for worst case is smart but not when it hurts your ability to fill the role your asked to fill. It is disheartening to see professionals get “sucked in” to a hardware solution when a software solution is needed.
This is a great response SF Medic, so let me bounce this off you: my current AR is fairly slick (mostly due to budgetary constraints). I’ve got a light on it (that’s mandatory imo) and a Grip-pod (that was actually because of something that came up during the final loooong hours of a manhunt – I don’t shoot while holding it) and a simple red dot optic. The one thing I want to add is a 3x magnifier that I can use as needed; my plan is (pending approval from Household 6) to add a LaRue mount and Aimpoint: http://www.laruetactical.com/aimpoint-3x-magnifier-larue-tactical-qd-pivot-mount so I can deploy it on the off chance I would need it. Obviously I’m not going into harm’s way every day hunting bad guys and hopefully will never actually need to break a shot in anger, but in the eventuality that I DO, I figure an urban situation may create the occasional happenstance when a closer look is warranted or even required for an accurate shot. I also like it for situations where the lighting conditions change substantially in more than one occasions between my position and my target (I’m laying at one point in the woods and there are two place where the sun breaks through, then my target is in deep shadow, 350m out). Lastly from a tracking/manhunt perspective it’s nice to have some magnification ability handy without resorting to switching from rifle to binoculars and back.
I also factor in the possible need for a magnifier married to a red dot because my shooting ability does not equal the mechanical ability of my rifle, and it’s not likely to ever do so. I can shoot effectively with iron sights out to about 200m, but without substantially more range time than I’m getting now that’s unlikely to improve (and is likely to degrade). Yes, I know there are a few guys on this forum who can engage targets at half a mile iron sights, and curve bullets as well, but I try to be realistic about my capabilities.
So, running your earlier comments through that filter, what are your thoughts?
David, I’m a big fan of the Aimpoint 3x magnifier. I especially like the Larue pivot mount. I really think that it’s an ideal combination for a carbine used in an urban environment.
I believe a lot of shooters think that a magnified setup is about accuracy or precision. It is certainly true that “if I can see better, I can shoot better”, but having low magnification is more about information. Low magnification allows you to get more information on what’s in front of you to then make a more informed decision. I can decide where to put my reticle (accuracy) or whether or not to shoot (PID). Either way, it’s about seeing better and getting more information.
I think the 3x/red dot combo is ideal for LE and specifically for the situations you mentioned. You will have a primary zero magnification red dot ready to go for those close range threats. Those close range threats being the priority for a patrol rifle. In situations where you have a threat/possible threat past 200m, you can quickly flip the 3x over with minimal time and energy and get a PID or take in vital information. If you need to take that shot at 350m then you can take your time and set up, apply the fundamentals, and put shots in a more precise location. Flip the 3x back over (again with minimal effort) and your ready to carry out your primary duties which is dealing with close range problems in an urban environment.
For a slick setup like you mentioned it doesn’t get much better. Everything is still lightweight and slimline. I think the ability to flip over and get a quick look is a huge benefit for the LEO who has to be sure of what is in front of him but without compromising his ability to be fast on target under stress. The ability to get the first hit is often the deciding factor between who lives and who dies. The best way I can put it is this. “I don’t want to be caught in a close range gunfight with a mid range optic but I can work with the opposite”.
Anyone else not trusted by their dept and not allowed to have a magnified optic on their duty rifle?
Walter; I know of at least two. I also know of one, otherwise very progressive, that have ALL optics (including red dots) outlawed by policy and procedure. “Too likely to lose zero or fail for mechanical reasons.” Iron sights only.
trha real bang bang i love
I run the patrol rifle program for my agency, which consists of 440+ rifles. We allow a variety of optics…red dot sights (Aimpoint, EOTech), as well as variable power. We also allow the ACOG 1.5X, 3X, & 4X and are considering banning the 3X & 4X optics due to slower responses at distances inside of 50 yards. What we have found to be the best bang for the buck right now is the Vortex Viper PST 1-4…it’s better (total price and weight) than a red dot / 3X magnifier combo, IMO. On 1X it is equally as good as a red dot shooting both eyes open, and you have the ability to power up for intel gathering on perimeters or for a distant shot. Although most police shooting are inside of 100 yards, my agency (large urban agency in AZ) has the longest patrol rifle shooting in the nation (to my knowledge)…326 yards with a hit (1 shot fired)…an incident that started in the city and ended up in the desert. The moral of the story, be ready for any engagement…at any distance…no matter where you work.
You still have eye relief issues even at 1x. The sweet spot may be bigger than at 4x, but it’s still smaller than a true reflex style sight.
True, eye relief is not as forgiving as a reflex sight. However, if you establish a consistant check weld every time you mount the rifle (example – nose to charging handle), and you set up the optic for that eye relief, then there won’t be any issues. Even when doing unconventional shooting positions, I don’t have a problem with it. It comes down to consistant training.
Exactly! It comes down to training. Training that LE guys aren’t getting or doing. Tomcat is right. I’m not a big fan of variable power optics for LE for use as a stand alone optic for an all around patrol carbine. There are certain instances where a variable power would be a good choice but not for everyone and not for primarily urban environments. I DO think that in conjunction with a 45° mounted red dot it can be a really great set up. However, like you said, the primary variable power optic requires an almost perfect cheek weld and eye alignment and that’s the biggest drawback to the 1-4x optics.
Sooo, you would rather teach someone two different check welds (one for the powered optic and one for the 45 mounted reflex sight) then to teach one check weld on a variable powered optic? OK, to each their own. However, on 1X you actually have a lot of eye relief. It’s not until you power up that your eye relief becomes more restricted.
Keep in mind, it’s the responsibility of the agency to provide minimum standards training. However, it’s the responsibility of the operator to obtain constant proficiency. You don’t have to wait for your agency to provide it…I didn’t.