Bill Wilson and Ken Hackathon's Crystal Ball Predictions

[NEPAKevin]

Changed their minds about what? They are offering optic ready pistols already.

Sorry, I assumed the terms "click bait" and "marketing" would infer that the hypothetical video title was not intended so much to express accuracy of a concept as to get a potential viewers/customers to "click on the new video" which obliquely references the dot controversy from the video being discussed. It's a relatively common technique used by content creators who are both catering to an established audience and trying to draw in new viewers.
ETA, I would also note that I am not saying that this "is" what they were doing in the current video as I do not personally know either of the gentlemen but rather that rant/rave is one way I have seen stuff get marketed.

[JHC]

"I firmly believe red dots are the future. But we're not there yet." - K.H.



7:00

If you can't figure out the context he's getting at . . . I don't know what to tell you.

[TCinVA]

We Lazarus this thread because apparently they decided to do a red dot specific followup on the predictions video.

As before, there's stuff to agree with and disagree with depending on perspective.

There are a lot of people out there selling smoke and mirrors on dots. Mostly out of innocent misunderstanding, but at least some of it is designed to boost some personal financial prospects.

People completely new to shooting handguns may well find acclimation easier than folks used to irons. The dot changes how you present the gun for a good chunk of the population. One can argue about the efficiencies of various approaches to the draw, but if you don't already have a pretty L shaped draw that gets the gun into your eyeline level, you'll find dot use considerably more frustrating.

There is a marked gap between the capabilities and habits of the "one percenters" discussed and the typical person who has a handgun purchased or issued for home defense. For them using the gun is not a hobby any more than most of us find the intricacies of hand tools to be a hobby. When I need a wrench, I just want one that works because having the wrench isn't the ultimate goal. The more typical person is like some folks I'm related to who routinely carry their pistol, but the last time they cleared leather with it and shot it is something they couldn't tell you offhand. If they shoot 200 rounds a year I'd be shocked. Now, they're doing better than most because they have absorbed the need to follow Tom's advice and "carry your damn gun", but in terms of proficiency in its use, that's another question altogether.

Luckily most criminal threats are terminated by even the effort to present a gun. Based on years of watching people draw handguns from concealment I'm convinced one of the reasons we don't see more rounds fired in self defense is simply because so many people are so slow to get the gun into action that the bad guy has time to recognize what's happening and shift into escape mode. The number of people who have a true 1.5 second or less draw from concealment is so incredibly small that it's basically a statistical rounding error.

Dots as they exist right now is the wrong call for these people. If we see evolution toward the standard I mentioned earlier (and have manifested in my own personal carry gear) then perhaps, but even if the gun comes from the manufacturer with the dot mounted and zeroed (Anyone teach carbine classes? Tell the class how much of your life is spent dealing with shit that isn't zeroed) that optic still has to be maintained and these people aren't cleaning or lubricating their firearms, much less keeping up with a dot.

In a typical use of a handgun, a dot doesn't have a huge delta in performance over iron sights. I often say that dot equipped pistols are best for what we do the least with a defensive handgun. I don't think we will see the stats change radically on where bad guys do their business. But I am seeing indications that the far end of the bell curve is getting a little higher off the X axis:



Two officers dead, this officer already wounded and thanks to the officer's ability to still maneuver the suspect presents an opportunity to stop the fight 36 yards away from the officer's position. Can you make that shot in low light conditions with a night-sight equipped pistol? I've made a shot similar to that on the range so I possess the physical capacity for it. Of course, I wasn't bleeding and in the middle of a gunfight when I did it. But if I set that shot up on the range, put $1,000 dollars on the line with the rules being if you make it you get $1,000 and if you don't you pay me $1,000 and gave the shooter the choice of doing it with an irons gun or an RDS equipped gun...who would pick the irons over the optic?

Yeah. Me neither.

So, yes, at typical defensive handgun stuff irons aren't any real handicap. But when we start looking at atypical situations are we dealing with the chicken or the egg? Do we not see more atypical handgun work because it's that rare to have an opportunity for it, or do we not see more of it because people know they can't do it? In the video above you see an officer who took an opportunity he otherwise might not have taken if he didn't have an optic on his gun. So it's not just inappropriate masturbatory bullshit over the Dicken incident.

The expense issue will always be there. The best optics to bet on are always going to be a significant chunk of the price of the handgun itself, adding somewhere between 25-75% of the price of the pistol on top of the pistol's purchase. The "tactical" world has gone from "LOL, if you carry a custom 1911 you'll lose a multi-thousand dollar pistol to police evidence" to "I will absolutely buy a $2,500 gun and stick a $500 optic and $300 light on it because that's what I need to fight with" real fuckin' quick. The bang for the buck proposition of a dot is a thing.

The training issue mentioned is multi-faceted. I, too, have watched a lot of people present their pistol expecting to find a dot, not find a dot, and uselessly prevaricate trying to find it before making a shot. Typically they were not under pressure to perform or else. I've found that not having my dot in the middle of shooting a scored course with something on the line doesn't prompt me to stand there helplessly looking for the dot. There's a slight delay and then I just switch to the sights...which if your presentation of the dot is correct are right there already aligned under the spot where the dot would be...and get to work. The delay ranges from 1/2 to 1/10 of a second. Is that likely to get me kilt in the streets? Probably not. Would I like to eliminate that? You betcha...which is why I have an Acro with a 2032 on my carry gun. And I routinely practice drawing with no dot, just looking for the irons.

If someone has literally decades into looking for the sights at a high level I can see how they would find dot skills to be perishable. If you've habituated something over literally your entire adult life then it gets harder and harder to change it. Today you can still see the ruts from wagon wheels on what used to be the Oregon Trail. A similar phenomenon has happened inside the brain and muscles of someone who has spent decades presenting a pistol from the holster a specific way that now makes it more difficult to find a dot. If you don't actively manage the process you end up doing what you are accustomed to and having to fix it somewhere in the middle. Someone who is very skilled with irons might well struggle with a dot and find the whole thing not worth their time.

Now the idea that you lose the dot between shots...that's not true anymore than you lose sights between shots. And that's not happening because of the thing mounted on top of the gun because the things mounted on top of the slide aren't shooting the gun.

I don't think dots will fade like 40 S&W. I do think we will hit a point of sanity where folks recognize that DOT ALL THE THINGS is not actually a good answer for everybody's situation, but I don't think you're going to see people who have dots now getting rid of them in large numbers. I think the concept is here to stay.

[GJM]

We probably need to merge this thread with the other one I posted this video link in, as we are having parallel conversations.

[BWT]

I don’t want to Dot all the things and was thinking that the other day. I was pondering to myself “Yeah, I don’t want all RDS on all of my guns”. Then I started thinking about a .22 LR pistol for my boys when they’re older and I was specifically looking for models with rails to attach a dot and it occurred to me - I’m just planning to put dots on everything.

The performance is there - is it the standard? Do I look at basically all pistols now and consider how I’m going to put a red dot on it subconsciously now? Basically.

I’ve been on a podcast binge (listening to a lot of Q podcasts). We said there was minimal weapon development in the GWOT and it’s been widely portrayed that kinetic guns are near their apex. But, when you look at it. The development has been in sighting systems really. RDS on a pistol? Yes. Iron sights to RDS to LPVO on Rifles? Yes. Night vision, IR lasers, IR illuminators and now digital night vision rapidly progressing to mainstream and driving down cost comparative to analog night vision? (If you have lots of time listen to the podcast Q did with EoTech most recently in the second/ third hour and also listen to the interview with KAC he did with Trey Knight. Both are indicating digital night vision is the future and is markedly less expensive. EOTech plans (per their Product Manager) to release digital binocular tube night vision tubes in 18 months).

Sighting systems have been where the development has gone in the last two decades.

I don’t think RDS will be on everything or should be. But, it is the future for professional weapons it seems.

[Trooper224]

I agree with much of what Ken says, at least as far as his disdain for those "all the dot, all the time" folks. Over the years we've seen the same attitude regarding the Tazer, Pepper Spray, etc. It's all treated like the second coming and the cure for every problem. We all know how that typically turns out. That being said, my old agency is shortly going to RDS use and if I was still working midnights I'd be embracing that wholeheartedly. It was an absolute game changer when we put it on our rifles. Right now it doesn't interest me. My eyesight is still fine. I'm also an old bullseye competitor and handgun hunter. Using pistol irons at extended ranges is a developed skill. However, when the eyes finally start to go south, I'll have no hesitation in adopting the technology. While I think this is one of the more considered videos I've seen in this series, I can't agree that it's a fad or a misfire.

Pistol red dots are not the. 41 Action Express.

[Steve m]

Ops,

I posted a thread in the RDS section referencing the above video. Please remove so we dont have redundancy.

Thanks
Steve

[Jared]

I thought this video was a lot more nuanced and less cringe worthy than the last one. I pretty much agree with the long analysis posted by TC on it. I know I took Ken to task pretty hard for the first video (and I still stand by what I said before), but I think this one actually had some decent points both ways.

[Paul Blackburn]

I appreciate and enjoy their perspective because of how long they've been in and around the industry. We all have a perspective based on our experience and insights.

And we'll be old to...if we're lucky.

[Stephanie B]

With my nearsightedness and using progressive lenses, the dots look kind of fuzzy unless I have them directly centered. I seem to have less troubles with a laser.