How controversal are civilians putting lasers on guns and shooting someone in self defense. I mean what kind?

Question

of trouble do civilians and law enforcement have with the legal matters concerning lasers, and does the majority of law enforcement use lasers on their guns, and how far can a handgun laser reach, and with practice can a person be as good of shoot without a laser in a self defense situation?

Answer 1

Many people use lasers on their firearms.  It can end a situation very quickly if the perp has a dot on his/her chest.  Lasers can go on indefinitely, effective range depends on the laser/gun application.  Self-defense you can only shoot someone within 25-30 feet of yourself for it to be considered self-defense.  And yes someone-with enough practice- can shoot just as well without a laser.

Answer 2

They are just an aiming device like a telescope so there are no legal issues.  Most people, unless highly drilled, miss terribly with a pistol in high adrenalin situations so I see them as a safety device.  Really, the best thing would be a sawed off shotgun since aiming wouldn't be needed at all but that IS illegal.  Range depends on the devise and conditions.  Like all lasers, rain and fog greatly attenuate them and it is hard to see the red dot in the distance if conditions are bright.  Certainly it can not matter what their range is as long as it is at least equal to the short effective range of a pistol.  At night, a concentrated-beam flashlight is also very effective as it blinds the enemy (especially if they are wearing night vision aids (readily available - I have one that I bought on a lark years ago)).

Answer 3

There is no controversy. They are legal to place on a firearm. Some Officers use them, most don't. However it does make an effective training tool to let me see how steady an Officer is holding his weapon on target and helps to correct mistakes. Range is limited by atmospheric conditions and over a great distance the "Dot" gets bigger.

Yes, a person can be and should be a good shooter without a laser sight. The laser has the disadvantage of making a shooter dependant on the lasersight and not learn to correctly use the iron sights on the weapon. They are nearly useless in daylight and it also can show a bad guy where the Officer is. Which can be a really bad thing!

Answer 4

There is NO controversy related to ANYONE using a laser sight.  Anyone that claims there is, is opposed to guns in general.  In a self defense situation, you DON'T have time to properly aim.  Using a laser sight compensates for this by providing a visual indication of where the bullet will go without having to look though the sights.  It also has the benefit, if used properly, off scaring the attacker.  Once the red dot appears, it may no be necessary to actually pull the trigger.

Answer 5

There is nothing controversial about lasers. They are just an accessory for your gun that makes it easier for some people to aim. That is good thing! What would be controversial about it? I put a cheap laser on my AK just for fun and it reached about 100 yards. And yes you can be just as good of a shot without a laser.

Answer 6

this is pure speculation here, but if lasers are illegal, i would assume it's for the same reasons that silencers are illegal. it's sort of hard to claim self defense when you have enough time to look through a target thingy and shoot at someone. get it? and, every state has their own laws on guns, so it's different state-to-state, i'm sure.

yes, i'm sure with practice, you can be a good shot without a laser.

Answer 7

Not controversial at all. No reason why it would be.