sight Picture

[erubio14]

i was wondering about sight picture. The department I work for used to allow us to carry our own ar-15's if we own one. which i did carry my personally owned rifle on duty or you could carry the department issue rifle. but to my understanding everybody's sight picture is different when it comes to a rifle of any type. well now we are no longer allowed to carry our personal rifles and have to carry the department issued rifles which are the m16's. which this aint the problem. the problem is we have to share a rifle with another person now. which to me is a big liability issue if i ended up in a gun fight. the rifle is zero-ed in to the last person who qualified with the rifle which was me. so my partner's would be different. im trying to find a solution to the problem with the department along with some help. if anybody has any advise or any place where maybe i can receive some documentation showing that sight picture is different for everyone. that would be great and dearly appreciated.

[RogerinTPA]

With in 200 yards and less, there's not a whole lot of difference in shot placement if the weapon was correctly zero'd in the first place. Beyond that, technique and experience comes into play. A couple of inches in shot placement, between shooters of similar stature, is a stretch, but there are some folks that don't use proper techniques or different spot/cheek welds, eye relief, etc...which will result in the POI being way off. If you're looking for more precision, only small adjustments or fine tuning should be required. If you have to share with just one other person, I suggest you both head to the range, observe how the other shoots, and either record the differences or come to a happy medium you can both live with for acceptable accuracy. Then validate that zero in different shooting positions that you may employ in the field. If sharing with several folks, Zero with your particular optic, and swap them out when you guys pass the rifle back and forth. If limited to iron sights, with several people, I would consider it a serious liability. You may want to get your department trainer involved to write a "white paper" study for training, and discuss weapons not zero'd to the individual officer, etc.. increases liability, etc...and solicit the Chief, to retain the option of officers carrying their own weapons, or at least, putting rails on them so you can swap optics and reduce liability if responding to an active shooter.

[erubio14]

i appreciate that, the department issue rifles are the m16a1's. and we have to use the iron sights. they dont have rails or anything for optics. its just the iron sights we use. and to top it all off im a left hand shooter and i have to carry a rifle with a right hand shooter. there are other left hand shooters but they share with other righties. which dont make sense. putting rails on the rifles for optics is something i could try to bring up with administration. i have mentioned about sharing with another left hand shooter but i get ignored when i bring it up. im trying to gather some information bcuz another officer and i are going to try to present a presentation in front of adminstration about rifle-ing. we have a new chief and thats why the rifle situation changed. but we were told if we have a problem with a change that we can bring it up. but we have to have a solution to the problem instead of just bitching about it. nobody had a problem the way it was before about the rifles. it was changed just to be changed. and like i said im not bitching cause we have to carry department rifles. im just worried about liability when it comes to having to share with another officer when our sight picture is different between two people with the iron sights.

[RogerinTPA]

M16A1s are good weapons, but limiting them to just iron sights and not modifying them to use red dot sights, is both inefficient and irresponsible, for shooting under the extreme stress of a gun fight. Under stress, the Red Dot Sights will increase the odds of accurate shot placement and reduce misses VS just using iron sights. There are mounts for optics for the carrying handle for the M16A1s by the way. The D-boys used them in this configuration on their M4s, before the flat top M4A1s were introduced, with great effect, while I was in Somalia.

If your Chief doesn't buy your proposal (And you really should get your Training Dept. behind this to give it more weight), get a carry handle mount with an aimpoint. Other will follow suit, especially if authorized for individual purchase, instead of department issue. No additional expense, ease of training, greater accuracy and hit probability while reducing liability, should be a very compelling argument for the boss to buy off on. Although not as comfortable shooting as a flat top receiver, it will still give you the speed and accuracy the iron sights can't provide to the average shooter, under the stress of a gun fight. A proficient shooter, who's used to iron sights and shoots on a regular basis, no problem. Typical, non enthusiast, who only trains to requal annually, big problem with iron sights under stress.

The best and easiest solution, is to get the reauthorization of privately owned ARs to be used. That is as simple as a stoke of the pen. Those who don't have one, can get the M16A1's with the carry handle optic mount.

[erubio14]

thats funny you mention that. my personal rifle i carried on duty is a dpms ap4 with carry handle. i have the aimpoint comp ml 2 red dot scope mounted on a cantilever style mount with quad rail and light system and vertical grip. but can't use it anymore. but i really appreciate your advise. im going to get with my buddy and see what he as to say about it. and see what we can do as far as presenting our thoughts and ideas to the chief.

[RogerinTPA]

thats funny you mention that. my personal rifle i carried on duty is a dpms ap4 with carry handle. i have the aimpoint comp ml 2 red dot scope mounted on a cantilever style mount with quad rail and light system and vertical grip. but can't use it anymore. but i really appreciate your advise. im going to get with my buddy and see what he as to say about it. and see what we can do as far as presenting our thoughts and ideas to the chief.

I hope practicality wins over political expediences and ignorance, in what a fighting rifle is supposed to be, but that's just wishful thinking on my part. If you can win over his subordinate commanders and folks closes to him, with your proposal, you will have more influential support. The big boss should go for IF the proposal is well written, so bounce it off the folks you trust and kick it around a few times before running it through the higher ups.

Good luck!

[erubio14]

I actually just received word that administration is actually over looking the rifle policy. its rumor that someone is working there ass off so we could carry our rifles again. the only catch to us carrying our rifles that we are hearing is they have to be customized the way the pd has swat rifles. hell which is fine with me. they use eotechs and surefire rail system with mounted tac light. i can live with that. as long as i don't have to carry a rifle with someone else im good with it. im not much of an eotech fan but its all good. if they provide those things i ain't bitchin

[RogerinTPA]

That's excellent news erubio. I hope the folks in admin, who are scrubbing the policy, is open to feed back from fellow LEOs. If there's a committee, try to get on it or see who's involved inorder to track progress. Eotechs aren't that bad. I own it, as well as an aimpoint M4S and shoot both equally well. Eotechs can be an acquired taste to many for a variety of reasons, but I actually prefer it since it was the first Red Dot Sight I used on a regular basis, so the aimpoint was an acquired taste for me. Any effort to reinstate the use of personally owned long guns will be the best option. Anything but sharing rifles, if you want to maximize the fullest potential of the long gun. A weapon is personal thing, besides, sharing is just a tad ghey.

[erubio14]

I just received some good news. We can carry our personal rifles again. whoo hoo. Some one was listening to our prayers. Only catch is we can't have any optics or tac lights on them. And we have to have a magazine pouch on the buttstock. Which that's fine with me. I carry a 5.11 bail out bag anyway. But hopefully later down the line we will be able to put optics on them. Rumor is right now that admin is looking on putting eotechs on the m16 department issue. Swat is the only people right now who have the eotech's and the surefire millenium tac light system on their rifles. If they r gonna put those on the regular patrol rifles I don't think there should be a problem if I got the same set up on my rifle. Hopefully that will change for our better luck too.

[RogerinTPA]

That's good news, however, I still don't get why the typical officer is restricted to iron sights, which I consider a liability, if not practiced on a regular basis. Iron sights increases the LEOs exposure to BG fire, is harder to master, and takes longer to engage in precision shooting, while under the stress of a gun fight. Sounds like the SWAT guys got their panties in a bunch over giving the same capability to the common LEO, as they have. Besides, they wouldn't be the cool guys anymore if everyone's rifle looked the same or cooler gadgets on them. Mag pouch on a carbine collapsible stock.....that's the most retarded thing I've heard in a while. Personally, I'd just show up with my Blue Force gear Redi-mag attached, and if questioned, say, well it serves the same purpose!


It's a start. I hope at the end of the day, common sense will prevail.