Strobe me, bro!

Glenn E. Meyer wrote:
So - I think we have established that the strobe as a blinding or nonlethal option is pretty nonsensical. Why?
1. It doesn't disconcert lots of people.

Well, it probably wouldn't disconcert anyone who has been to a disco, played laser tag or or watched a music video by The Smiths in the last couple of decades.
 
My comments thus far pertain to indoors. Home defense includes the outside of the home for sure, but I think my tactics would be different for an outside disturbance vs one inside my home. None of my pets stay out at night and the outside of my house has flood lights, some of which are motion activated. If there is something going on out there, I can light the place up and observe from the darkness behind locked doors. Outside, I would probably opt for the shotgun which doesn't have a rail for a mounted light. My pistol does and is better suited to the tight spaces indoors.
 
We're talking 300-500 lumens

I wont be using 300-500 lumens for anything. Certainly not inside my home while in absolute darkness.


Quote:
All you have to do is point at the floor

have you ever been in a real crisis before? If you have then I am sure that you have at one time or another, ran into a problem. Think about the last time that everything went south... now consider that someone tells you, "all you have to do is". ( It sounds a little silly when you consider it that way). I have learned that the world is not perfect and if all you have is a weapon mounted light, you are at some point going to have to choose between using it poorly with the muzzle down or making the best use of it by pointing the gun in the direction that you need light. You say its enough light while pointed down?... well maybe in a perfect world it is. The world aint perfect and not all circumstances flow in the way you would expect.

I'm a law enforcement officer. I'm well aware of how things go during a crisis. I'm also not in the habit of making theoretical suggestions or blanket statements. I've used a weapon light in the manner I suggested countless times. The reason I mentioned that method is because it seems a lot of people are against a weapon light because they feel it forces you to point your weapon at a target that hasn't been identified yet. I'm saying that you don't necessarily have to. A good light should enable you to tell the difference between your son/daughter/wife/etc and a stranger, and if it's a stranger you will probably want your weapon pointed at them if they're in your house. Give it a trial run and see what you think.
 
I dont think a weapon mounted light forces anyone to do anything but I do believe that it can foster a circumstance where you must routinely choose between what is prudent and what may not be. Specifically I mean pointing a weapon at something you would have never otherwise pointed it at- had you not felt compelled to use the light expeditiously. A weapon mounted light may work just fine when things go as expected, but things do not always work out that way. Bad things do not always stay within defined or expected parameters. I do not adopt a methodology which relies substantially on everything happening just the way I expect it. I adopt a method that will afford me the greatest options in the most varying of circumstances. To that end, a weapon mounted light which is used as a primary source of light isn't it.
 
Last edited:
It is going to be a disorienting effect and could cause an advantage for you. If that strobe is absolutely blinding, a strobe hotter than a camera flash, jeebus, that's going to hurt, and in a darkened situation people will reflexively recoil from it. Don't minimize what can or can't work when talking about this sort of thing, and don't make the assumption that the BG will always be a tactically trained assailant.

Aim that sucker down a hallway and it will cause trouble, but it is also true that the thing is a target. Once that thing has cycled once or twice, the BG may be just shooting at the blur.

Keep in mind that a strobe is going to be disorienting for yourself as well.

All things considered, i'm not convinced that it is going to be a definite plus, but it could be helpful in limited scenarios. Flash bangs are essentially single strobe rounds.
 
Oh, well.

I see you recommend aiming from what seems a stationary position down a hallway for a significant amount of time.

You assume your opponent may not be minimally competent (that seems to be a great plan and a major tenet of military tactics and law enforcement that has led to many successful encounters).

Of course, firing at a blur (which is you) can't lead to hits to the center of the blur.

Stick with these ideas not being a definite plus, you had that right.
 
The problem I have with firearm mounted flashlights is there is a major difference in intent between shining someone with a flashlight and pointing a firearm at them. But mounting the two together you eliminate the difference.

There are a lot of situations where I would shine someone with a flashlight that I would not point a gun at them.
 
Lohman, I agree, but if I am casing my house or property with a gun in hand, I'm past that point. I have flashlights if that is all I need. Keep in mind, this applies to me alone as everyone's situation and tolerance, paranoia, cautiousness, etc...vary significantly.
 
Lohman, I agree, but if I am casing my house or property with a gun in hand, I'm past that point. I have flashlights if that is all I need. Keep in mind, this applies to me alone as everyone's situation and tolerance, paranoia, cautiousness, etc...vary significantly.

You are right that the judgement here is individual in nature. I am often enough looking around with a flashlight in hand a gun on me or even in my other hand. I still think there is a step between gun in hand and pointing gun at someone that I prefer being distinct. I get the argument that, especially with someone in the house, there need not be that distinction.
 
Glen, be serious, I neither recommended nor assumed any of that, read it again if you have to

Standing in a hallway using a strobe is obviously stupid but from around a corner it's going to shake any opponent, may end the engagement, and will cause temporary night blindness. Everything is going to be a blur. Is this neutron, the wife's crazy ex? He's probably going to leave, and any ordinary criminals will at least be delayed and deterred.

I said that a strobe is going to be a specialist tool, that there weren't many applications where it could actually be useful or helpful, and it's possible that it could diminish your capabilities as well. It's wasted weight for at least eight hours a day. Should I have called it a useless gimmick that will invariably cause more harm than good, or be honest and admit that sometimes it could

don't make the assumption that the BG will always be a tactically trained assailant.

That's not saying to assume that the opponent is going to be a loser with a stolen high point, it's a comment that many people assume that small efforts are useless. Someone here even said that pepper spray isn't effective because it takes too long and some people would be able to fight back.

The chance that an average guy will find himself crossing swords with a quality combat specialist is pretty low, isn't it? Don't dismiss any tool without a car better one in reserve.

I hadn't seen your post about the immunity people have probably developed to strobes, I have to agree. But it begs the question, why do they use them in paintball or laser tag? Because of the disorientation and confusion they cause. Why do they use them in clubs? The same thing. People who are vulnerable will feel the effect of the visual errors as confusing fun, sort of like being drunk.

A high powered strobe could cause a serious distraction and it might be useful. Nobody should count on it. As I said, I'm not sure that it will be an overall asset and I think that better ideas should be pursued.
 
It seems to me, Glenn E. Meyer, that you are not an advocate of WMLs. Do you recommend that we remove out WML's from all of our home defense firearms, long and short?
 
Well, if I'm a BG I would prefer that you have a light mounted on your gun. It gives me advanced warning as to your location and direction and you don't know where I am or where I'm going.
 
It seems to me, Glenn E. Meyer, that you are not an advocate of WMLs. Do you recommend that we remove out WML's from all of our home defense firearms

I don't think it is a fair question to ask Glen if you should or should not remove a WML from your gun. He has obviously taken an issue with some elements of WML use and he has thoughtfully expressed those issues. I would simply take it for what it is and make my own decision based on the information available, common sense and my personal inclinations.

As far as the bad guy being a tactical ninja or not.. I will consider him the biggest, baddest and most capable foe I have ever face in my entire life. If it turns out that he is not... great. The idea that a person would consider a criminal invader inside your home to be less than that, seems rather naïve.
 
Last edited:
There's a reason that the drill used to be hold the light at arms length as yo explore the dark places.

This thread, like so many others, is loaded with supposition and manufactured scenarios. These things, creating imaginary threats is how we get around to creating deterrents and defense.

How many cops will abandon their gun, baton, light, taser vest, radio link on the shoulder band,even comfortable shoes? COps face every kind of scenarios so they wear a heavy tool belt.

It could be argued that you shouldn't have a home defense light. You aren't suppose to go looking, it makes a target, gives away your location, false confidence,BLAH BLAH BLAH, but it all depends on certain situations existing, and an equal number of situations would be helped by any one tool. A light will identify a target and jeebus, isn't that the absolute first rule of use of force? If you can't even clearly see a threat, how can you possibly determine if deadly force is justified? even if the guy is inside your home,just being in your home should not be considered justification for force.

Fifteen years ago, we had a retarded guy who lived a few blocks away, twenties, tall, imposing. One day I found him playing cops and robbers with a toy gun. He had gone through the neighbor's gate, was rummaging around, and even went into the enclosed patio. He moved on before I could shoo him off. Later I called the cops and asked that they talk to his parents.

I have a basement office., the basement has an outside door that I leave open sometimes for air. The basement is divided from my desk. I don't leave the lights on out there,I'm in my office. If another retarded guy moved in and played the same game, I heard someone creeping around at the other end of that cave, waved a gun at me, maybe I'm going to be in my own personal hell for popping a kid with a toy gun. Yes sir, not keeping a flashlight on my desk is the best idea ever.
 
Well, if I'm a BG I would prefer that you have a light mounted on your gun. It gives me advanced warning as to your location and direction and you don't know where I am or where I'm going.

If you keep using good ole common sense like that you will end up derailing this entire thread.
 
Fire forged, I can't disagree. But we also can't make the assumption that Mexican hit men are in the kitchen. Again, we create and learn scenarios and it makes us better. A lot of people have died because of toy guns. Many people have died because they were outclassed, many have died because they are so incredibly incapable that a bonk on the head finished them.

It's hard to say that we should presume that the opponent will be weak. Maybe I should retract that. It was meant to say be prepared for anything but be ready to lower your level of hostility or even stand down.
 
I think a lot could be learned from doing some light experiments in a dark room with a friend. Some folks might be surprised by how much they're actually illuminating themselves when they hold a flashlight at arms length away from the body. It's easy to figure out what we can see when we use a light but how often do we experiment to see what it looks like from the bad guys perspective?

When a bright light is in front of your body it will more or less tell a reasonably smart person where you are. However, all they can see is a bright painful light that may make them squint or close their eyes. When it's held off to the side it lights you up fairly well. A lot will depend on the type of flashlight. The more powerful it is the more it will light up everything in the room including you unless you're directly behind it. Grab a friend and get your flashlights out and give it a test run.
 
Some folks might be surprised by how much they're actually illuminating themselves when they hold a flashlight at arms length away from the body.
Correct. If you're going to use this method, it's important to hold the flashlight not only out to the side but also to angle your arm forward or the light will illuminate you.

Also, as you say, if the light is really powerful, the reflected light from walls, ceiling and items in the room can illuminate you even if you're behind it. I haven't experimented to determine at what power level that starts to be an issue.
I think a lot could be learned from doing some light experiments in a dark room with a friend.
Very good point. People who want to be prepared for shooting in low light need to, at least, do some experimentation in low light. Even if you can't find a range that will let you do actual low light live fire, one can practice techniques at home with dryfire.
 
The method I discussed is intended to be off and to the side (across your body). It's far enough forward to use as your forearm as a rest for your gun hand. Can't say I've noticed if or how much it illuminates the shooter
 
Back
Top