The value of a "tactical" light for civilian concealed-carry

[fyrstormer]

Are you kidding me?!?

He definitely isn't. Didn't you know? Cops (as a culture, not necessarily as free-thinking individuals) think they can do whatever they want, including terminating your Constitutional rights when it's convenient for them. http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...meras-dont-mix

I don't think the issue here is so much that reporters were filming public police activity, but that filming police activity implies you doubt whether the police are doing the right thing -- questioning the police's judgement. That tends to be a Very Bad Thing if you're not actively seeking a confrontation with the police, hence why I'd rather not suggest that a police officer's logic regarding flashlight quality might be flawed.

[flashlight nut]

He definitely isn't. Didn't you know? Cops (as a culture, not necessarily as free-thinking individuals) think they can do whatever they want, including terminating your Constitutional rights when it's convenient for them. http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...meras-dont-mix

I don't think the issue here is so much that reporters were filming public police activity, but that filming police activity implies you doubt whether the police are doing the right thing -- questioning the police's judgement. That tends to be a Very Bad Thing if you're not actively seeking a confrontation with the police, hence why I'd rather not suggest that a police officer's logic regarding flashlight quality might be flawed.

It's very convenient to take bits and pieces of film footage to portray the so called truth. Being a cop, I find your remarks ignorant and offensive. People like you think anyone can say and do anything they want regardless of public safety, disruption to other people's rights or following the law. Everyone knows that professional protesters uses tactics to provoke the police. So for the hours of footage showing cops being spit on, shoved and cursed at and showing amazing restraint, only a few seconds showing the cops "over reacting" is shown. Being a cop, we have to live walking on eggshells trying to do our job without offending anyone because every judgement we make gets put under a microscope (by our politically motivated bosses, civilian review boards and the media) and our jobs are then on the line, so don't think for a second we make those descisions lightly or without actually knowing the law. This is especially true in our private lives. You can get a ticket or commit minor infractions in your private life and go to work the next day without worrying about loosing your job. We have to report such things and again worry about loosing our jobs, benefits, pension and modest pay to support our families. All this for the "privilege" of putting our lives on the line to protect YOU.
This alone sould muster just a little respect.
So no, I didn't know cops can do what ever they want. And what do you know about the culture of police officers. Did you ever hear the term,"walk a mile in a man's shoes before you judge him." How many violent confrontations do you repond to on a daily basis?
I understand that the majority of the public does support and respect LEOs and I thank you.
PM me if you want to discuss this further.

[fyrstormer]

That's cute, tell me off in public and then say I should respond in private. No thank you. Delete your public post and send it to me via PM if you want to have a conversation via PM.

It concerns me that you think my support for civilian monitoring of the police means I'm against the police. It also makes me think you're the sort of police who needs civilian monitoring. It takes a special kind of mindset to think "this world is on the verge of chaos and I'm just the guy to help straighten things out," and people with that mindset set me on-edge. I was born with a strong moral compass and I don't need anyone's help to be straightened out.

Admittedly I've never been in a gunfight and I'd certainly appreciate help if I ever found myself in or near one, but at the same time, I figure the strong moral compass I mentioned before is probably why I've never been in a gunfight. Of course if I decided to become a police officer, I would expect gunfights to happen from time to time as part of the job, and hopefully I'd have the decency to avoid using that to guilt-trip the people I willingly chose to work for.

[flashlight nut]

I see, you can make insulting and inflamatory remarks in the public forum but how dare I respond in kind. Some how standing up for myself and my profession means I now need monitoring because I don't share your views. How elitist of you.
Let's see,"Cops think they can do whatever they want including terminating your constitutional rights when it's convenient for them". I think that statement goes well beyond mere "support" for public monitoring. I guess your strong moral compass includes making unprovoked and insulting statements.
It's also nice of you to take the liberty of interpreting my comments to mean "this world is on the verge of chaos and I'm the guy to straighten things out". I don't know what type of calls you think cops get called to but it's not to have tea and crumpets with the local church group. You seem to put forth a lot of your interpretations as facts. I truly hope you do become a police officer some day and then reflect on your comments made here. If you think this is a guilt trip rather than an opposing response, maybe you have something to feel guilty about.

[fyrstormer]

I'm very sorry you can't deal with my opinion that you don't like without getting emotionally hurt by it. If I'd known you were a cop before I responded to you the first time, I most likely wouldn't have posted what I did, but only because I've learned (as stated previously) that disagreeing with cops is a Very Bad Thing.

Ironically, your opposing response demonstrated exactly the sort of hubris required for a cop to question whether I need to have such fancy tools on my person, since after all I'm not doing anything important with my life, like breaking up fights for a living. Thanks for that.

[fishndad]

I'm very sorry you can't deal with my opinion that you don't like without getting emotionally hurt by it. If I'd known you were a cop before I responded to you the first time, I most likely wouldn't have posted what I did, but only because I've learned (as stated previously) that disagreeing with cops is a Very Bad Thing.

Ironically, your opposing response demonstrated exactly the sort of hubris required for a cop to question whether I need to have such fancy tools on my person, since after all I'm not doing anything important with my life, like breaking up fights for a living. Thanks for that.

Im not a cop and ive read this thread through.Of course he was offinded,and then you come back with"emotionally hurt"
you sound intelligent and the language you have chosen has purpose.The Purpose was to inflame an argument.So you have
expressed your oppinion of the Police,and know you are continuing to be provocative.Did you also tease other boys on the playground
then run behind the teacher?

[Samy]

I'm very sorry you can't deal with my opinion that you don't like without getting emotionally hurt by it. If I'd known you were a cop before I responded to you the first time, I most likely wouldn't have posted what I did, but only because I've learned (as stated previously) that disagreeing with cops is a Very Bad Thing.

Ironically, your opposing response demonstrated exactly the sort of hubris required for a cop to question whether I need to have such fancy tools on my person, since after all I'm not doing anything important with my life, like breaking up fights for a living. Thanks for that.

I think you're done.

[flashlight nut]

Again, your interpretations of what I wrote are very creative. I suppose dc38's comment about cops equating flashlights with guns and being stupid enough to do so, along with your agreement and colorful comments elicited such a "Very Bad Thing" happening by a police officer. Many cops belong to this forum and I have never heard any profess that a civilian should be restricted on what flashlight to carry. Even in a thread such as this we have given advice on using a flashlight in conjunction with weapons or just for defensive purposes so I am at a loss as to where you get your opinions from. And please point out where I said if you are not breaking up fights for a living you are not doing anything important with your life, or am I just too stupid to see it. You have a lot of maturing to do.

[flashlight nut]

You are right Samy. This has gone on quite enough. My apologies to the rest of you.

[TEEJ]

Im not a cop and ive read this thread through.Of course he was offinded,and then you come back with"emotionally hurt"
you sound intelligent and the language you have chosen has purpose.The Purpose was to inflame an argument.So you have
expressed your oppinion of the Police,and know you are continuing to be provocative.Did you also tease other boys on the playground
then run behind the teacher?

I get the same impression. Making inflammatory statements, and then acting as though anyone inflamed by their inflammatory statement is now persecuting them.

It IS like hitting someone...and then when they hit you back, acting like THEY started it.

Cops are HUMAN BEINGS, with feelings, wives, children, political opinions, religious views, etc, just like anyone else. They are NOT all the same, like carbon copies of some stereotype. You will typically be wrong if you assume everyone in a group is the same...for any group.

Not all Muslims are terrorists, anymore than all Christians are Oklahoma City bombers or white supremacists.

Are ALL cops so perfect that they should not be supervised, no, of course not, but as a group, at least the guys I know, DO work pretty hard to do the right thing day in and day out.


And take biased sources with a grain of salt.

If you edit video footage, you can "prove" about anything you want to.

Bits of footage, spliced together as needed, can tell any story you want it to. Some friends who are in the "business" have show me how this is done in numerous fairly easy ways. A mac with "imovie" can take a gang attacking and beating an old man, and edit it to show the old man attacking the gang...a reality tv show can take several disjointed stories, and create a new completely unrelated story...

...and a group harassing someone and finally instigating a retaliatory reaction, can be shown as the retaliatory action started the confrontation, etc....very easily.

People who SEE the edited versions are always tricked into believing what they saw HAPPENED.

Those with an open mind can sometimes be convinced it DIDN'T happen, but, the closed minded ones, even mildly close minded, will NEVER revise their memory of the events...especially if the events support their world view, etc.


That variable is true for all of us. If we get evidence that supports our beliefs...its accepted as fact w/o resistance.

If we get evidence that is in conflict with our world view, our FIRST instinct is to discredit it.


People are like that, good people and bad people....its HUMAN nature.


If you believe that a group is bad, say that Muslims are terrorists, any Muslim that IS shown as a terrorist is immediately considered as proof/validation of that belief.

If you believe a group is good (Like whatever YOU are, etc...), any one in your group that is shown as bad is assumed to be framed, unfairly prosecuted, or, NOT REPRESENTATIVE of your group.


So, the Muslims who are not terrorists see a Muslim arrested for terrorism, and decry that terrorist as an extremist who does not represent THEIR views.

The Christians who see a Christian arrested for terrorism ALSO view that guy as an extremist who doesn't represent THEIR views, and so forth.


The above will NOT differentiate extremists from the OTHER group as not being representative of THAT GROUP though...as there's no conflict with their world view to provide the impetus do do it.



So, if you want to be open minded and fair....and at least be open to OTHER World Views, etc....when you hear/see evidence in conflict, AND in support, of YOUR view, try (TRY) to consider it as if it DIDN'T support or conflict with your beliefs.


SOME people can DO that, most can't...opposing opinions don't fit into their head in a way that allows unbiased evaluation.


Food for thought.



And, "tactical" is WAAAY over used as a term. If you want the light to come on in high, you also want it to be able to go off just as quickly, in case the light reveals a guy about to shoot you.

If you have to SCROLL through options to get the light off...well, you are providing something to aim at while you do it.


If you didn't practice, you will screw up, and be too tied up with details instead of muscle memory. This is a bad thing.

Tactical, if it means the light goes on/off with the switch, either momentary or another click, etc...so there's no scrolling, and comes on in high always...works better than a light that comes on wherever you had it last, but goes to medium and then low or firefly or strobe or beacon or disco duck, etc....before off.


Light itself, as a means to incapacitate an aggressor, works for a second or two on a sober person...so, its not a solution in of itself. On a drunk, etc, it might work longer, as they are more easily disoriented.

Mostly, its way to see them in more detail, see if they are armed and with what, and have a second or two to decide what to do next. If you don't know what to do next, well, hope they don't either.

[Monocrom]

Back on topic . . .

I had received an SF L1 "extreme" from our own MilkySpit a few months back. Wanted a light that could do double-duty instead of a light with simply two output levels. For that reason, I like to call it the L1 Gemini. Low mode has been increased to 40 lumens, with plenty of runtime. When using low, you twist the tailcap a bit for constant-on mode. Now you have an average general-use flashlight. High mode however is used by pushing the momentary tailcap switch and holding it down for roughly 200 lumens of output. Thus using it as a true tactical light.

Not standard-issue, obviously. Not inexpensive either. Modification was $150 and that's if you supply Scott with a stock SureFire L1. Good news for me was finding one on the CPF MarketPlace for around half of what a new one costs. So under $240 for me for the total package. But there is the wait time. I knew Milky was overloaded with orders when I put mine in. 8 months later, I had my milkyfied L1. Definitely worth the wait. Since the L1 has the length of a typical AA flashlight with a clicky switch, that means a solid grip with all the fingers. Some think the L1 is a bit too long for a single CR123 based light. It is. But that extra length is fantastic when actually holding the light in hand.

So, there you go. My idea for a light that can function as both a traditional flashlight and a tactical flashlight. Capable of filling two different roles instead of just being a light with two output levels. Best of both worlds with no compromises needed. If anyone wants one, Scott can help. Just keep in mind that he's a one-man shop and flooded with orders. Likely only to get worse in the future. Once again, wait is worth it though.

[flashlight nut]

Back on topic . . .

I had received an SF L1 "extreme" from our own MilkySpit a few months back. Wanted a light that could do double-duty instead of a light with simply two output levels. For that reason, I like to call it the L1 Gemini. Low mode has been increased to 40 lumens, with plenty of runtime. When using low, you twist the tailcap a bit for constant-on mode. Now you have an average general-use flashlight. High mode however is used by pushing the momentary tailcap switch and holding it down for roughly 200 lumens of output. Thus using it as a true tactical light.

Not standard-issue, obviously. Not inexpensive either. Modification was $150 and that's if you supply Scoot with a stock SureFire L1. Good news for me was finding one on the CPF MarketPlace for around half of what a new one costs. So under $240 for me for the total package. But there is the wait time. I knew Milky was overloaded with orders when I put mine in. 8 months later, I had my milkyfied L1. Definitely worth the wait. Since the L1 has the length of a typical AA flashlight with a clicky switch, that means a solid grip with all the fingers. Some think the L1 is a bit too long for a single CR123 based light. It is. But that extra length is fantastic when actually holding the light in hand.

So, there you go. My idea for a light that can function as both a traditional flashlight and a tactical flashlight. Capable of filling two different roles instead of just being a light with two output levels. Best of both worlds with no compromises needed. If anyone wants one, Scott can help. Just keep in mind that he's a one-man shop and flooded with orders. Likely only to get worse in the future. Once again, wait is worth it though.

Seems very similar to the LX2 in terms of UI and output. Other than a presumably shorter light, what are the differences?

[Monocrom]

Seems very similar to the LX2 in terms of UI and output. Other than a presumably shorter light, what are the differences?

Keep in mind that the L1 uses a single CR123 cell, while the LX2 uses two such cells. 200 lumens from a light running on two CR123 cells is easy. From one cell? Scott definitely worked his magic. UI is technically the same. The primary use for the lower setting on my L1 is a slight twist for constant on, so it can function as a regular flashlight. However, yes; you can gently push down for momentary mode of 40 lumens. And, even though momentary tailcap switch is the ideal way to switch on the higher 200 lumens mode; yes' you can twist the tailcap for constant-on of those 200 lumens. Once again, the ideal is twist for the 40 lumens medium mode and momentary for the 200 lumens high mode. That's the best way to use the double personality of the Milky L1 "extreme."

A lot of CPFers hear that a light has dual output of 40 lumens / 200 lumens, they start to wonder why those two settings were chosen. Surely a much lower setting would be better overall on a two-mode flashlight. And I'd be the first one to agree. However, while the SF LX2 is indeed a two-mode flashlight, my Milky L1 isn't. Technically it is. Best to picture having two different flashlights in each hand. One, a single-mode flashlight used for general lighting chores. The type of flashlight every homeowner keeps around, but a quality version. Something along the lines of an old-fashioned 2AA Mini-M@g model with an aftermarket LED upgrade. In terms of operation, you twist to switch it on. In your other hand is a single-mode tactical light with a momentary tailcap switch. Something along the lines of a SureFire 6P with a Malkoff production M60 LED drop-in in it.

Now you've got two lights. One for general lighting chores, and one for true tactical use. What I had Scott do was combine those two separate lights into one very compact flashlight. Now the 40 lumen mode and the 200 lumen mode makes more sense. You pick whichever single mode you need depending on the task facing you. With the LX2, SureFire clearly meant for it to be a two-mode light with a 15 lumen low and a 200 lumen high. In terms of use, the modified L1 is meant to be used as either a single mode traditional flashlight or a single mode tactical light. Dual-personality flashlight instead of dual-mode flashlight.

Beam profile is also very different. I let Scott know I didn't want the tight beam usually found on SureFire lights that come equipped with an optic. I wanted something closer to what you get with a reflector. A nice hotspot but with plenty of side-spill. Far more pragmatic and useful. (At least for my needs.) Scott definitely didn't disappoint. Yes, runtime on high mode is shorter with my L1 than with an LX2. Though not by a great deal. And once again, you have a single cell light compared to one running on two cells. If I reach into my spares-carrier and toss in another cell into my L1 after the first cell dies, in order to have a fairer comparison, than the runtimes on high for both lights is nearly identical.

Once again, Milky has worked his magic. No clue how he does it. Maybe he uses some ancient manuscripts and waves a magic wand for a few hours, and all of a sudden there's a new batch of SureFires that are now working at their absolute full potential. (Sure, he works his magic on other brands. But generally it's on SureFires.)

One final difference would be the grip. There's not much checkering on an L1 body, but damn if it's not significantly more than what you'd find on an LX2. That's one of the two main reasons I never bought an LX2. (Can't stand the reversible clip either. The length of the L1 means that the bezel-up clip on it is 100% functional.) Certain things should be nice and smooth. Like a beautiful woman's legs. Others? Not so much. If I truly need my flashlight to work, I'm going to be beyond mad as Hell if it squirts out of my hand like a wet fish simply because there's just a tiny bit of sweat on my hands. I like the older SF models. The ones that had checkering that was so good that you could literally use it to saw through other flashlights made by the competition. I don't like these new "kinder & gentler" SureFires. When I grab one of my SureFires, I want to feel as though I have a cheese-grater covered in Krazy Glue in my fist. Prisoners on Death Row have more freedom of movement than the SureFires I'm holding.

[Quiksilver]

I'm surprised more CPFers don't get their ass kicked on the street for flashing a dangerously bright tool in the eyes of another person at night, when the situation could be avoided entirely.

I know I would take serious offense if someone flashed a 200 lumen light in my dark-adapted eyes for no good reason. If I had no intention to attack them before, receiving that would be sufficent to be called an instigation. And if I couldn't see due to blindness, first instinct would be to close and engage since I am extremely vulnerable due to temporary blindness.

[Monocrom]

I'm surprised more CPFers don't get their ass kicked on the street for flashing a dangerously bright tool in the eyes of another person at night, when the situation could be avoided entirely.

Likely the reason why that doesn't take place more often is that the vast majority of CPFers aren't that immature, and aren't that rude.

I know I would take serious offense if someone flashed a 200 lumen light in my dark-adapted eyes for no good reason. If I had no intention to attack them before, receiving that would be sufficent to be called an instigation. And if I couldn't see due to blindness, first instinct would be to close and engage since I am extremely vulnerable due to temporary blindness.

I'd be upset too if that happened to me for no good reason. I'd likely engage as well. Amazing the number of folks who just stay on that center line instead of moving off of it.

[Solscud007]

I'm surprised more CPFers don't get their ass kicked on the street for flashing a dangerously bright tool in the eyes of another person at night, when the situation could be avoided entirely.

I know I would take serious offense if someone flashed a 200 lumen light in my dark-adapted eyes for no good reason. If I had no intention to attack them before, receiving that would be sufficent to be called an instigation. And if I couldn't see due to blindness, first instinct would be to close and engage since I am extremely vulnerable due to temporary blindness.

I concur with Monocrom. I can only speak for myself, but I never blast anyone in the face. Unless it is a friend and I am messing with him. Other than that, I would only use a full blast if the situation demanded it. I have used bright tactical lights on people during low light airsoft encounters. These are guys with fully automatic weapons in their hands. Trust me, with a full blast of light charging forward to engage let alone shooting is the last thing on their minds. Sure I have been shot at after a blast of light but they cant aim well and always miss. Also I am shooting them right as I blast them with light. In airsoft one hit your out or down waiting for a medic (aspect of the game, not a real medic)

Seeing these people's reactions to the light is informative. There is a brief moment that you can take advantage of while they are recovering from the light. You can then judge what to do next. A good option is to blast and book it out of there. A better option is to have your wits about you. Keeping your head up and scanning for possible threats is a much better use of your time. I recall a study where prisoners were shown a film/video of people in the street. They were asked who would you target and who would you avoid. People who were up and alert were avoided. People who were not alert were picked as targets.

Seeing a possible threat early on give you a lot more time and opportunity to adjust accordingly. You have many more options before resorting to a light.

[fishndad]

I'm surprised more CPFers don't get their ass kicked on the street for flashing a dangerously bright tool in the eyes of another person at night, when the situation could be avoided entirely.

I know I would take serious offense if someone flashed a 200 lumen light in my dark-adapted eyes for no good reason. If I had no intention to attack them before, receiving that would be sufficent to be called an instigation. And if I couldn't see due to blindness, first instinct would be to close and engage since I am extremely vulnerable due to temporary blindness.

Where did that come from? Ive never heard of flashing someone on the street in the eyes with your flashlight.
Only discussing what would be a good light for doing so for SELF DEFENSE to avoid and get away from an attacker.
This thread!

[TEEJ]

Where did that come from? Ive never heard of flashing someone on the street in the eyes with your flashlight.
Only discussing what would be a good light for doing so for SELF DEFENSE to avoid and get away from an attacker.
This thread!

Yeah, this is not about randomly flashing someone in the eyes, this is about STOPPING AN ATTACKER for a moment to buy reaction time. As Solscud mentioned, it buys a delay period of a second or so that you can use to your advantage.

In an attack situation, If I hit the guy in the eyes to buy that hesitation...I do NOT stay in one place, or hold the light at the same orientation to my body. Once I hit them, I hold the light out to my side so that if they DO try something, they are like the bull charging the cape.



As at that point they were ALREADY potentially charging like a bull, hence my desire to make them hesitate/give me time to take appropriate counter measures...this is a very good analogy. If all they see is the light, and that's where they are charging, I at least have moved my center of mass off center from their target point.

I can also simply turn the light OFF when they are close, as their vision will not be recovered enough to compensate, and, they will simply continue towards where the light was last. If attempting to fire, that is also where they are most likely to aim...where the light was last.

This is one reason I like a floody beam, in addition to their head, I want to see which way their hands and belt buckles are going, etc...to anticipate dodges and weapon use, etc....and why I like if the light doesn't need to scroll to an off position.

As mentioned above, attackers target the vulnerable....and avoid savvy targets as higher risk. If you have a response to their attack that is OTHER THAN cowering/rolling into a ball, etc...they re-assess whether you might hurt THEM. They don't want to get hurt...they would much rather come up behind an unsuspecting victim, and whack them in the back of their head, knocking them out...and then take what they want with no chance of being identified later, etc.

The TV versions where they face you and ask for your wallet are rare...although the newbs might do that, and, then have to kill you once they realize you can ID them, or, not think about it, and simply get ID'd/go to court later, etc.

[fishndad]

Man.TEEJ.You sure have a way of exlpaining things. I think if you wrote a book say" Flashlights for Dummies "with a brick
insie(that way i could smack them over the head after they have read it of course).Some folks might finally get it.
I will try ,humbly of course to back up what you said,You would use the light to very quickly blind your attacker and run.
IF you are incapable of running.If you are backed into a corner or are otherwise screwed.Then god may be on your side.
Myself i am prepared and trained to use lethal force.But I do pray from time to time that I will never have to live with a decision baring those circumstances.

[lightfooted]

Interesting how this thread got a bit derailed there for a bit...also interesting how it basically started because someone who supposedly deals with that kind of stuff daily on the job couldn't just say "Well we aren't all like that..." and then dropped it. (To be clear, I'm not saying you are like that)

Even more interesting is this aggressive reaction to getting blasted in the face with 200 lumens while out in public. Seriously? No really I wasn't sure if you guys were serious....maybe I should be able to pick out your sarcasm better but really I am not clear on what you guys would do. (You guys being QS, Mono and Solscud)

Why??? .....last time I checked there was no law regulating the use of a flashlight to light someone up at night. It's not like they are hosing you down with OC or pulling a tire iron out to knock you over the head with. However suddenly becoming aggressive with a total stranger just because he flashed you with a light is definitely grounds for taking a defensive stance. After all maybe I wasn't flashing you with the intent to blind you but trying instead to identify you or someone else nearby...or get the attention of a passing friend in his car so he could pick me up....or any one of a few hundred other reasons that could be legitimate.

Now suddenly this guy is coming at me like he is going to kick my ass and I don't know why... yep I'm definitely going into condition orange...and depending how it goes from there....maybe even red.

[SimulatedZero]

I feel that a lot of the aggression that some people have expressed is the armchair mentality. It's something that everybody, including myself, is guilty of. When people are in a safe environment they tend to exaggerate what their reaction would be to being "offended". It's not a purposeful attempt to make themselves appear bigger, badder, better, it's just something that I've noticed people do. If I'm standing with a group of friend's I may say that I will teach someone a lesson for doing something stupid, but in reality I will be much more cautious about getting in a fight because of the steep consequences both legally and possibly physically. There's no point in getting that aggressive over something stupid. Most people aren't going to have that ballistic, aggressive attack mentality when being flashed in the eyes, either on accident or on purpose. They will be slightly disoriented for a very short moment as their brain processes what just happened. That delay will cause them to stop and look around at what's going on before they blindly attack someone. And even if they determined that someone purposefully blinded them they are more likely to talk, or yell, to the person to find out why they did that. But, because those people are in the safe environment of this forum they will say that they will attack for that kind of provocation. It's probably not purposeful and everybody at some point or another has done something similar.

Now as towards the value of carrying a tactical light with you every where. I am a big proponent of "If it works when you need it, then it's tactical for you" meaning that people should use what they feel the most comfortable with and are the most familiar with. You may EDC a Fenix PD20 and have to twist the head and use a reverse clicky to get into the strobe mode. But, if you have done that thousands of times over the course of a couple years you will be able to do so from muscle memory with out having to think about. Lets say you give that person a momentary only light to carry through a bad neighborhood. Yes, it is designed to more aptly suit tactical needs but the person is unfamiliar with it they may mess up somehow. They may pull out the light and go through the motion of setting up turbo/strobe like it's still the Fenix PD20 and that could cause them to change something on their tactical light to where it is now ineffective.

Well that brings to mind training with what you will be using. If you are willing to go through the training that it would take to commit the new light to muscle memory then perhaps a "tactical" light would be suited for for you. But, if you plan to buy one and just carry it around when you are in seedy areas, then it could conceivably get you into more trouble. The thing about muscle memory is that it takes five thousand repetitions to commit something to muscle memory. But once you have that action/motion committed you will be able to do it every time quickly, efficiently, and more importantly correctly. This is why in boxing you get trained for a very long time before you get your first match. Here you aren't allowed to have a match until you have gone through six months of training. Most of which is at a slowed pace. You never spend a lot of time sparring at full speed. But, because you have spent so much time practicing that technique and committing it muscle memory, it will be there at full speed for you first match. Your body will know what to do and when to do it subconsciously, allowing you to focus more on the situation then on your reaction. The same will hold true with using your light under stress. If you have every mode of the light committed to muscle memory, you will be able to more effectively deploy that light in a tactical situation. This does not mean that your light would be better then a "tactical" light if both are equally trained with and used. It just means that the light you have committed to muscle memory will work better for you then the one that won't. And if you don't have time to set-up a light committed to muscle memory, regardless of the UI. Then you most likely are not going to have time to do anything but defend yourself or brace for impact as it were.

That's my two lumens on the subject. Muscle Memory is key in any stressful situation, that's why people in high risk jobs go through so much training for that job. So they can properly react in an emergency. Having a "tactical" light on your person doesn't necessarily make you a harder target, depending on the person with the light, it could make you a softer target. So I wouldn't put as much thought into the light and would put more thought into committing it to memory. There is more to it, but that is a big point that I haven't seen really stressed in this thread yet. And if I missed, then I apologize.

[TEEJ]

My impression of the OP's intent, was to see what the value of a tactical light was, for a civilian who carries a concealed weapon.

That implies that, to be qualified to carry a concealed weapon (Really qualified, not just being allowed to), one would also do what was required to be qualified to use whatever other accessories might be of value.

IE: they are already a hard target, because they are armed. The assailant, unless not too observant, would have to be breaking from the normal victim choice algorithm they unconsciously follow, to attack an armed victim. They would prefer a daydreaming tourist who is oblivious to their surroundings, and preferably, as weak and unimposing as possible.


As the concealed carry guy would not be brandishing his trump cards unless the game played out that way...he is aware of a threat/is under attack/being threatened....his response can include drawing the weapon, and/or drawing the weapon and a light.

If a perp sees a response that LOOKS LEO-Like...a guy with a gun and a freakishly bright light....especially if the guy looks like he knows how to use them.....said perp will be thinking really hard and fast about if he should continue to try to take down this victim...or look for a way to break contact.

Even a lion goes after the old/sick looking antelopes rather than the strong healthy looking ones....they are easier targets with a higher chance of going down w/o kicking the lion's teeth in.

COULD the lion probably kill even a healthy antelope? Sure, but there are easier pickings...why take the risks associated with harder targets....and choosing human victims is analogous.


Even knowing that the light was on his face means he can now be potentially identified...so performing a crime immediately afterwards ups the ante...its another deterrent.



NOTHING always works 100% of the time. Real life is like that. What deters one guy infuriates another, and so forth. What IS consistent though, is the TENDENCY for conflicts involving potential victimization to deescalate when the attacker perceives the victim as potentially aware of his surroundings/harder to take by surprise, and/or when the target shows evidence of also being potentially capable of counter measures/potential danger to the attacker.

Just because you HAVE a gun doesn't mean you have to use it. Just because you have a light doesn't mean you have to use it. Both give you options though you would not have without them. You just need to be able to choose what is appropriate for the situation.


For me, I think walking confidently and with purpose, while looking around/showing situational awareness, deters attacks by those looking for targets of opportunity.


That's the FIRST line of defense.

[ledmitter_nli]

[ledmitter_nli]

In NYC (where virtually everything "defensive" is illegal) this is how I roll.



And when jogging, the light is in hand.



I'm more inclined to keep it clipped in my waist band from now on. Because people passing by me think I'm wielding a dangerous weapon or something.

I remember I was standing at an intersection returning home and there was a group of young kids. I actually over heard this "is that a gun?"

Seriously, from those pics above does it look like a firearm? I wouldn't call it it something that looks "off the shelf" as TEEJ characterizes it, either.

Even patrol officers who see me with it in hand give a 2nd look.

It's amazing how wussiefied our state of affairs have become.

[Monocrom]

Yeah . . . That's just advertising B.S.

You're not getting that level of intensity from a little Pelican flashlight. My Fenix TK35 on its highest setting could pull that off. But then again, that would be over 800 Lumens. Pelican definitely has not kept up with LED technology, and they don't use the latest emitters in their lights. Judging by the head and beam in the second pic, that looks like a Pelican M6 2320 model. Output = 82 lumens. Since those are likely emitter lumens, actual output would be about 55 lumens. You're not getting the type of intense beam in the first pic with a flashlight pumping out about 55 lumens only. And you're definitely not getting that type of reaction from a knife-toting attacker either.

[ledmitter_nli]

In NYC (where virtually everything "defensive" is illegal) this is how I roll.



And when jogging, the light is in hand.



I'm more inclined to keep it clipped in my waist band from now on. Because people passing by me think I'm wielding a dangerous weapon or something.

I remember I was standing at an intersection returning home and there was a group of young kids. I actually over heard this "is that a gun?"

Seriously, from those pics above does it look like a firearm? I wouldn't call it it something that looks "off the shelf" as TEEJ characterizes it, either.

^^^ Actually I should clarify. I really meant to say that the light doesn't look "off the shelf" (as TEEJ characterized in a different thread relating to being seen with a tactical light if you are an average dumpy civilian). So I can see it getting "disconcerting" looks from the sheep if they don't know what it is, and unfortunately, from the sheep herders as well.

"Suspicious person in a white shirt holding a "weapon". Arrive alive advise 84..."

So I might just clip it with the shirt over it instead. Besides I can use the free hand to carry a wata botta.

[ledmitter_nli]

Yeah . . . That's just advertising B.S.

You're not getting that level of intensity from a little Pelican flashlight. My Fenix TK35 on its highest setting could pull that off. But then again, that would be over 800 Lumens. Pelican definitely has not kept up with LED technology, and they don't use the latest emitters in their lights. Judging by the head and beam in the second pic, that looks like a Pelican M6 2320 model. Output = 82 lumens. Since those are likely emitter lumens, actual output would be about 55 lumens. You're not getting the type of intense beam in the first pic with a flashlight pumping out about 55 lumens only. And you're definitely not getting that type of reaction from a knife-toting attacker either.

Yeah I know those pics are exaggerated. Posted them to get the spirit of the idea

Any 700+ lumen light should do the job at that close of range.

[Monocrom]

Any 700+ lumen light should do the job at that close of range.

Yup. Any old 700+ lumen flashlight that happens to be lying around.

[TEEJ]

Yeah I know those pics are exaggerated. Posted them to get the spirit of the idea

Any 700+ lumen light should do the job at that close of range.

Even 500 L is enough at close range....and, if focused well, and close ENOUGH....really, even 100 L in the eyes CAN wreck a perp's night vision and make him hesitate. If he's NOT night adjusted, well, it still makes him squint.


Hence the LEO popularity of the XT11, etc.... Even NOT night adjusted, 500 + L are just a lot in your face to see through.

We could start strolling around with some blinged out XM18's and use 15,000 Lumens to melt the guys head instead of just making him unable to see.

As cooler heads prevail, obviously, using your XM18 to make the other guy's head burst into flames ...will help you to prevail.

[dc38]

Again, your interpretations of what I wrote are very creative. I suppose dc38's comment about cops equating flashlights with guns and being stupid enough to do so, along with your agreement and colorful comments elicited such a "Very Bad Thing" happening by a police officer. Many cops belong to this forum and I have never heard any profess that a civilian should be restricted on what flashlight to carry. Even in a thread such as this we have given advice on using a flashlight in conjunction with weapons or just for defensive purposes so I am at a loss as to where you get your opinions from. And please point out where I said if you are not breaking up fights for a living you are not doing anything important with your life, or am I just too stupid to see it. You have a lot of maturing to do.

Hey flashlight nut! I suppose my statement was misinterpreted to some extent. I didn't mean to spark a feud of any sort, it was just a passing comment about SOME cops being bullies and stupid. I apologize if i offended you in any way, but you shouldn't feel offended. My statement applies to some local cops around me who think they know everything. To recount an occurrence: a cop pulls over next to me at the bus stop and ask what i'm doing there. I tell him I'm waiting for the bus. He keeps asking me as to where I'm going, so i ask him if he has any reason to be questioning me like he is doing. He says he "don't need no reason to know your business". I replied that if i'm not under suspicion for anything or being detained, I'd appreciate if he would go on his merry way, because he's blocking the bus stop. He pulls his car into the parking lot behind me (shopping complex) and gets out of the car and approaches me and tells me to drop my bag. I tell him i don't consent to any unlawful searches and question him again as to why he's stopping me and if i'm free to go about my business. I point to the bus, which is now right next to us at the bus stop, and the driver is willing to wait because he recognizes me. I tell him to go on because he's a stickler for schedules. Anyways, the cop decides to grab my arm as i'm telling the driver to go, and whips me back around. (at this point i would like to yell in his face). He takes my bag and rifles through it and finds...nothing. I ask if he knows he is in serious violation for an unlawful search, and he raises his voice that i have no rights. He then drops my bag and proceeds to take my prized Klarus out of my pocket, again, without my permission. Dumbass shines the thing in his face and says, why are you carrying a weapon? At this point, another patrol car is passing by, and i flag them down. They come over and the first cop says, this kid is carrying a potentially dangerous weapon. (basically, they agreed that it potentially COULD be used to blind passing motorists, or as a kubaton) I was like, SERIOUSLY? The other cop agrees with this first moron, and tweedle dee and tweedle dum cuff me and stick me in the back of one of the cars and radio in for whatever reason. Needless to say, they HAD to let me go, as I was in violation of NO laws. I filed a complaint with the local station as well as the mayor's office, but in retrospect, I should've reported it to the news. So long story short, I'm just saying that there are SOME stupid cops around who are *#$(&*#!&**. Disregarding that, Flashlight nut, almost all other cops are professional and courteous, including NY's Finest. I have a few cops who are quite close friends, and never in a million years would i call them stupid.

Now if everybody please continue discussing their flashlights as per schedule,

(P.S., another funny occurrence at the mall when i was hanging around after work. Cop stops me because somebody in a white dress shirt had been stirring up trouble at the local sears and i was going to be held for ID'ing by a witness. To this, I consented, because I knew I was innocent and just trying to help the guy get his job done. Anywhoo, the witness comes out, and asks after a quick laugh and shake of the head "Officer, we described the guy as a 6'3 WHITE male..." I'm not white. -_-" Officer didn't even thank me for my time, just said "have a nice day". I LOLed with the witness and HE apologized...for what? hahaha. No harm, no foul. I hold no resentment)