Tactical Flashlight

[jobo]

doesnt flood lighting the area just make every one aware you are there, if you cant see them they can't see you,ove quietly like a ninja

 

[drop bear]

doesnt flood lighting the area just make every one aware you are there, if you cant see them they can't see you,ove quietly like a ninja

It is a compromise. For me I will go to a break in. And if for some reason I dont just wait out the front and call the cops. I will kick the doors, turn my torch on and call out. Hopefully if there is someone in there they will save me the trouble and run away.

Now If I am suddenly face to face to them. They have to make the decision whether to go through me. Which is more trouble.

 

[morymorya]

I bought a GearLight for my daughter and she can put it in her pocket. I looked at its quality, it was strong, and it was strong enough to be a great tactical flashlight.

 

[Invisibleflash]

Stream light for illumination.... old mag light for putting knots on someone's head.

Yes, mag light is the legal kubaton in NYC. Sorry I gave away my old one when I moved onto the hi output led's.

 

[Invisibleflash]

I think the finger ring would be a finger breaker in a fight

Don't know. Maybe. If an issue I'd cut ring off if I could.

I always wanted a dedicated strobe. I wonder how reliable it is. In current trim the NYC cope may pull you in. Weapons of any form are illegal.

 

[Invisibleflash]

Looks like something you Brits should have. Or would there be a problem with it in England? I read the poor Brits have to use a bar of soap in a sock or rolled up newspapers to fight off attackers.

Has anyone bought one of these lights? How does it hold up? Any issues with it? I use Surefire myself.

 

[Invisibleflash]

I don't think the disorientation is really reliable. Having hit a few guys with the strobe on mine. I dont thing the strobe makes much difference either. Exept it can be a bit disorienting for you up close.

I still suggest the primary purpose of a tactical torch is to see trouble far enough away that you can avoid it.

Light may not be bright enuf. Go in a dark room, real dark, shine 1200 lumen in your eyes. See what happens. If it is not dark enough, lights don't work as well. Unless you are someone very special, I can't see for some time.

 

[jobo]

Looks like something you Brits should have. Or would there be a problem with it in England? I read the poor Brits have to use a bar of soap in a sock or rolled up newspapers to fight off attackers.

Has anyone bought one of these lights? How does it hold up? Any issues with it? I use Surefire myself.

yes, having anything which carries the label tactical can be a problem I can't see blinding someone with light as a major problem but hitting them it with may be, just carry something designed to hit with is a big issue, we can however carry a substantial torch and co indedentally find it in our hand if we are attacked

rolled up news papers make an extremely effective weapon,if you have time to roll them

 

[Invisibleflash]

I don't bother with the strobe feature on my flashlight either. I'm basically not sold on the strobe feature. I keep my light set on high mode. I only bother with the low setting around the house when using it to look for stuff. And the strobe setting I don't deal with at all.

As far as the disorientation or momentary blindness factor, well I am sold on that. I think a sudden and unexpected flash of 500 lumens of light right directly in the face of someone with night adapted vision is something not to be overlooked or underestimated. I've accidentally shined it in my own face (at 500 lumens) in my house, during the daytime with the bedroom light on. And...well.Trust me! Just, you know, trust me on this one.

My light only has full power or off. I used to have a low and high setting light. Had an altercation and used low by mistake. That was enough of a lucky warning for me.

 

[Invisibleflash]

I get what you are saying Blindside....but what is the reward that outweighs the risk of having that finger loop?

I would like the light if it was minus the finger loop. The finger loop just adds a risk that isn't needed.

If someone is wanting to disarm me from the flashlight why do I want a flashlight I have to fight to retain?

See if you can cut it off.

 

[Invisibleflash]

What people who make disorienting light and sound weapons do not understand about the people they are intending to use them on.

You can use a Class IV laser for defense. But it can cause permanent eye damage. In the USA, when / if the soft civil war turns into a hard civil war, they may come in handy. A laser can be useful 50 yards or more.

 

[Invisibleflash]

Instead of a finger ring I would rather removable strike bevels on both ends.

Those bezels can cause lots of blood and permanent disfigurement. If you are hauled into court maybe an issue. I use Surefire myself. Much less aggressive bezel. I do like the dedicated flash feature of the light being discussed. That is what is of interest. I'd cut off the finger ring.

 

[Invisibleflash]

Yes, all of my flashlights that have a strobe function also strobe on the highest setting. The reason that I have recently come to be against the strobe setting in a SD situation is that I experimented with it after reading some research that suggest that the strobe function can be a setback to the person WITH the flashlight as well as against the bad guy. The reasons given were a) the strobe makes it difficult for the bad guy to detect your movements and distance from him. This is most certainly advantageous to the holder of the flashlight. BUT it can also have a slight disorientation on the person holding the flashlight as well and it can also make it difficult for that person to notice slight movements and distance changes that the bad guy makes. ....

Yes, never thought about that. I'd have to see how the strobe affected me in the dark.

 

[Invisibleflash]

Something I forgot to mention with my list of reasons for being anti-strobe is that the strobe light doesn't necessarily stop the bad guy. Based on what I've read is that because the strobe is basically intermittent at whatever hertz can allow certain people to deal with it and charge you anyway because they can still see you even if it is a distorted image of you that they see. With normal high output they don't see you at all. This would be the fourth reason that turned me off about strobes.

A fifth reason is that there isn't anything in any of the research I've done to even remotely suggest that strobe is better in a SD situation than normal high output. Normal high output is better than normal medium or low output. The reason? Normal high output has more lumens than medium or low output and thus a better chance at the temporary blinding factor.

Some people say that strobe is better to use in a SD situation than normal high output. Reason?.............

Again, these things are not an issue at all with the normal high output function. And this brings me back to my question; why mess around in a SD situation (and possible life or death situation) with something that has downsides as opposed to using something that does not have these downsides at all? Please forgive me guys but I'm failing to see the logic in that.

IDK, I could be completely wrong here but I think the strobe function is a "nifty" feature that most consumers are convinced is better than normal high mode strictly based on the marketers saying it is. IDK. Maybe I'm the only one who sees it that way.

You would have to test it out. That would make a good YT video. Strobe vs normal light.

 

[Invisibleflash]

As an old man on the job, my prefered weapons are my radio, my hands and my side arm. I like a flash light for seeing in the dark and a small knife for cutting materials when necessary. I don't want no baton, no pepper spray, no nothing. Just my rathers, nobody else's.

You can't shoot everyone that pushes you. In NYC you can't carry a gun. Now what's your plan? If you are an old man and can still fight, great for you. But all us old guys are not that lucky.

 

[Invisibleflash]

Super uncomfortable with the kubaton. If I am threatened enough to need one I probably need a baseball bat.

I don't like to start a weapon fight with about the worlds most ineffective weapon.

What is wrong with kubaton?

I don't use one for keys, but they are great for hammer fist strikes. Although in NYC can't carry em. As was noted earlier, flashlight is your kubaton in NYC.

 

[Invisibleflash]

I agree with this.



THIS! From my perspective the bad guy should only know I brought a kubotan (or yawara or palm stick, etc.) into the altercation when he feels it being used somewhere on his body. It should be felt BEFORE being seen. And once I have introduced the kubotan/yawara into the altercation I feel duty bound to keep attacking and put him down for the count and try to prevent him from recuperating from being hit with the kubotan. I don't believe in simply brandishing a weapon (where the bad guy has an opportunity to ascertain what I have and prepare to deal with it). I believe, instead, in quickly deploying and using a weapon to gain the upper hand and to maintain that upper hand until the threat is no longer a threat.



Same here.



The knife or the kubotan are not what's really dangerous. It's the people wielding them. Just because you have a kubotan and you're defending yourself against a guy with a knife does not automatically mean you are at an automatic disadvantage. If he's not good at using a knife and has no fighting skills but you do have real skills and are very good at using your kubotan or yawara who is really at a disadvantage in that situation? Besides, if I had a choice, I would rather face a knife wielding person with a kubotan than to face him empty handed.

Yes, good advice. If a knife attacks it is best to gas them or light them up then take them out with baton or other strikes. Although if you gas em, especially with cone spray, you may get blowback. Kubaton is good for hammer strikes. That is all I use mine for. I don't keep keys on it. Life is not perfect, gotta do best you can.

 

[Invisibleflash]

The strength of the continuous beam is not so much as it interfere as it BLINDS/TAKE'S AWAY VISION, particularly at night in low lit conditions. The strobe interferes with the OODA LOOP by making it difficult at worst and impossible at best for an assailant to get a good sense of the movements and distance of the person holding the strobe light even though he can still very briefly see him in between flashes (especially in situations outside of night time and low lit conditions). It's also irritating as H*** to be flashed in your face by it. Very annoying and can be a distraction. I never denied the distraction or disorientation factor of the strobe light. My arguments against it's use were based on using it at night and how the person with the light can also be negatively affected by the strobe light even if he's not as badly affected by it as his attacker.

But to me the (important) difference between blinding/taking away the vision and mere distraction is that if you use the continuous beam at night to take away your attacker's vision you can keep the light on and in his face and attack at will in which there is basically nothing your attacker can do to counteract it (unless he's a d'bag and has a mirror in his hand). But with the distraction you only have a split second or two to take advantage of whatever disruption of his OODA LOOP you are able to obtain. In other words, although I am reconsidering my initial position of the usefulness of the strobe mode I am still of the position that the strobe function has a couple of downsides that continuous beam does not have.

But I got the idea of revisiting and reassessing my position while watching parts 3 and 4 of Jared Wihongi's 4 part youtube videos on using the very tactical flashlight which started this thread.

If I do conclude that there is value in using the strobe feature of a tactical flashlight it would be for my own reasons based on my own research, training and experimentation and NOT simply because the tactical flashlights marketers say it is without them providing their own research and experiments to validate why they say so. At the risk of coming off as being condescending I think this separates me from most of the masses of tactical flashlight consumers.

This should all be settled on YT. Make a video timing how long useful vison takes to return when being blinded from various lumen lights.

 

[Invisibleflash]

I get what you're saying and I do appreciate the idea but here are two possible problem's with the flanking idea:

1) I don't think the assailant is going to stand perfectly still in one spot. This is why I said it will not be as textbook as the video makes it out to be. You have to flank him while somehow leaving your arm in the right position to keep the light directly in his face. Just try doing this yourself with a training partner who is allowed to react naturally and you'll see that it's easier said than done.

2) It's an extra step or movement that you're better off skipping. If I have my light shining in a bad guy's eyes and have succeeded in taking away his vision I would rather take maximum advantage of that moment and drop him with one move (say a right cross to his jaw or a palm stick to his clavicle or sternum) instead of taking unnecessary chances with two moves (step to his left first while somehow keeping my adrenaline filled arm where it needs to be to keep the light perfectly in his eyes and then drop him).

Have a look at the second video again and look at the sequence where the female is at her car giving the bad guy the business. She has the light in her left hand directed toward his face and going to work on him with the weapon in her right hand. Which would have a better chance of saving her in a fast paced, adrenaline filled attack; that which she's doing already in the video or trying to flank him in between shots with the weapon in her right hand?

I'll reiterate that I most certainly appreciate the concept of flanking someone while shining a bright light in his eyes but I think that concept takes second seat to simply attacking him while you can as soon as the opportunity presents itself. James Williams himself does teach such a concept as evidenced in the video below.

Remember, he can't see what movements you're making behind that light anyway so deliberately looking to flank him is unnecessary imo. If you just so happen to naturally flank him during the altercation then that's great. By all means take advantage of that moment if you do. But I would rather focus on surviving and escaping instead of fixing my mind on any one tactic, be it flanking or otherwise.

Good video, good advice, esp 'get out' after strike. But light is too short. If they got a knife, a longer light can be used in a hammer fist to the temple. Once they use deadly force, all bets are off. Make sure they don't get up and take off after you...with knife.

Here is a quote form an old mentor of mine...Jeff Cooper on consideration. (Quote condensed)

"Anyone who willfully and maliciously attacks another without sufficient cause deserves no consideration. We are fully justified in valuing the life and person of the intended victim more highly than the life of the pernicious assailant. The attacked must be stopped - at once and completely. An armed man is dangerous as long as he is conscious. Take no chances - put him out. When your life is in danger and under lethal attack don't be kind - Be harsh - Be tough - Be ruthless.'

 

[lklawson]

You can't shoot everyone that pushes you.

A "push" is seldom justification for Deadly Force regardless of the tool used. Even in New York you can't bludgeon someone to death with a flashlight "that just pushes you." The firearm, knife, or bludgeoning D-Cell Mag Light, are all considered Deadly Force. Sorry, but it's a non sequitur argument.

Choose the most effective tool which you can legally use in your environment and can effectively employ (preferably because you've gotten training in proper and effective use) whether it's a gun, a knife, or pepper spray.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk