Tactical Flashlight

[Gerry Seymour]

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 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.

To me, a flanking move is part of the counter-attack. I don't want to stand still, whether they can see me, or not. If they can't see me, that movement provides an additional advantage, because they can't clearly tell where I've moved to.

 

[Psilent Knight]

To me, a flanking move is part of the counter-attack. I don't want to stand still, whether they can see me, or not. If they can't see me, that movement provides an additional advantage, because they can't clearly tell where I've moved to.

Yes, in this case I'd rather just move if I need to and it won't necessarily be a flanking move. I will only move when, where and how it makes the most sense. But I won't fixate my mind strictly on lateral movement and flanking. When people fixate on anyone given tactic during a physical altercation they run the risk of missing other tactics that make more sense than the tactic they are fixated on. There's a natural flow to any given altercation and I would rather be prepared for whatever changes and attack opportunities that natural flow gives me and adapt to changing circumstances. I can't do that if I am strictly looking for the opportunity to do one specific tactic (in this case flanking).

 

[Psilent Knight]

Remember, the "bad guy" in Mr. Williams videos is standing perfectly still while Mr. Williams is moving in slow motion. So of course it looks perfectly textbook in the videos. Last I remembered though the bad guy never stand's still by choice and is willing to take his punishment and an altercation is fast paced and dynamic. A swinging arm and a front kicking foot are quicker and less cumbersome than a lateral stepping movement.

 

[drop bear]

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.

What if I throw punches at the light?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

What if I throw punches at the light?

F*** that light up, DB. It's an a******, anyway.

 

[Psilent Knight]

What if I throw punches at the light?

Lmao. Make sure you give that white light a black eye. That'll show 'em what a real shiner is.

 

[drop bear]

F*** that light up, DB. It's an a******, anyway.

I am hoping it will be near your head.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I am hoping it will be near your head.

Wait, when did I end up holding the damned thing?? Who gave me the flashlight??

 

[drop bear]

Wait, when did I end up holding the damned thing?? Who gave me the flashlight??

It is how you win the game keepings off. You don't go back and forwards trying to get your stuff. You bash everyone who has touched your stuff.

 

[Psilent Knight]

It's just a matter of time before the law abiding citizens of society will no longer have any kind of advantage with super bright flashlights. Every body and their grandma are marketing them left and right. And commercials on TV for that one flashlight that is basically the same as the Bell & Howell model are being shown with evermore frequency. My wife convinced me to buy one on an impulse while clothes shopping at Gabriel Brothers (you read that right folks).

Can anyone tell me how so many companies are marketing the same model flashlight under different names? Are they like buying them wholesale from China or something? I think I've seen the Bell & Howell and I-Zoom design flashlight sold by 6 or 7 different companies under as many different names. How is this being done?

Here's the I-Zoom which is the same thing as the Bell & Howell and who knows how many other names being etched on it. I'm seeing more and more commercials on television and online for this light sold by different companies (and under different names).

2500 Lumen i-Zoom Flashlight

Okay, so what company(s) in China are they getting this template from?

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the one I bought from Gabe's was cheap too; $20 which is the price they're all selling them for. So as I said earlier it's just a matter of time before the a******s of society catch on and counteract that advantage and/or use it themselves to their own advantage.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Yes, multiple companies in China make the same flashlight(s). And these companies market those flashlights under different names and/or vendor accounts. The flashlight in your link above is one of them. There are a gazillion of them on Ebay. Not to rain on anyone's parade, if you spent $20 on it then you were taken. That's about four times what you'd pay on Ebay. Yea, you can get a flashlight like that for around $5 give or take. Here's a bit more salt for the wound, it states 2500 lumens. Those are Chinese lumens which are as real as Peter Pan, no-touch knock outs, unicorns and magic beans. They make up a number that they think will impress people. There is NO WAY that light produces 2500 lumens on six 1.5V AAA batteries. If it produces even 500 lumens you'd be lucky. It also doesn't seem to have a very efficient driver but that's another story.

As I mentioned earlier, go to Ebay and type in Sipik and/or SK68 and you'll see more lights than you can shake a stick at. Type in CREE LED and you'll see the same thing.

I someone wants an inexpensive light that still has quality then you'd be MUCH better served going with a Convoy S2+ and invest in a couple of quality 18650 cells and a good smart charger.

Buy Products Online from China Wholesalers at Aliexpress.com

That link is to Simon's store on Ali and he is one of the few in China with a sterling reputation. These lights have the excellent 7135 chip drivers. You can custom order 3,4,6 or 8 chips. If you're unfamiliar with that kind of driver (circuit board that runs the flashlight) it has chips which run the amps from the battery to the LED. If you want max run time (yet still have a VERY bright light) choose 3 or 4 chips. If you want maximum lumen output then go with 6 or 8 chips. Get a conversion tube so that you can shorten it to an 18350 sized light and get a pocket clip. This is a flashlight that will actually work when you need it, has memory, has L, M and H with strobe and SOS that can be hidden.

Check out this thread for more information and videos on torture testing:

Convoy S2+

You can get a Convoy S2+ for between $15 and $20 depending on the features you want. A few more $ if you want the pocket clip and 18350 tube. If you want it quicker then go with Richard at M.E. and you'll get the same light in just a few days.

Flashlights

Richard gets them from Simon and both companies have thumbs up ratings on BLF.

If you want the same type of light that's even brighter then go with the BLF A6 or Astrolux S1 (same light/different name).

Astrolux S1

You'll probably pay between $20-$30 for these and they already have the clip and tube.

Other options are Nitecore products like the SRT3, 5 or 7 or EA11 or EC11 depending on how big and what types of batteries. Nitecore will run you more $ however. But they are great lights.

And again, spend the extra $ and get GOOD lithium ion batteries from a trusted source like Richard above. DON'T GET THE CRAP XXXFIRE BATTERIES ON EBAY. Yeah, their cheap for a reason. Go with Samsung, Panasonic, Efest, Keeppower, King Kong, Nitecore etc. And get a good charger like a Nitecore:

Nitecore I2 & I4

No, don't have stock in any of the above. But I know a thing or three about flashlights. Hell, I can build/modify them when the mood strikes me.

 

[Psilent Knight]

@Kong Soo Do very informative post. There's only one part I wish to respond to:

There is NO WAY that light produces 2500 lumens on six 1.5V AAA batteries. If it produces even 500 lumens you'd be lucky.

You may be correct that it doesn't produce 2500 lumens. But I do have a flashlight that produces 500 lumens and that I-Zoom model is way brighter by a significantly noticeable margin. I was able to light up the entire block up the street from me with it during a power outage a couple of weeks ago. It's throw distance is also quite insane. Because of the size of the light and the batteries (6 AA) I'd say somewhere between 900 and 1,600 lumens MAY BE more accurate. And I think I'm being modest by going as low as 900 lumens.

BTW...magic beans are real my friend. A little fairy dude riding on a unicorn gave me some. Thanks to the power of those beans I can now perform no touch knockouts.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

What is the 500 lumen flashlight that you have? And remember, lumens are a little odd in that 1000 lumens isn't twice as bright as 500 lumens (as an example). If the I-Zoom is 900+ lumens then that's great.

I guess eating some beans would allow for a no-touch knock out...

 

[Psilent Knight]

@Kong Soo Do it's a SureBilt 500 Lumens. It's not too husky or heavy but it has some decent size and weight to it which is the primary reason I bought this particular flashlight. It is the one handheld light that I have that I can knock the hell out of somebody with. It's built to last. It takes 3 AA alkaline batteries and it's extra bright. And that I-Zoom model flashlight is at least double the brightness. I'm telling you it's seriously freakin' BRIGHT.

But regardless of the exact number of lumens of either one of these flashlights I'm not complaining because they are both pretty darn bright and they are more than sufficient for my purposes. As I see it bright is bright and a SUDDEN and UNEXPECTED flash of either one of them directly in the eyes of someone with night adapted vision will definitely do what I need them to do for me. And either one can be used to knock some sense into a would be aggressor.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

But regardless of the exact number of lumens of either one of these flashlights I'm not complaining because they are both pretty darn bright and they are more than sufficient for my purposes

That's the bottom line right there.

My personal on-body EDC is the Nitecore EA11. Can use either a AA or 14500 cell. With a good 14500 cell, reports are that the output exceeds the advertised 900 lumens. Regardless...it's like looking at the sun. Back up is the Nitecore SRT3. This one can hit 550 lumens but it's a cool light in that it can use AA, 14500, CR123 or RCR123 (16340) cells. They both have all the features I like (moon mode, turbo, memory, strobe, SOS and beacon).

 

[Psilent Knight]

At some point in the near future I definitely intend to check out those lights by Nitecore that you have. They sound awesome. Thanks for the recommendation and thanks for your informative posts in this thread.

 

[Psilent Knight]

I have a question I've not seen brought up yet in this discussion.

How many lumens do you all believe it takes to take away a person's night adapted vision with a tactical light? What is the minimum lumens output required for this?

 

[drop bear]

I have a question I've not seen brought up yet in this discussion.

How many lumens do you all believe it takes to take away a person's night adapted vision with a tactical light? What is the minimum lumens output required for this?

Its tricky. If you look at led lenser with its measly 300 lumens. it is a bit brighter and the beam goes further than the 1000 lumens nitecores.

P7.2 - Box

I still wouldn't bank on blinding for self defence. I would focus on being able to see well at night. You see a guy from a long way away you dont have to make as quick a decision as to what to do about him.

Or in my case i dont step on as many snakes.

 

[jobo]

Its tricky. If you look at led lenser with its measly 300 lumens. it is a bit brighter and the beam goes further than the 1000 lumens nitecores.

P7.2 - Box

I still wouldn't bank on blinding for self defence. I would focus on being able to see well at night. You see a guy from a long way away you dont have to make as quick a decision as to what to do about him.

Or in my case i dont step on as many snakes.

agree the best idea would be to leave the flash switched off and then hit him with it

 

[Psilent Knight]

I still wouldn't bank on blinding for self defence. I would focus on being able to see well at night. You see a guy from a long way away you dont have to make as quick a decision as to what to do about him.

Here is how I think the tactical flashlight should be used in descending order from the most preferable to the least preferable. By preferable I mean by conscious strategical decision. Why consciously choose to do #5 if you can safely do one of the first four?

1). To clear a dark area that you must navigate. You clear it BEFORE continuing your navigation through that area.

2). As a deterrence. If you are being threatened or feel uncomfortable with the movements or behavior of someone you shine the light in their eyes and take away their vision to keep them immobilized while you make good on your escape.

3). As a blinding tool to take away their night vision as you execute a quick "stun and run". You do this if you are past the 2nd stage listed above. With this method you flash 'em, then bash 'em and then run.

4). As a blinding tool to take away their night vision while you attack. You do this if you are past the 3rd stage listed above and find yourself having to engage in CQC to ensure your own or a loved one's safety. If doing this my preference is the light in my non dominant hand and another weapon in my dominant hand.

5). As an impact tool. This can be done with the light on or off. I will only do this if I do not have a weapon in my dominant hand and the flashlight is the only tool that I have at the moment.

I realize the circumstances will dictate how the light is employed. A person may suddenly find himself in the 4th or 5th stage without having the luxury of being to execute the first 3 or 4 stages. Sometimes it can't be helped and we cannot always dictate at what stage of a situation we will be in.