Why don't they put a picatinny rail on the top of pistols where the rear sight is, so you can attach a red dot...

But you can but aftermarket ones

Attached: Glock-SI-GSR13.jpg (1000x750, 229.12K)

It requires extra machining, which costs money.
It adds edges which can snag on holsters and clothing.
A lot of newer guns have specially milled sections for taking red dots which are much lower profile than rails.
A lot of slides are narrower than picatinny rails.

For one a big ass fucking red dot is going to be shit for carry gun ergonomics and handling. For two the iron sights are fine learn how to use them. It's like the fudd retards I know who mount scopes on every rifle they own and literally never go beyond 25 yards.

You clearly don't know what a fudd is.

Not trying to turn this into a dot va irons debate, but sure seems like red dots will be at the very least trialed by organizations in the near future. Whether they’re meme novelty or practical for self defense really hasn’t been figured out yet. Personally, I could care less either way. I have a 19MOS I put a Viper on for funsies, it was nifty but not sure I’d carry it all the time. I have a kydex IWB dremeled for it, no major issues drawing or snagging.

Like stated by others though, the market for top rails would probably be small. They catch on everything, and if you’re not actively using them, they’d be a pain in the dick. I’d assume standard irons wouldn’t clear them unless innovated a bit either. The current trend of mounts with cover plates is much more carry-friendly. Not to mention, most users probably aren’t putting anything on top of their handgun other than red dots, so there’s no real use for rails to accept other accessories.

Maybe if you’re going to hypothetically put a NFA scary foregrip or stock on your handgun they’d be convenient, but at that point there’s other firearms on the market that do that niche better in all ways.

The current studies on red dots show they are an adjustment that requires retraining to use effectively, especially in drawing and quickly acquiring targets. Individual conclusions I’ve read about are mixed. As a secondary weapon, it could be speculated they’re not super necessary when 9 times out of 10 a handgun is probably being point-n-shot at something very close range. The argument for using the window for easier point shooting acquisition is there, though.

I see people throwing up pics of sub compacts with dots on them, looks like it defeats the purpose of a sub at that point. I’m interested to see where the future will take this though. If it ends up being just a fad, maybe some other game changing solution will stem from it. Unless they’re outlawed as rifle-tier accessories, and then I’ll probably just end it all and reincarnate in a parallel universe where McDonald’s uses suppressors as drinking straws and dogs can talk.

Gotta be the same reason competitive archers use these meme non-sights. They don't fucking do anything, you might as well aim without them.

Attached: 175111_ts.jpg (1179x1766 74.6 KB, 69.93K)

Yeah that would be mallninja. A fudd, to his credit, would mount an appropriate scope and do without it altogether if ironsight is sufficient. A fudd is not someone who's incompetent, it's someone who's not interested in firearms beyond utilitary value as hunting and pest control tools.

Oh they're great for stand shooting, when you have plenty of time to aim - no doubt about that. The problem with quick aquisition is that when you draw a gun, 99% of the time you don't see the reticle immediately, it's just blank aperture. You already know the gun is pointing fuckways so you're not hitting shit, but at the same time you don't see nor intuitively know which way and how much adjustment you need to make to bring the aim to the center. At this point you have two options: to fuck about with the gun direction until you see the red dot, and to use some other backup sight to do coarse aiming which should bring up the reticle, which you then use for fine aiming.

Well I mean, with my large aperture rifle sight, a big reticle that I specifically selected for its size to increase my chance of catching it, and good deal of training, I see the reticle immediately 3 times out of 10 when I draw the gun. With a miniature pistol sight that has ⅓rd the viewport area, with a red dot that's a tiny fraction of the size of a crosshair reticle, and without appropriate training, your odds of pulling up a gun and immediately seeing the red dot in the aperture are pretty fucking slim.

Pic related is about what the reticle looks like in the aperture at extended arm length.

Attached: f92f9c9f2fd400b7f7a37d61df3e5781.image.733x550.jpg (733x550, 34K)

I thought it was playing to the stereotype of 'old blind fuck that needs 4x magnification to see the target'.

I'm not saying the scopes make the fudd, it's just that every fudd I've met does this.

Yeah, fair call. Gotta have at least 14x for a 60m shot on a deer.

not my fault. picatinny rails are plenty narrow enough.

What if you work in a liberal safe space and concealability is paramount?

every pistol nowadays has a full size, compact and subcompact version. have a tradition 3 dot sight and a picatinny for optic version.

Because that's where the rear sight goes, also red dots are retarded.

Do I have the gun for you, OP

Attached: Ultimate-Hi-Point-Dynamic-Pie-Concepts-RECOILweb-3-670x447.jpg (670x447, 48.76K)

Why do you say they don't do anything?

Why do the good die young? I still laugh at the Proctor video with gundam dubbed over it.

Remove front or rear sight from your rifle and try aiming. If you can hit your target accurately like that, clearly you don't need the other sight either.

Five seconds of research on google would have saved you from actually believing that you've figured something out that millions of archery practitioners have been missing. This is honestly priceless. You've uncovered the greatest shekel farm of our time user, fake bowsights! Wake up sheeple!

There is a rear sight, dipshit.

You mean the peep sight? My bad, I forgot it existed, on account of not seeing people using it very often, just the front sight. I also remember some guy shit talking a guy that put EOTech on a bow and couldn't hit anything, while he was using one of these ring sights and no peep sight and was doing great.