I'd recommend saving your money and spend it on something more useful.
Moonclip capability sounds nice, but considering the fragility of the clips themselves and the potential reliability issues whether using the clips or not, I think a gun cut for moonclips is most suited for gun games and best avoided on a personal defense weapon.
A lot of fuss is made over sights, but the reality is that they really are not all that relevant in the vast majority of armed defense scenarios in which a civilian would be involved. And the incidents where sights might be useful, night sights would be of no added benefit over standards ones. For civilian personal defense, threat focused shooting is the norm and is almost always preferred considering the reactive nature of such events and the distances at which they occur. And while I think it is possible to align the sights while visually focused on a target in a controlled range environment, such is not likely the case in a dynamic one where you will rely primarily on physical indexing methods and the guns silhouette superimposed on the threat and I don't think sights contribute anything meaningful to aiming the weapon in this manner.
Just as a revolution occurred in the martial arts after the rise of NHB/MMA, I sometimes think something similar needs to happen with the shooting arts.
With reality-based and Force-on-Force training steadily gaining greater acceptance and credibility among reputable instructors who are starting to understand its value, it could be said it has already begun to some degree, but there are still countless holdouts who think the lessons learned are somehow invalid or that everything you could ever need to know about defensive shooting can be learned by static range work. And unless participants actually start using live ammo in FoF so that there is absolutely no doubt regarding the results, widespread acceptance will continue to be a gradual and relatively slow process. While FoF isn't the end all, be all(the same applies to MMA in relation to H2H) in the context of training for personal defense, it's about the best simulation currently available in terms of realistic training and everyone would be wise to learn and understand at least some portion of the useful elements that have been derived from it and apply it to their own training methods and preparedness plan. I think doing so would radically change opinions just as the UFC did with the martial arts.
If we take what we have learned from Force-on-Force and combine it with an analysis of real world events, it becomes clear what role handgun sights(in general and in particular night sights) actually play in civilian personal defense encounters, which is actually a relatively minor one.
Moonclip capability sounds nice, but considering the fragility of the clips themselves and the potential reliability issues whether using the clips or not, I think a gun cut for moonclips is most suited for gun games and best avoided on a personal defense weapon.
A lot of fuss is made over sights, but the reality is that they really are not all that relevant in the vast majority of armed defense scenarios in which a civilian would be involved. And the incidents where sights might be useful, night sights would be of no added benefit over standards ones. For civilian personal defense, threat focused shooting is the norm and is almost always preferred considering the reactive nature of such events and the distances at which they occur. And while I think it is possible to align the sights while visually focused on a target in a controlled range environment, such is not likely the case in a dynamic one where you will rely primarily on physical indexing methods and the guns silhouette superimposed on the threat and I don't think sights contribute anything meaningful to aiming the weapon in this manner.
Just as a revolution occurred in the martial arts after the rise of NHB/MMA, I sometimes think something similar needs to happen with the shooting arts.
With reality-based and Force-on-Force training steadily gaining greater acceptance and credibility among reputable instructors who are starting to understand its value, it could be said it has already begun to some degree, but there are still countless holdouts who think the lessons learned are somehow invalid or that everything you could ever need to know about defensive shooting can be learned by static range work. And unless participants actually start using live ammo in FoF so that there is absolutely no doubt regarding the results, widespread acceptance will continue to be a gradual and relatively slow process. While FoF isn't the end all, be all(the same applies to MMA in relation to H2H) in the context of training for personal defense, it's about the best simulation currently available in terms of realistic training and everyone would be wise to learn and understand at least some portion of the useful elements that have been derived from it and apply it to their own training methods and preparedness plan. I think doing so would radically change opinions just as the UFC did with the martial arts.
If we take what we have learned from Force-on-Force and combine it with an analysis of real world events, it becomes clear what role handgun sights(in general and in particular night sights) actually play in civilian personal defense encounters, which is actually a relatively minor one.
