Originally Posted by LA_357SIG
What exactly were you expecting. You wanted info on a certian optic? You do the research. My statement referred to optics in general. Unless you can prove optics do not malfunction, then your response to my statement was pointless, or you were attempting to start an arguement.
And where did I say optics weren't ideal? I did say in certian situations they were an advantage. Speed is not always better. Precision in most cases is.
I asked you for some supporting evidence to your statement. It was a general question. I supplied a specific optic hoping it might make your job of finding supporting evidence. I expected that you had none and I was correct.
You mention that RDS brake and irons rarely do. This would lead one to believe you feel optics fail more than rarely. I want to know where you found this information as I have never had a quality optic fail let alone more frequently than rarely.
You made the statement therefore the burden of proof falls on you. I was very polite about it but received the response I expected. Meaning I knew you had no experience or were in possession of any technical data to back your claim.
I didn't say you said they were not ideal. You said they were ideal in certain situations. That means there are situations you feel they are not. I was curious as to the situations you felt they were not.
So a magnified optic is less accurate than iron sights?