Departmental policy on red dots

Can we get a thread going of police departments that allow, or issue red dots and parts of the policy pertaining to the use of dots. Ive noticed most departments when thinking about changing the policy want to see examples of how other departments are doing it, and i think having a place to see a list of departments, and what policy's are in place may help officers write policy and departments to swich to them easier.


I'm also interested in seeing a thread pertaining to this matter because my agency will be making the switch to red dots on service pistols for all qualified officers. There isn't much enthusiasm that I'm hearing from most officers but that's a different subject altogether.

Currently, all armory/firearms instructor staff must complete 40 hours of instruction from a particular instructor and then they must complete the same instructor's red dot instruction course in order to be qualified to teach staff. This is just the agency I work for but I have seen other agencies in our area with red dots; I can't speak to what they do or what their policy says.


After digging through my agency's policy on red dot sights for duty handguns (actual policy name), the requirement for officers to carry a red dot consists of two parts; classroom instruction (2 hours) and live-fire training (8 hours). The classroom section covers "RDS advantages/disadvantages", "malfunction causes and remedies", and "red dot/iron sight relationship".
The live-fire section is made up of 7 sections; "establishing sight picture", "target focus marksmanship", "acquiring the RDS", "optic malfunction", "use under low light", "one hand shooting and manipulations", and a qualification to finish up.

The section of policy covering red dot optics on duty pistols isn't descriptive as to how the live-fire objectives are conducted; just seems to be more of a layout for obtaining qualification. I work in the detention side of the agency and what we do is closely mirrored by what patrol side does as far as firearms instruction is concerned. With that being said, (Insert State of residence) Peace Officer certificated courses seem to be the only way anyone of consequence will listen and implement changes especially to firearms related policy.

I hope this is somewhat of a help or at the very least a minor contribution to what you're trying to accomplish.
Thank you very much, it does help certainly. I have pretty much been told that "realistically no departments are actually equipping red dots" despite the numerous articles I have pulled up and shown the Sargent who is pretty much in charge of what we get and whatnot. Im hoping if i get enough responses showing actual policy from actual officers that i can get the ball rolling at my department


Reach out to Aaron Cowan of Sage Dynamics and/or Jim Dexter of Tactically Sound.

Both of them are happy to share their resources/paper/policy/leg work they have done on agency red dot stuff.
I have heard of both of them, but ill definitely find a way to reach out to them, as well as check out the resources they have on the websites, thank you


At the end of the whitepaper, he actually lists agencies + contacts that already use red dots:

In-Use Agency Contacts
Below is a list of points of contact for agencies already using MRDS duty guns in full, part, or optional
to the officer.

I thought I had seen something, but just checked. Might be what you're looking for!
Hey all…first post here. My agency (mid-sized) just replaced our Gen3 GLOCK21’s with Gen5 GLOCK 17’s with RMR06’s for all personnel. It wasn’t a hard sell once some of the instructors did a side-by-side with the 21’s, iron-sighted 17’s, and the RMR’s. We require that zeroing be done only with agency firearms instructors and no removal of the RMR outside of annual inspection/battery replacement, and when being compensated, you must use the agency holster (Safariland 7TS). All officers had to complete a full 12-hour transition course and all new officers complete the same course during in-house orientation.

I will be honest…as one of the most senior firearms instructors at my agency, as well as being the lead armorer, I was against the decision when it was first brought up because it put us so far over budget and I was looking at how few officers are gun people that will train and looking at the long-term maintenance issues. Some of those fears were put aside, but I still want to see how enthusiastic officers are once the RMR’s aren’t the shiny new toy. It is clear that there are benefits, especially for mediocre shooters at distance, but it is clear that on-going, frequent training will be a necessity to remain competent.
Thank you very much for your response, was it difficult to write in new policy concerning maintenance and such, or was pretty much the whole department on board? Also how easy did officers find the original course that tought them about the red dots?


As a fly on the wall, it is SUPER interesting to see inside how agencies make these decisions. As a civilian, I had of course assumed that all cops are expert marksmen. But makes sense that there are varying degrees of interest/skill even among police. Thanks for the cool insights!
The policy was super straightforward and simple and there was no dissention among those that were involved. It was only adding a couple lines or two to our existing firearms policy. We did not want anyone tinkering around with the sights and possibly stripping screws, not torquing them properly, and possibly messing up their zero. There were some people that wanted to buy the latest and greatest tacticool holsters for use at training or in plainclothes, but once they used the 7TS paddle holster, no one is complaining, especially because they can keep the TLR-1 on it. At the end of the day, it’s a high-liability topic and we weren’t going to really get input from those not involved in the upkeep or training aspect of the guns.

In regards to the transition course, it was well-received. We covered topics like those presented in a post above in areas such as: manual of arms/operation, presentations, slide manipulation, backup sights, malfunctions, moving and shooting, target transitions, and the capabilities of the sight and parallax. At the end of the day, I think almost everyone felt comfortable and confident, especially with distance shooting, however most acknowledge that on-going training is a must. In a perfect world, I would say at least quarterly, but dry practice like draw/presentation could happen daily if they cared enough to do it on their own. The biggest improvement people noted wasn’t even the move to the RDS, but just a more ergonomic handgun going from the brick of a G21 to the slimmer G17.

In regards to cops being expert marksmen, I would say there are some that do well, and some that barely qualify. Even the good shooters or the guys on SWAT aren’t necessarily “gun guys” and just use what they are given as a tool. There is no lack of opinion by people that think they know, but the reality is that outfitting an entire agency with reliable and durable gear that fits in a budget isn’t always the same as what the instagrammers or youtube guys do. We aren’t getting our slides milled by a high-end outfit, nor are we swapping parts and getting the frames stippled and cut. Simple, efficient, and low-maintenance is the name of the game with me.


dry practice like draw/presentation could happen daily if they cared enough to do it on their own.
Have you given everyone a copy of e.g. Refinement and Repetition by Steve Anderson, or another dry fire practice book? Might be a worthwhile investment at $27/person even if only 10% actually practice.