I advocate knowing how to use Lights and Lasers, but also to be proficient at shooting through a NV compatible optic like an aimpoint out to 200 meters with no IR light or laser.

Back in the 80's some old SF vets took us out in the middle of the night to a range wherein there was targets with the little "fishing" 2 or 3 inch Cyalume lightsticks taped to the center of cardboard silhouettes. No external light sources, flashlights were not allowed and  none of us had any NV in the 80's. One of the guys asked what was the point of the cyalume sticks and one of the SF guys that was a Vietnam vet explained that often times this is all you have at night for a target indicator. The lightstick was to simulate muzzle flash and that was what he meant when he said sometimes that's all you have as a target indicator.

We learned to shoot and hit with iron sights (no optics) those targets. It's not as easy as it would sound. I've since used the same drill dozens of times teaching people this same thing and it's always funny to hear some people say "20 yards? No way I won't hit the target" and then go and see a clean target after a half a magazine.

This is where we started and I'll glad we learned that way first. Some of those old Vietnam era vets knew their way around the night without the modern equipment we have now. We spent tons of training time at night without NV back then (no one had any back then).

If you take that sort of training and add in modern equipment, the results are excellent IMO.

However the opposite is true. I've worked with people that despite having $3K of NV assisting their vision, were almost ineffective at night in the field. Often times city folks, not used to being outside at night where it's truly dark, psychological issues with night, lack of automaticity with weapon skills, as well as basic stuff like just not knowing how to walk around at night. The "wizard eye" as some call it can only help you so much if your psyche is freaking out cause your not used to being in the woods at night without tons of light (IR or white).

IMO, people compensate with IR light sources more than necessary. IR laser, yeah definitely and use it correctly. Being lit up like an IR Christmas tree for no reason, not always a good idea. Every Joe Schmoe with a $200. Russsian Breakalotski NV model can see that. Use IR sparingly.

If you're in an armed profession, I think it's extremely important to know how to roll passive and to be proficient at it.

While I still advocate for the use of IR laser and IR illum (not to mention white light) when the situation dictates, as "enemies, foreign or domestic" continue to learn and evolve and become better equipped with each passing day, the situations where "going passive" will be desirable will increase, IMHO.

Beyond that, for me at least, it's easier to take low-percentage shots passively than when using the laser, especially when using something like an EOTech where you can use the 65 MOA ring to judge your offsets, and I find that my presentation and acquisition is not perceptibly slower or more difficult than during daytime.

~Augee