Tweet
It looks like our government is looking at retiring the old 9mm Beretta and some Sig's. Article in Fox News said their are complaints about the 9mm requiring several shots to stop some one and the open slide on the Beretta allowing to much dirt to enter the gun and causing functioning problems. Geeze, big surprise? So sad, i wonder how many American lives were lost because of this. Open slides and 9mm ball ammo are a poor choice. I don't understand war, I thought the idea was to kill more of the enemy so they would surrender. If they are going to continue using ball ammo then they should ask Glock to build them a single stack .45 with a 5" barrel and be done with it. Fortunately most warriors use a rifle. If our government can crap out over 3 billion in a hurry to spend on illegals, we should be able to pick out a pistol in a reasonable amount of time. They should let our nations Special Operators pick the pistol and caliber, Navy Seals, Delta Force, etc. I should be in charge of this and not the politicians.
-
-
Some of the men have been getting NEW 1911's does that count?sigpic
www.aluminumalloyboats.com -
NOPE...! The 1911 is over a 100 years old and used by the military for the same length of time; and has been manufactured by everybody for years. NOW...the new Glock 45 auto long-slide would be a "NEW" gun for the military; they haven't had them before.OR the 10mm in a long-slide version would be very impressive as a military sidearm.Originally posted by pacific23 View PostComment
-
A sidearm is an Oh Sh@@ gun in the military. I believe one reason for going with 9mm was uniformity with NATO countries? .45 is a beast and I love the 1911 platform. However our politicians are involved and there is no telling when a new sidearm is adopted. I first read this report quite a few years ago and if memory serves correctly the Marines did start reissuing the 1911. With drawbacks and withdrawal on horizon I doubt the politicians will move on this.Originally posted by .338 mag. View PostComment
-
[QUOTE=. I believe one reason for going with 9mm was uniformity with NATO countries? [/QUOTE]
This is the very reason America should worry more about OUR troops instead of NATO troops! If we are the gold standard they should get in line with us. Not Nato, the UN or any other group of peoples. I hate to hear of American troops under a Soviet(or any other nations) general. Just who do you think they would set out, if the feces hits the fan? But Obama and Hill have different thoughts about this, just look at Bengazi.
Steve"The Original Point and Click Interface was a Smith & Wesson."Comment
-
The loss of life due to the new AR's were up there for sure.Now left only to be a turd in the forrest and the circle will be complete.Use me as I have used youComment
-
At the time of NATO's forming the USSR was the main threat.Originally posted by S.B. View Post
regardless...our our ammo size of choice isn't the greatest. Hasn't been since the 60s.Comment
-
Hopefully, whatever gets chosen, they ditch the FMJ and go with an effective bullet. I go back to the Model 10 with a FMJ 150 gr and the 1911 and an FMJ there too. A decent bullet is the answer regardless of the caliber.
Like they say...I carry a 45 'cuz they don't make a 46...althought, I've come to like a real 10mm, not the 40 S&W.Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Lowrider View PostThey can't "ditch the FMJ" and they are going to continue to use the FMJ. The Geneva Convention and the Laws Of Armed Conflict (LOAC) require the use of FMJ bullets. FMJ ammo does less damage to a person and is, somehow, more "humane." The old philosophy was if you wounded an enemy combatant, you removed three combatants from the field-the one you wounded plus two to carry him back to an aid station. Obviously, the times have changed, but the US is still a signatory to the Geneva Convention.Originally posted by .338 mag. View Post
By the way, all of the military's rifle ammo is "ball" ammo, too.Comment
-
Beat me to it!! Rep points sent!Originally posted by Amigo Will View Post
How many guys died face down in the mud in Vietnam with a cleaning rod stuffed down the barrel of their POS M-16. And, somehow, that is THE longest serving military service arm in US history. Go figure.Comment
-
Have you heard Putin, lately?Originally posted by Yukon Cornelius View Post
Steve"The Original Point and Click Interface was a Smith & Wesson."Comment
-
My Springfield 1911 is my favorite pistol and the 9mm with a +p+ 127 grain hollow point is a decent hand gun combo at reasonable pistol ranges. A Glock is easier for shooters to learn, should be as reliable as a 1911 and should be lighter and cheaper. It is also warmer to the bare hand in cold weather and the big trigger area and trigger is more user friendly to a gloved shooter then a 1911. A .45 will never leave less then a .45 caliber hole, as we all know. "Special Forces/Team Guys" should always be allowed to carry what they want.Comment
-
.338, ever heard of the Versailles(sp?) treaty. in war, no hollow points allowed. Why the .45ACP, and still is, the best choice, in many opinions. Talk to combat experienced veterans not the behind the lines guys. It's been doing it for over a century. Don't listen to todays gun scribes either.
Steve"The Original Point and Click Interface was a Smith & Wesson."Comment
-
Neither the Versailles treaty nor the Geneva conventions say anything about ammo. That's an old rumor.
The Hague conventions prohibit the use of expanding ammo, but the US did not agree to that stipulation. There are several instances where US military uses expanding ammo. I carried hollowpoints in my M9, and several units use 77 gr OTM bullets in 223ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕComment
Comment