[nothing]

Originally Posted by CBennett

Well ive always felt and still do that if your going to be in the armed forces there should be 1 OVERALL(by age) STANDARD that should be met for physical fitness AND weapons qualification...if you cant meet them you need not be in the military..again just my opinion. especially in a combat related MOS..If you want keep the M9 in the loop(as there are already tons of them inservice anyways) for female troops and then use the .45 ACP for the males..thats what they used to do.....45 ACP for males .38 special for females.

There is one standard, male or female. I see plenty of males that shoot like 12 year old girls. Has nothing to do with strength or PT. it's a systemic lack of fundamentals.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...d9dSEm3R3P24pg

[Boats]

Originally Posted by dpadams6

You would think that with those kind of statistics there would be a ton of citizens and police in the Usa carrying those. But there's not. I don't know one person that carries a beretta. WHY?

Why? I'd hazard a guess that there are no men in your social circles. Some chest shaving ladyboys maybe, but no actual men of the old school.

Back when police departments actually paid for their weapons the 92FS was a popular police sidearm. Now you see a bunch of non-shooters carrying "free" lowest common denominator plastic garbage and panic shooting at suspects 60-200 times while scoring three peripheral hits.

Ever see anyone attempting a pistol whipping with a polymer zip gun? It looks like the start of a chick fight. It looks like soccer if only soccer were more butch.

Man up. Get a Beretta 92FS, but only if have hands that can handle a buxom American woman assets. If you can only palm a tennis ball, stay home on your dainty laptop sized keyboard and continue to disparage one of the greatest 9mm pistols ever devised.

[NEOH212]

Sig's or HK's of course!

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by Boats

Why? I'd hazard a guess that there are no men in your social circles. Some chest shaving ladyboys maybe, but no actual men of the old school.

Back when police departments actually paid for their weapons the 92FS was a popular police sidearm. Now you see a bunch of non-shooters carrying "free" lowest common denominator plastic garbage and panic shooting at suspects 60-200 times while scoring three peripheral hits.

Ever see anyone attempting a pistol whipping with a polymer zip gun? It looks like the start of a chick fight. It looks like soccer if only soccer were more butch.

Man up. Get a Beretta 92FS, but only if have hands that can handle a buxom American woman assets. If you can only palm a tennis ball, stay home on your dainty laptop sized keyboard and continue to disparage one of the greatest 9mm pistols ever devised.

[unit1069]

Originally Posted by gatorboy

I think the cartridge (.357sig) would work great, maybe add the 31 to the prospect list.

My thinking is that since 9mm has been working very well for over 100 years the 9mm Magnum (.357sig) is just more of a good thing. Whether one likes it or not there's hardly any dispute that the caliber shoots accurately as a any handgun caliber and has a barrier penetration second to none among common duty caliber weapons. It makes a lot of sense to me for military application where FMJ is required, and the recoil isn't as much as .40S&W or .45ACP.

[camaro_dave]

Originally Posted by unit1069

My thinking is that since 9mm has been working very well for over 100 years the 9mm Magnum (.357sig) is just more of a good thing. Whether one likes it or not there's hardly any dispute that the caliber shoots accurately as a any handgun caliber and has a barrier penetration second to none among common duty caliber weapons. It makes a lot of sense to me for military application where FMJ is required, and the recoil isn't as much as .40S&W or .45ACP.

exactly. as i stated in my last post if i were stuck with a 9mm i listed my weapons. if .357 sig was allowed i would for sure pick the P226 or even the slightly smaller P229 (my favorite carry piece btw).

[faawrenchbndr]

Oops,........wrong page

[jwhite75]

The Glock 17 makes a lot of sense, as the Glock 9mm is being used in so many of the countries we are "saving". It just makes logistical sense in some terms.

I know there are a lot of people who think we should have some rugged reliable all metal pistol and it should be USA made. Its a great idea in theory.

Truth is the Glock is the most reliable and easily maintained handgun platform in the world. Like it or not. That includes the M&P. Glock 17 or 19.

[craig19]

If we are staying with 9mm there is no need to dump billions of dollars to replace the M9, that is a huge waste of money. I was issued an M9 for a while, and carried one in Iraq for a couple of months, I see no reason to replace it with another 9mm.

If switching from 9mm to something else, then fine, look at something else. I like my M&P 40 a lot, I think that in a 40, or 45 would be a good fit.

[Ruggles]

I vote M9, it really has served well IMO. There are equally good choices but I really can't think of many that simply outclass it.

[countrygun]

If ease of cleaning, and even reliability were the most important criteria the military would carry AKs.

As much as fans of the 92 may boo and hiis, it didn't sweep all the categories during the trials. I don't see "the US military pistol of the future" out there for sure. Like I said a CZ would be my suggestion, but then again then my best friend completed his first enlistment almost 30 years ago (In what would end up being his career) he remarked that in his opinion was that, at that time, the Star PD would have been a good choice, and he was only half kidding. Small, light, big bullets,

[porschedog]

Glock 21!!

[banger]

Let see if I've got this right....

You want to S---Can hundreds of thousands of perfectly good and reliable combat pistols.....

To do what?

Replace them with hundreds of thousands of perfectly good and reliable combat pistols.

How can this plan be seen as anything other than a monumental waste of tax payer money?

[DoubleWide]

Glock 20. I really don't see a hot 10mm as a problem. More power, good capacity.

[ParisArms]

Originally Posted by faawrenchbndr

For it's intended use, the M9 is outstanding! Would be better if JHP were possible.

NATO rule, no expanding bullets



Glock

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by banger

Let see if I've got this right....

You want to S---Can hundreds of thousands of perfectly good and reliable combat pistols.....

To do what?

Replace them with hundreds of thousands of perfectly good and reliable combat pistols.

How can this plan be seen as anything other than a monumental waste of tax payer money?

I have heard reports that the "sandbox" has not been kind to our current supply, so it wouldn't surprise me to hear of another trial series. By the time they finish that, there will be even more wear and tear on them. Individual weapons are one place I don't complain about "spending" money. I still don't like "wasting it".

[samuse]

I think the M9 is a damn fine pistol.

It does what it's supposed to do and it does it well.

I like the M9 and I think it would be a HUGE waste of money to change to a different gun when none of the other guns available really do anything any better than the one they're using now. Hell, a DA/SA Beretta 92 won the world in IPSC last year right?

[fnfalman]

So, female soldiers can hump a ruck for 10-miles, shoot M203, machine guns, .50Cal sniper rifles but they can't handle the massive recoil power of the .45ACP round?

[fnfalman]

I totally agree, though the guns must be nickel plated for corrosion resistance.

A) It looks cool.

B) It's just about as useful as any current pistols for military application.

C) It's American.

Originally Posted by IndianaMatt

[ColdSteelNail]

Sig P226MK. If it's good enough for the Seals it should be good enough for any fighting force. Considering the trials they put their candidates through imagine what they must put their handgun and other equipment through. They probably will consider the .40 or .45 though.

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by fnfalman

I totally agree, though the guns must be nickel plated for corrosion resistance.

A) It looks cool.

B) It's just about as useful as any current pistols for military application.

C) It's American.

Save a fortune in magzines too pardner

[ColdSteelNail]

Originally Posted by banger

Let see if I've got this right....

You want to S---Can hundreds of thousands of perfectly good and reliable combat pistols.....

To do what?

Replace them with hundreds of thousands of perfectly good and reliable combat pistols.

How can this plan be seen as anything other than a monumental waste of tax payer money?

From what I read in Army Times is that so many of their weapons have and are reaching the end of their lives that now is the time to consider a new platform. This doesn't mean that Baretta is out of the running and may very well be chosen again. They had a list of guns in the running. I don't remember all but Glock, M&P, Sig P226, Sig P229 and Beretta were among them.

[copo9560]

Anything in 10mm - would be nice to be able to shoot surplus ammo cheap.

[samuse]

When you look at what it takes to change platforms, new M9s would look cheap.

Think about it. It's staggering to think about how huge of an undertaking it would be.

Hell, Beretta has made a few subtle refinements to the 92fs since they first started producing them, but they still have to produce the original version because the slanted dustcover and radiused backstrap are not in the original TDP...

[dsa1115]

Sig 220