“Army’s main concerns with the M9 are that it’s insufficiently accurate, lethal, and reliable for the service’s purposes”
What kind of tests did the Pentagon put the Beretta through that they couldn’t figure it out before they decided to buy it?
Shouldn’t “accurate, lethal and reliable” be a requirement for every gun they put into service?
Apparently, it’s been fine since 1986 or so according to the article. Then, all of a sudden, it’s not good enough.
LOL. We are talking the government here. You could almost put a sarcasm tag after that question.
It’s reliable and accurate. But they chose 9mm for the wrong reasons. The Beretta is also a heavy SOB.
IIRC, the criteria was compatibility with the euro-weenie 9mm NATO cartridge, and reduced recoil for the anticipated influx of female military. (And now the homosexuals are reaping the benefit of not hurting their wrists)
“What kind of tests did the Pentagon put the Beretta through that they couldn’t figure it out before they decided to buy it?”
I have read that the major criterion was that it had to be “compatible” with the NATO countries. Since they all use 9mm, we settled on that round. Beretta makes fine guns, but 9mm was a step backward for our military.
Someone ought to develop a semi-auto in 45 caliber.
That should have some stopping power.
Congress should conduct a study!
Didn't you read the next sentence?