[section9]

According to a report I read, the M1911 has become the sidearm of choice once again for those who can get their hands on it. The M-9 just doesn't have the same stopping power as the M1911. Tommy Franks himself carried an M1911. When you are to the point where you are using a sidearm, you are not worrying about accuracy or kick so much as you are worried about stopping the jihadi who is fifteen feet away from you and closing fast. Several SF guys complained that they would have to tap a jihadi 3 times with the M-9, while a .45 would do the job with only one tap.

The most popular, iirc, has become everyone's favorite 1911, the Kimber .45. My friend the gunsmith, who is also a range safety officer for a PD down here, swears by the Kimber, as do plenty of others. My prediction? The M9 is quietly shelved as officers and NCO's start carrying the Kimber, NATO standard or no NATO standard.

The complaints about the composition of the gun oil have been confirmed to me by this friend of mine.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Travis McGee]

You are right on. Every special unit with their own weapons pipeline and budget uses on version or other of a .45 pistol. I can't think of a single exception.

The dirty truth is the 9mm was selected because most of our lady soldierettes couldn't rack the slide on the .45 or shoot it without flinching.

How can the crack troops guar a gate if they can't load their .45? So it went.

[Hat-Trick]

pleased as punch with my new Kimber Ultra-Tactical II.

[R. Scott]

I had no qualms about the 1911’s accuracy. While on a Combat Pistol Team I had the pleasure of teaching handgun marksmanship to the Company’s officers.
Every one of them parroted the same old crap about it “not being able to hit the side of a barn”.
Every one of them walked away after qualifying raving about how accurate and easy to use it was.
All it took was a little bit of training – about an hour.