Replies

I hesitate to start out with saying that "you're wrong", but the heck with it: You're wrong (and clearly have no idea how firearms and ammo are specified, designed, approved and tested.) It isn't "bureaucrats and secretaries"; it's engineers, laboratories, firing range technicians and thousands of hours required to make sure we get what we're paying for to keep our Marines and soldiers alive.

You haven't been involved with this vital piece of work but you have to have heard of the disaster we had with the M-16 and its shoddy initial design and the lives it cost - and I'm fairly sure you never heard of the problems we've had with garbage 40mm grenade launcher ammo from Milan Army Ammunition Depot that cost some Marines and soldiers parts of their bodies because it went off in the barrel.

If the careful and responsible development of weapon systems and their ammunition adds some costs to weapon acquisition, so what? We're talking about our kids' lives here. Which would you rather pay - $1,700 per pistol or tell some kid's Mom he or she died because his idiot pistol failed?

Personally, I don't care if the new weapon costs tens of thousands of dollars per Marine or soldier as long as we are lead-pipe sure that the son of a gun fires every time they pull the trigger.

As a patriotic American, I'm sure that's your priority too.

Ditto...... If ones looks at current "new" on the commercial market like S&W's clone of the 1911A1 and the SIG Granite Series 1911A1 copies and Glocks GAP efforts . Add that new development to the fact that the M9 is reaching it's end of service life contract and all but snuffy smiths are packing an old slabsided 1911A1's.........Then the 45 auto is on the way back IMHO and the pistola pirates smell contract over the horizon.

Stay Safe !

The mistake you make is to assume that because it's the military then waste, fraud and abuse is OK. How are you going to explain to a mother that her son was killed because they only bought 1,100 pistols and her son didn't get one, when they could have gotten 2 or 3 times as many, just as good, and equipped more Marines?

You say you don't care how much a weapons system costs, but we're not talking about Star Wars here, we're talking about a handgun. We can save money and equip more soldiers if smart purchasing decisions are made and reasonable cost controls are in place.

You tell me now, how is it that we're spending over $400 billion per year on defense and they haven't added one new division? I think we're getting cheated and it's harming our defense and the soldiers themselves.

This $1,700 pistol is a perfect example. You can spend 1/2 the amount: $850, get an excellent .45, and equip twice as many Marines. You say I don't know anything about procurement. Maybe, but I know plenty about firearms, and there's no rational reason to equip soldiers with top-notch custom guns, which is what you get for $1,700. Are they using them in competition? For the price of this contract you could probably enlist 50 more Marines.

Anyway, they're supposed to be relying their rifles. Replace that junker M16 if you really want to help them.