I agree that the .45 is the answer, but what about weight? We got women now, and the wrists of some of the men aren’t as rigid as they ought to be (limper).
The .45 tends to be a heavy gun. Can you get the weight down and not sacrifice accuracy/stability?
Weight is actually an advantage in recoil management, but you have to balance that against the disadvantage of toting a heavy piece. I taught a neighbor lady to shoot who tried all the lightweight purse guns in the display and settled on a full-size Browning Hi-Power because she could shoot the nipples off a gnat at 10 yards with it. She said to heck with it, she’d carry it.
“The .45 tends to be a heavy gun. Can you get the weight down and not sacrifice accuracy/stability?”
The Army says they want more power and especially if they end up fighting “lawfull combatants” and have to use hardball, .45 does seem like the right answer. But, one of the complaints I have heard about the Beretta is that it is too heavy. A pistol, any pistol, tends to be carried a lot more than it is ever fired. I’ve seen the “Glock torture tests” and I’m wondering if a Glock 21 might be the answer. I know, no safety. Seems like police departments have made their peace with that. Some are even saying that DA/SA, mechanical safeties, etc. just require extra training.