Mr Rogers, you are absolutely correct! I hate the M9. If I had my way, I would have carried my Randall 45; only because its so cool and manly.
But this is about wasting valuable National Resources on a fix that does not exist. Every Marine I EVER met wants to carry a 45; who could blame them. Somebody has to be the guy to say “Sorry Boys” there is just no data that indicates that our current pistol does not meet the requirement.
I’ve Never see a singly guy outside the wire, without a PSD, who did not have a M4/M16A4. So why are we wasting this money??
I’d have preferred to carry a couple of Ruger SuperBlackhawks. I shoot better with them than an M9 and they would have looked way cooler. Made more noise, too!
The guys I talked to figured the M9 was there for style points, and so you could kill yourself seconds before being captured...none of the guys I knew wanted to try being a Taliban prisoner. But I was a Lt Col, 49 years old and doing staff garbage at the time, so I could count my trips off the FOB on the fingers of one hand.
My SIL was Marine Infantry. IIRC, he said he never fired an M9 in combat.
” I would have carried my Randall 45;”
I’m a port sider and have two left handed Randall’s. Have the Match (adjustable rear sight). And, also the Curtis LaMay. I pack the LaMay quite often. Wish Randall had not gone under :(
Because you can't live on a congressman or senator's salary in DC.