Posted on 01/15/2015 9:47:42 AM PST by shove_it
He said hopefully... LOL, you’re a hoot. I doubt they have that foresight though. I suspect it’ll be 9mm as most (all?) of our current/potential allies use it. A better platform would nice though. The Glock or SIG DAO/DAK would be my choice but then again the military still lives back in the early 1900s where small arms are concerned. Im sure it’ll have to have a manual safety, be all metal and be hard and expensive to maintain. :(
I certainly understand youre tendency toward 357SIg. I like it myself very much with 40 S&W as a second choice then 9mm. I prefer a SIG DAK or Glock.
A Glock in.45acp would be a better choice than any 9mm I can think of. A return to the 1911 is politically impossible.
The only problem with the Glocks is that I’m sure the military will require some sort of manual safety.
I agree with the need to re-evaluate, but I think it’s time to question the need at all —how many times a sidearm has even been used by a soldier in the last forty years and the circumstances, and re-evaluate if we even need them. My guess is such instances are astronomically rare, and even in those rare instances it was used only because for that duty position/billet it was the only weapon issued/available and a carbine or shotgun would be much more effective.
...which brings me to another topic - I think we should consider expanding ammunition for military pistols. The U.S. isn’t a signatory to the first Hague Convention that prohibited it for reasons that seemed sound a century ago but are now a little questionable. The second Hague Convention, which the U.S. did sign, doesn’t prohibit it IIRC. Anyone who knows more about that, I’d be delighted to learn.
It's a wonderful caliber. It's high velocity, high energy, relatively small and light weight, and the bottle necked design makes for more reliable chambering (in theory).
It reminds me of the Tokarev round.
I am not a vet, so this may sound like a stupid question. How often are sidearms used in modern warfare? At what range are they effective?
In a combat situation handguns are your “Oh **** I’m going to die!” weapon. And most engagements are within feet.
L
Now, the only units using 1911s used to be the USMC special operations units - the Force Recon Marines, who used Colt 1911s to great effect. However, when the Corps realize they were missing out on missions because Force Recon was not a part of SOCCOM, they decided to create a new Special Operations group ...and MARSOC was born. Now, this meant that there were still Force Recon (totally under the Corps), and MARSOC that could be tasked by SOCCOM. This also meant that there were a lot of people who required those Colt 1911s, and usage of that sidearm by MARSOC has been going down.
The 1911 works great and is an amazing firearm (better than my $2,941 Glock 19 ....weird story on that), but chances of them ever being adopted widely are next to zero. Same goes for adoption of the .45.
http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/7-G34512
C'mon, give.
I once tried to get a product through the military approval system. By the time it was ready every general had to have their say and sprinkle pee all over the design. It was useless and I stopped wasting my time.
Now, with Obama’s all gay all the time military, it will need to approve the all tranny general staff. Who knows what they come up wit.
Getting a license in my country (and a license is required to legally own a firearm) is a long and difficult process, and once (if) someone gets it then one has to purchase the firearm from one of a smattering of legalised shops. This means the pricing power is strongly in the hands of the dealers, and that is how 550 Dollar Glocks end up costing just under three grand. As for rounds, getting quality rounds is next to impossible and most licensed people have to do with S&B and Fiocchi JHPs from Europe. Not bad rounds (and I believe Trayvon Martin was done in with a 115gr S&B), but nowhere near the likes of a Federal HST, Winchester Ranger T or Speed Gold Dot. I was fortunate enough to (somehow ...) come across some Ranger Bonded, but that’s another story I would be foolish to get into. Anyways, the price of those S&Bs ...even the FMJ for practice ...is over a Dollar per round!
Anyways, getting my license was one of the happiest days of my life, and even with the prices of ammo (and everything else) I am happy to be able to protect myself and my fellow citizens.
Shame about the politics of the 1911. First pistol I was allowed to use. Father required me to know the weapon. When I could field strip and reassemble it blindfold on the kitchen table, we finally went to the range. That chunk of steel will always have a special place in my heart.
This pistol in .40cal (Model 96)would be a jewel.
All those calibers won’t go thru body armor. 9mm is a common round found all over the world. They should go with Glocks.
Loads of females in uniforms that won’t be able to handle .40 cal. I’ve shot .40s and they are too hot for me and I’m a big guy.
The FN 57 would be controllable, has a high capacity mag and has good penetrating power but there is the issue about special ammo and costs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.