Army Replaces Browning with Glock
Discussion
Motorrad said:
DonkeyApple said:
Left handed people are evil. I don't think we should be arming evil people. 
Commenting as a sinistral who has out performed right handers while shooting from my non-dominant hand; I can see where you are coming from. You need to keep the superior performers down.
Olf said:
Shot both the Sig .45 and Glock 9mm back to back recently and I have to say the .45 is a bit of a brute in comparison. 9mm makes a lot more sense for the occasional shooter wanting to deliver any more than one round accurately and quickly.
I think this is the key reason for the 9mm in military use especially when there is a 'one size fits all' requirement as well. First of all you carry more rounds so can make more bangs if used for suppressing. But most importantly anyone who has done moving target shooting knows is that a 9mm pistol is back on target and useable again far quicker than the heavier rounds like a .45.
I imagine that a .45 is a horrible round for standard military use.
I liked the Sig but prefer the Glock. What is key is that both are noticeably better than the old Browning.
Well yeah, what do the USMC know? 
http://www.marines.com/operating-forces/equipment/...
Considered a defensive weapon by the Marine Corps, the M9 Beretta is a lightweight, semi-automatic, double-action pistol.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/07/20/colt-awarded...
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/28/marines-pay-2...
"Some reports suggest Marines are not happy with their main Beretta M9s for their lack of accuracy and stopping power. With M1911's now supplying Special Ops, growing interest may lead to a better solution.
Colt Defense, based in Hartford, Conn., will supply as many as 12,000 of the 200,000 U.S. Marines with semi-automatic, tan-colored M45 Close Quarter Battle Pistols, and they will include spare parts and logistical support.
The gun has long been the weapon of choice for special operations agents, thanks to its reliability and the stopping power of its massive bullets"
http://www.marines.com/operating-forces/equipment/...
Considered a defensive weapon by the Marine Corps, the M9 Beretta is a lightweight, semi-automatic, double-action pistol.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/07/20/colt-awarded...
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/28/marines-pay-2...
"Some reports suggest Marines are not happy with their main Beretta M9s for their lack of accuracy and stopping power. With M1911's now supplying Special Ops, growing interest may lead to a better solution.
Colt Defense, based in Hartford, Conn., will supply as many as 12,000 of the 200,000 U.S. Marines with semi-automatic, tan-colored M45 Close Quarter Battle Pistols, and they will include spare parts and logistical support.
The gun has long been the weapon of choice for special operations agents, thanks to its reliability and the stopping power of its massive bullets"
If there is an accuracy issue then thats down to the weapon, the quality of the ammunition or a combination of the two. Or, dare I say it, poor training. 9mm itself is not inherently inaccurate.
The stopping power/number of rounds carried/ease of shooting argument is cyclical and infinite.
The stopping power/number of rounds carried/ease of shooting argument is cyclical and infinite.
BruceV8 said:
If there is an accuracy issue then thats down to the weapon, the quality of the ammunition or a combination of the two. Or, dare I say it, poor training. 9mm itself is not inherently inaccurate.
The stopping power/number of rounds carried/ease of shooting argument is cyclical and infinite.
That isn't strictly true. It holds firm in the situation of a single first round but it's where the barrel is pointing after the first round and when you need to send the second one along. The stopping power/number of rounds carried/ease of shooting argument is cyclical and infinite.
Ultimately it is here that something like the Glock is comfortably superior to the Browning and I imagine that in a military situation could be quite crucial as I doubt just the one round is fired in a situation where a pistol is used.
The post above re the .45 is looking at this type of weapon in the hands of serious professionals who will have trained extensively and for whom the first shot is more crucial in terms of stopping and the need for successive rounds less.
In the hands of a more conventional soldier I can't see it being at all appropriate verses a 9mm.
130R said:
One thing that would be interesting to know would be when the last time anyone actually engaged the enemy with a pistol was, it's probably happened about 5 times since the second world war realistically ..
Don't know. 
It's pretty much a weapon of last resort for a normal soldier but primarily has as much use for show in some situations probably.
130R said:
One thing that would be interesting to know would be when the last time anyone actually engaged the enemy with a pistol was, it's probably happened about 5 times since the second world war realistically ..
I get the feeling that a lot of these killings by Afgan policemen and solidiers of our own soldiers are situations in which a good pistol and training could be a life saver.Off the top of my head and without looking things up:
Pistols were used extensively by tunnel rats in Vietnam.
I know of several incidents in Northern Ireland where a pistol was used to get soldiers out of trouble. In one case a soldier killed three armed PIRA members after being caught in an illegal vehicle checkpoint.
A British soldier won a high level award (MC or CGC maybe?) for engaging multiple Taliban at close range with a pistol in Afghanistan. This was about two years ago IIRC.
Shoulder weapons are superior to pistols in almost every way apart from portability and concealability. But its worth saying that a pistol is one of those things that most people hardly ever need, but when they do they really need it.
Pistols were used extensively by tunnel rats in Vietnam.
I know of several incidents in Northern Ireland where a pistol was used to get soldiers out of trouble. In one case a soldier killed three armed PIRA members after being caught in an illegal vehicle checkpoint.
A British soldier won a high level award (MC or CGC maybe?) for engaging multiple Taliban at close range with a pistol in Afghanistan. This was about two years ago IIRC.
Shoulder weapons are superior to pistols in almost every way apart from portability and concealability. But its worth saying that a pistol is one of those things that most people hardly ever need, but when they do they really need it.
130R said:
One thing that would be interesting to know would be when the last time anyone actually engaged the enemy with a pistol was, it's probably happened about 5 times since the second world war realistically ..
http://militarytimes.com/blogs/battle-rattle/2012/...HedgehogFromHell said:
130R said:
One thing that would be interesting to know would be when the last time anyone actually engaged the enemy with a pistol was, it's probably happened about 5 times since the second world war realistically ..
Guess you weren't out with us on tour in Afghan last year.. Mo.
130R said:
One thing that would be interesting to know would be when the last time anyone actually engaged the enemy with a pistol was, it's probably happened about 5 times since the second world war realistically ..
I know of several from HERRICK 16, in August / Sept 2012.BOUND to be more since then.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff