If soldiers could choose their sidearm

To me it would be a Glock 19 or 17 in 9mm. Glock because of its simplicity and ability to go bang in almost any condition and the mags are almost indestructable. Or any modern NATO rated polymer or maybe alloy (read light weight) 9mm would do. (HK, Walther, SIG, Beretta)

The gun is light, the ammo is light (so I can carry more if needed)

The world's battlefields and everything else is a 9mm world so finding ammo won't be a huge issue. (it may be an issue but I am more likely to find 9mm most places and 40SW very few places outside the US)

Anyway I carried the M9 as a tanker and even though I got to ride the weight of the gun was still a consideration.

Looks like the Glock 19 (9x19mm) is a popular choice with the US Army Special Forces.

I will go out on a limb and guess the majority would choose...
same as they are currently issued

A more appropriate question would be, which rifle would they choose?

I would wager it would be a toss up between a Glock, Sig, or the current M9.

I'd go with a xdm in 9mm. xdm for the mag capacity and because i shoot xd's better than glocks, and 9mm because it's everywhere on the modern battlefield.

^^^Earl hit it on the head. I hate to say it but as a soldier in war, by the time you have to pull out your secondary because your primary is down for whatever reason, you have a lot more problems on your hands than brand or caliber of your sidearms. The upper elite bring what ever side arm they want despite of what they are issued. But Sig, Glock and M9 are the three most popular.

I was a Marine Corps Platoon Commander in Vietnam in 1968 amd '69 and carried a 1911 as my primary weapon for a year, most of that in the field. I had the occassion to use it several times. An extra 1/2 pound of weight is not a carry factor and in fact the extra weight gets you back on target quicker if a follow up shot is needed. For civilians and the police, weight may be a factor, but for actual military combat, from my experience it is not. As a civilian now, I carry a Kel-Tec P3AT in my pocket but if I had to go back into combat, I'd carry the Beretta M9.

It would be total chaos unless the military said you can choose any gun you want as long as it feeds this issue ammo from these issue magazines.

I hate to say it but as a soldier in war, by the time you have to pull out your secondary because your primary is down for whatever reason, you have a lot more problems on your hands than brand or caliber of your sidearms.

Click to expand...

But my primary was a handgun as the 105MM gun or the 50 cal or the coax 30 cal were not "mobile" carry weapons. True we did have 2 rifles in the tank but they were mounted out of the way and were not easily gotten to or manipulated through the hatch. Thus the M9 and in my early days the 1911A1 on me was the only way to go if you were having to dismount the tank...even for long period of times.

I carry a 1911 for everything. For war I might switch to a hi-cap 1911.

Most guys dont get sidearms, just a primary. I carry an M4 and a Buck General. If I had to rely on my Buck I would be in a really bad situation. If I was allowed to.... I would carry my Glock along with my M4.

If it were me and if I had a choice... glock 21. Capacity, Durability and reliability, and better one shot stops with fmj ammo.

The 3 generations of my family before me who served all bought 1911s when they returned home. The 4th generation family member who recently returned from 2 tours in Iraq purchased a Beretta 92.

If limited to FMJ I would pick a bigger caliber than 9mm. I would want it light and reliable. A Glock 29 SF or Glock 20 SF 10mm would be at the top of my list.

Sig P226 9mm

I carried the Beretta M9 in the Marine Corps. I never had any problems with mine and I qualified expert with it five times. I'd feel just fine carrying it again. I would also feel fine with a Glock, XD, or a CZ. Hell, I'd actually like a Makarov. It is stone simple and reliable. Not the best caliber but I could live with that.

I carried an M9 as a crew chief, now I have an M9 as an MP. They work fine and are plenty accurate, but they are huge. I would gladly give up my M9 in order to carry an M&P9 or G17 or XD9. The 9mm does just fine and is readily available. I would change because any of the other three options I mentioned are sized for normal people. The M9 has a very long reach to the trigger. The M&P9, with it's adjustable backstraps, is able to be tailored to the person. I'm 5'10-5'11 195 lbs, so I'm not a small guy, but the M9 is too big. Any of the polymer pistols would fit a greater number of soldiers, making them more effective with their sidearms.

Sidearm Choice

If you would have asked me when I was still in the Marines I would have said the M9 was just fine (97-02 - 0341). If I went back in now, assuming I would be stuck with the 9mm. I'd prefer an XDM, but would be happy with any other modern polymer pistol. The added capacity and slightly lighter frame would be nice.

If I could get access to any caliber I want...I would go with a .45 ACP.

CZ SP01 Phantom, or a bare bones 1911A1 like I used 20+ years ago. Never had any issues with it.
I agree, allow personal sidearmas, and the supply line gets a wee bit tangled. Look at the Germans, using whatever captured pistol they found. They even had Norweigan made 1911s! Single caliber/magazine/spare parts makes the whole supply thing easier, and we know how tangled supply lines can foul a war effort.

I would gladly settle for the idea of me being entirely responsible for my own gun, ammo, and maintenance. This would leave me way ahead of the army anyway.

For me it would be anything in hi-cap.10mm or 45acp.

If I had the choice, it would be a Glock 19 or a SIG P226 Combat. Wouldn't even consider anything else

Strahley!