Military sidearm question

[Belgiboy]

There is a lot of conflicting information out there on the ever-entertaining debate on which military handgun caliber is the most suitable.

The 9mm vs. .45 dilemma is always good for a fascinating read. I own both and love shooting them but I did have a question that i wanted to put before the (ex-)military members of this forum or anybody else who may have an educated answer to this. What is the military sidearm used for? What is its value in a combat situation? I would love to know or hear about some real life situations where a soldier (marine, sailor... etc) had to revert to using the issued handgun. That would help us non-military shooters form an opinion a lot better. Thanks

 

[Bezoar]

im not military but heres a few facts that i have seen permutated online and in print over the years.

THE medical profession "prefer" the 9mm as it just pokes a small hole through a person, while they hate the 45 as it smashes the hell out of the patient resulting in harder work for them.

Many americans anyway doubted the ability of the 9mm to kill the "corn and beef fed 240 pound american male" versus the 9mm ability to kill weak and malnurished europeans.
And ego as well, if your a huge 240 pound gorilla, you want a gorilla sized gun, and not a puppy dog sized gun.

 

[mpmarty]

The military side arm is issued for one of several reasons:
A status symbol for an officer
A "last ditch" defensive weapon for a person in combat, or for air crews who may be forced down somewhere unfriendly. Also issued to those who work in close quarters such as tank crews and finally office personnel (read REMF).

 

[NavyLCDR]

The military sidearm (standard Beretta 92, 9mm) is issued to higher ranking personnel (officers and E-8's and E-9's) for personal protection. It is meant to only be used in a self defense situation from 3-7 yards and training is carry in holster with round chambered, de-cocked and safety on. Draw, safety off, fire 2 shots within 4 seconds at center mass and safety back on.

The issued sidearm is not used for combat. Typically there will be many other members of a team or squad armed with M-16's and the sidearm is used for short range self defense in the event they get past the M-16 armed personnel on guard. Same is true for sidearms issued to aviators who may find themselves crashed or ejected into hostile territory - hide and escape first, shoot only at close range as a last resort.

This is Navy policy....

 

[mainmech48]

It's been said that if you have to resort to a sidearm in combat, you're already up to your neck in some d-e-e-e-p doo-doo. That is as true a thing as has ever been uttered.

That said, when your observations on arriving in-country tell you that there's a strong probability that you'll eventually find yourself and your mates in that kind of mess, regulations and Navy Policy aren't quite as much of a disincentive, IME.

And, speaking as a southpaw, you're pretty likely to ignore the policy that says that a 1911-A1 sidearm will be carried in a regulation flap holster, on your right hip, with five rounds in the magazine and the chamber empty, too.

In our little corner of the Bassac, after February 1968 those policies got ignored a lot more, and even the most doctrinaire Trade School Boys on the river didn't try to push 'em anymore.

Any sidearm beats no sidearm, and bigger holes are better. Your butt, your call.

 

[armed85]

Well I'm not office personnel and I'm only an E-3 and I'm issued the M9. I work aircraft maintenance.

I'd rather have an M16 despite how large and combersome it is onboard an aircraft.

I would rather the DoD spend the money meant for a new pistol on more and better small arms training and more ammo for small arms training.

A new pistol is useless if we rarely shoot it. There's more pressing training concerns than equipment concerns right now.

 

[Medusa]

Close quarters, sometimes a rifle is too cumbersome and sidearm offers the needed maneuverability.

Or if your rifle is slow-firing bolt action and you do need to cover your ass.

Or in CQB your longarm is grabbed, then let the bastah have it and use your sidearm to neutralize the bastah.

Or when I'm moving around with my rifle in bag and I need something to protect it with.

Or when the primary weapon is empty and I do need to fire NOW, I use the pistol to suppress/neutralize the enemy to get the time to reload.

 

[MikePGS]

It is meant to only be used in a self defense situation from 3-7 yards and training is carry in holster with round chambered, de-cocked and safety on.

I certainly could be wrong about this, but i heard somewhere that pistols were actually carried without a round chambered in the military.

 

[BADUNAME13]

Situation:
VBIED in Iraq. Driver is shot and killed, passanger bails out, and then starts running for the car (Presumably to set off the IED)

One of our Assaultmen is in a position to shoot him. He shoots him 5 or 6 times, the guy falls down and then gets up, the Sgt shoots him again 5 or 6 times (One string was of 5 and one string is of 6) Haji falls down and is getting up again when the Sgt puts 2 into his head at basically contact range.
-Furthest shot was ~ 5 meters, and the first 11 rounds from the M9 were all in the chest.

I did not see it happen, but was there.


Col Cooper's book: To Ride, shoot Straight, and speak the Truth goes into the uses, and why they are not a general issue, as well as situations where they were used.
I recommed it for that and further because it is a good and informative book.

You NEED a backup weapon for when the POS M16/M4/249 goes T!ts up... it's just that it is cheaper to bury the guys than it equip and train them with a second weapon.

Why do you think SF types get pistols, and they give us pistols in Recon?
It's b/c they have more $ invested in our training.

 

[mashaffer]

And then there is the penetration champ 7.62x25. []

mike

 

[ARTiger]

Never served, but know many well who have and also was fortunate enough to have a military history class at my college years ago which I ate up.

In a combat zone infantrymen are expected to carry their battle rifle at all times, officers, many REMF's (and some NCO's) typically carry rifles only when there's possibility of direct engagement. Basically, sidearms are mainly intended for soldiers who regularly or occasionally have duties that make carrying a rifle difficult. Since unarmed soldiers anywhere in or near a war zone would be an insane proposition, these folks usually get a sidearm issued. When and if they go into a combat situation, it's rarely left behind just because they have a rifle then. That's my take on it at least. I'm sure there are many very experienced military people around here who have a much better idea on the matter.

Since ball ammo is all that can be used, the 9mm Parabellum round is generally considered less likely to quickly stop the adversary from fighting back than the .45 ACP would.

No handgun however would make sense to use in combat as a primary weapon unless a rifle is unavailable.

 

[tkendrick]

Sidearm

When I retired from the Army, they issued sidearms to officers, MP's, most pilots, tankers, cannon-cockers and most of the crew-served weapons guys, like mortar, machinegunners, etc. I found it interesting that most military professionals, especially officers, were never to keen on the idea of issueing pistols to the troops, even if there wasn't a cost issue. Most truck drivers and support personell, (I'll date myself here...we actually had field mess personell assigned at comapny level) cooks, clerks etc. spent as much time trying to wrestle with their rifles in bizarre situations, as they did actually performing their jobs. Imagine...changing the oil on a duece and a half when policy was that you had to have your personal weapon physically on you at all times.
My son says it's changed a bit.

 

[RON in PA]

This is an impression only, based on what I've seen on TV and the web, that in the current unpleasantness in the Sand Box because of the heavy involvement in urban warfare, house clearing, etc. the pistol is actully being used to a greater degree than in previous wars.

Anybody with firsthand knowledge please chime-in if this is wrong.

 

[trueblue1776]

I have seen every rank from E2 to O3 wear an M9, I wore one for a long time. National Guard and Coast Guard use them when an M16 would make people feel uncomfortable, must be PC at all times! Security details use pistols extensively, as do sweep teams and intelligence/hunter teams.

I prefer the M9 to the 1911A1, I consider myself handy with a sidearm and prefer the added capacity of the M9. I never saw the sidearm issue as that big of a deal, in my line of work it was used as a warning on my belt. In fact in a few arguments with my superiors (over my mag pouch being mounted horizontally) I volunteered to do my job unarmed, which in crowded areas with compliant subjects is less stressful for me anyways.

If I was ever going into a situation where I thought a firearm was necessary I would bring my M870.

In enclosed spaces a rifle will make your ears bleed, this I know.

 

[Jimmie]

Anti-hijacking... but that allows the use of HP ammo.

 

[cdrt]

FWIW, it is well documented that Sgt. Alvin C. York killed seven German soldiers with seven shots from his issue Colt 1911 while he was cleaning out those machine gun positions. In the movie, Gary Cooper used a Luger, but that was because they couldn't get a 1911 to work consistently with blanks.

 

[Novus Collectus]

Damn!!! You beat me to the York mention by a single minute!

 

[ar10]

1911, works every time and saves your ass when the POS M16 dies, after that the mossberg.

 

[trueblue1776]

when the POS M16 dies

Good thing the Aberdeen proving grounds aren't located on the internet.

 

[Devonai]

In my National Guard unit, the following people are issued M9 pistols:

CO, 1SG, M60 gunners, mortar tube carriers, sniper section, and our medic. However, the medic does have a rifle assigned to him and he can choose to take one, the other, or both. He usually takes the M9 just for convenience sake. When he was in Iraq he carried both.

As others have already pointed out, other than Top and the Captain, the pistol is only there because those soldiers can't carry both a mortar tube, M60 or M24 and a M16A2. However, in the weapons squad and mortar section everyone else has a M16A2 (AG, ammo bearer).

I have absolute faith in my Beretta 92FS and the Mec-Gar mags and Speer Gold-Dot JHP I use with it. However, the appearance of my unit's M9 pistols doesn't instill much confidence in me, and when coupled with FMJ ammo and Checkmate magazines I can only hope I never find myself limited to one in combat.

 

[mljdeckard]

Here's the thing about a military sidearm. You'll probably never have to use it. But if you DO ever have to use it, that means you are in BIG trouble, and this is the time when you need every possible advantage.

I am facing deployment. I was an armorer in Germany, and I got used to carrying whatever weapon I wanted to. (That was a military arm, that is.) If I am in Afgahanistan, getting charged, in close quarters, I don't want my last thoughts to be: "Boy, I sure hope this 9mm fmj doesn't pinhole this guy repeatedly and leave him STILL charging at me."

I consider 9mm to be sufficient for defensive uses AS LONG AS YOU ARE USING PREMIUM AMMO. (147 gr subsonic would be my preference.) Since we pretend to follow the Hague Accords, which we never signed, we appease the rest of NATO by keeping 9mm, fmj. What would be better? ANYTHING. I consider 10mm too powerful for civilian personal defense, but this would make it great for war defensive use.

I have asked those in my unit who have recently returned from OIF and Afgahanistan, "Is it feasible to get and carry a 1911 in country?" The reply is; "Take 500 rds of .45 FMJ with you, and see what happens when you get there. You will find a guy with a .45 USP, Glock, or 1911 they need to sell quick because they can't take it home. Ask your local officers if they care if you carry it up front. (It depends on how close you are to the adminisphere.) Keep it in a chest holster at all times."

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Most truck drivers and support personell, (I'll date myself here...we actually had field mess personell assigned at comapny level) cooks, clerks etc. spent as much time trying to wrestle with their rifles in bizarre situations, as they did actually performing their jobs.

That's because in those days, the Army actually understood tactics. Right down to company level, commanders kept reserves, and when the reserve was committed, you "reconstituted" it by mustering all the cooks, clerks, mechanics and so on. So those people had to have real guns -- rifles.

During WWI, one of the first American units to go into combat was a cavalry regiment. When they got into fighting in the trenches, they found the .45 was the ideal weapon -- semi-automatic, close range. Pershing, himself a cavaryman, decided every soldier should have a .45. Unable to produce enough, the Army went to Colt and S&W and the result was the M1917 .45 ACP revolvers. But after the war, the idea died.

Personally, if I were King of the World, I would encourage officers and NCOs (E7 and up) to buy and carry their own sidearms -- to foster the warrior spirit.

 

[Chuhhuniban]

Personally, if I were King of the World, I would encourage officers and NCOs (E7 and up) to buy and carry their own sidearms -- to foster the warrior spirit.

It's not a bad idea. I did for fifteen years. The problem is (or, at least, was, when I was active duty) that marksmanship training with the pistol was rudimentary at best and non-existent in many cases. I saw many people who were "weapons qualified" with the ol' M-1 pencil deep in the heart of the unit personnel files. The Army, outside of the Infantry, simply doesn't value marksmanship very highly. Therefore, the only really competent shooters are those who make it their business or hobby to become such. The pistol, for most officers, is an ornament (a symbol of office if you will). The fact of its ornamental nature is one of the reasons that the ongoing debate about the 9 mm versus the .45 is just hot air. The SOF guys all use .45's as a weapon, everybody else could probably carry a paintball gun (rant off).

 

[Vern Humphrey]

If people buy their own sidearm, there is at least a chance they will take it to the range now and then.

 

[another okie]

I can't find the link right now, but if I remember correctly there was a Marine officer who won the Silver Star in the drive to Baghdad who used the machine gun on his hummer until it ran out of ammo, then his M16 until it ran out of ammo, and then pulled his M9 to finish the job.

Colonel Cooper said pistols don't win wars, but they save the lives of soldiers, who do. And that in theory no one needed one, but at the front everyone wanted one.