U.S. Brings Back the .45

[355sigfan]

The US Coast Guard. I've held it. I've shot it. I have boarded with it.
The first magazine I picked up off the pile next to my computer was Guns & Weapons for Law Enforcement. The ad is on page 41. "The superior performance of the P226,P229,P239 and the rest of the SIG SAUER pistol line is why the Army, Navy Seals, FBI, Coast Guard, Texas Rangers and many of the largest and most prestigious law enforcement agencies trust their lives to SIGARMS." And yes, we do have ammo for it. Bought it on the open market and it works just great. From a company named "Federal"? I think they're new in the business Sigfan.

Sig makes fine guns. I have shot and carried them on the job. Funny how the FBI dropped sig for Glock. GLock also owns the leo market. The sig is nothing special. Its a fine weapon but so is HK, Beretta, Glock ext. Yes you have ammo since your not under the Navy and your not active in a war. Your under the department of homeland security. Your bascially a military organized leo force for the moment. If you went to war you would not be using 40's at least not for long. The ammunition supply logisits would be a nightmare.

Grunt a great many troops in the previous wars carried their 1911's conditions one the way god intended. I am a firearms instructor myself and have been training green recruits and the 1911 is not all that difficult. Its not the easiest but once you get past the safety its pretty fast.

Pat

 

[Gatman]

What ever happened to the indefinite article 'an'? It seens it's going the way of the dinosaur. Even newscasters do it to nowadays.

Sad thing is I really agree with you. I been taking some English classes and I have to edit my papers. For some reason it just doesnt sound right. An before any vowel. And an "a" before a consonant.

But we must not forget we are on the internet where it is not really an important matter.

But overall I wish the military would just use .40 SW. This way the cost would drop. But hey I think it should be whatever they want and/or need.

 

[dm1333]

Sigfan,
This is a horse that is so dead it is just hamburger now.:banghead: The Coast Guard is a military service.:banghead: In peace and in war.:banghead: In war time we do not automatically become part of the Navy and revert back to a law enforcement organization in peactime.:banghead: Check out 14 USC 2 to start with. There are CG units in the Persian Gulf, Red Sea and Iraq right now. When they rotate out and are replaced by units that have rearmed with the Sigs the Sigs won't magically disappear. And there sure as shootin is ammo in the supply system, our supply guys went out and procured it and gave it to the armories for issue.

 

[355sigfan]

Sigfan,
This is a horse that is so dead it is just hamburger now.:banghead: The Coast Guard is a military service.:banghead: In peace and in war.:banghead: In war time we do not automatically become part of the Navy and revert back to a law enforcement organization in peactime.:banghead: Check out 14 USC 2 to start with. There are CG units in the Persian Gulf, Red Sea and Iraq right now. When they rotate out and are replaced by units that have rearmed with the Sigs the Sigs won't magically disappear. And there sure as shootin is ammo in the supply system, our supply guys went out and procured it and gave it to the armories for issue.

You answer to the Department of Homeland Security. I know your job fairly well. I have worked with Coasties when I worked drugs. You basically are a LEO organization. And no way in hell would you be stuck using a odd ball pistol caliber in war. The military is not going to want to stock 3 kinds of pistol ammo. When I say war I mean a real war not Bush's little family vendeta.

Pat

 

[Rob96]

I believe the Glock is the best alternative.

I don't believe so, and I like Glocks. Speaking with experience as a former USAF SP, I just don't think the Glock lends itself well to all of the straps and so forth hanging off of the gear they use. Just my humble opinion.

When I say war I mean a real war not Bush's little family vendeta.

Hmmmm,,,,,Aircraft, armor, rifles, artillery, people dying, sounds like a real war to me. Talked to many involved in this "family vendetta, and they believe in it. Everyone I have talked to said they would rather fight them there, rather than here.

 

[DougW]

Here is another little bit to add to the discussion. The US Army bought 5000 Ruger P95DAO's early last year to outfit the Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker crews who are not normally armed with a weapon. They bought P95's because Baretta could not produce the additional M9's quick enough, and the Army wanted something fast. Plan calls for 2 M16's and the appropriate number of side arms for the crews.

I think they need to re-issue the M3's they removed in the early 90's.

 

[dm1333]

Totally off topic but ....

Sigfan, did you happen to peruse the US Code that I mentioned? I'm very familiar with what MY services missions are(yes, I am an active duty CPO). 14 USC 1, which defines our missions and status as a military service, is also very interesting. Both of them have a whole slew of missions that have nothing to do with law enforcement. Since I happen to be correct(and provided the proof) let's just drop it now.

 

[Grunt]

Every time somebody mentions US tank command getting new Ruger P95s, God kills another kitten.:banghead:

 

[Jeff White]

Just to set the record straight, no US Army soldiers were ever issued the P95. The ones that were purchased were given to our allies.

Tank and Automotive Command ay Rock Island Arsenal manages the small arms programs. When they purchase something it doesn't mean that the items go to armored units.

Jeff

 

[Rob96]

Here is another little bit to add to the discussion. The US Army bought 5000 Ruger P95DAO's early last year to outfit the Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker crews who are not normally armed with a weapon. They bought P95's because Baretta could not produce the additional M9's quick enough, and the Army wanted something fast. Plan calls for 2 M16's and the appropriate number of side arms for the crews.

I think they need to re-issue the M3's they removed in the early 90's.

That couldn't more farther from the truth. The P95's went to the Iraqi's.

 

[355sigfan]

Wow, where's the love for the Coast Guard?

Well, someone's gotta jump in the breach and help dm1333 stick up for the Coasties ... yes, they are a military organization. Not only have I worked with them on LEO ops in the Pacific and Caribbean, they are most definitely a presence in the Arabian Gulf. The CG was also a presence in the Gulf during DESERT STORM. In fact, the school I went to for learning how to board ships at sea had Coast Guard instructors ... And we (Navy) had a lot of CG participation in our SSET/SSEW classes.

Never said I did not like the Coast Guard. They have a great job. They are the first line in the drug war. They have a job that can be a lot of fun. But it has more in common with my job as a leo than a soldiers job.
Pat

 

[Jeff White]

Not only did the P95s go to the Iraqis, but the Bradley and Stryker are used by the Infantry and all of the soldiers have individual weapons.

M4s replaced the M3 grease gun that was BII on tanks and recovery vehicles. The grease guns and now the M4s on the tanks are BII. (basic issue items, in other words just like the pioneer tools, tanker bars etc.) They are there to give the crew, who are all armed with pistols, a more effective weapon to use when they might have to dismount.

Jeff

 

[Old Dog]

Wow, where's the love for the Coast Guard?

Well, someone's gotta jump in the breach and help dm1333 stick up for the Coasties ... yes, they are a military organization. Not only have I worked with them on LEO ops in the Pacific and Caribbean, they are most definitely a presence in the Arabian Gulf. The CG was also a presence in the Gulf during DESERT STORM. In fact, the school I went to for learning how to board ships at sea had Coast Guard instructors ... And we (Navy) had a lot of CG participation in our SSET/SSEW classes.

 

[SFvet]

Remember the military has to use ball ammo. No hollow points allowed per the Den Hague convention. There is nothing wrong with the 9mm as long as you can put some good high speed hollow points in them. For military use a .45 FMJ might be better but ballistically it is equal to a .32 ACP HP!

Actually for everyone else that may be true, however for LE we used HP in the M9's at my base.

 

[dm1333]

I never said you didn't like the Coast Guard

You answer to the Department of Homeland Security. I know your job fairly well. I have worked with Coasties when I worked drugs. You basically are a LEO organization. And no way in hell would you be stuck using a odd ball pistol caliber in war. The military is not going to want to stock 3 kinds of pistol ammo. When I say war I mean a real war not Bush's little family vendeta.

Pat

But the statement above proves that you really don't know what the Coast Guard does. We are not "basically are a LEO organization". My question to you is this; have you read 14 USC 1 and 14 USC 2? They define what the Coast Guard is, and does. You don't know my job fairly well. I think the problem is that you would rather argue than research. One of the moderators here asked another member what military organization just bought Sigs and why has he not seen anything in print about it. I answered that question with facts and he hasn't argued the point. I placed some facts in front of you, have you bothered to read either of the US Codes that I referenced? We can always move this to another thread since I don't want to be guilty of hijacking this one.

 

[355sigfan]

But the statement above proves that you really don't know what the Coast Guard does. We are not "basically are a LEO organization". My question to you is this; have you read 14 USC 1 and 14 USC 2? They define what the Coast Guard is, and does. You don't know my job fairly well. I think the problem is that you would rather argue than research. One of the moderators here asked another member what military organization just bought Sigs and why has he not seen anything in print about it. I answered that question with facts and he hasn't argued the point. I placed some facts in front of you, have you bothered to read either of the US Codes that I referenced? We can always move this to another thread since I don't want to be guilty of hijacking this one.

I could read you the mission statement to my department but that does not mean thats what we do. The code simply defines what the Coast Guard was set up to do. It does not mean thats what it is today.
Its nothing personal. The Coast Guard serves a vital role for our county and it helps stop a substantal amount of drugs from comming into the country. They rescue sailors in distress. Ext. But their not a front line fighting force like the Marine Corp or the Army. I respect you for your service to our country. Its just as important as those in the Army, Navy, Airforce ext. But its different. Lets drop this like you suggested earlier.
Pat

 

[dm1333]

Sorry Sig fan just can't let that last one go.

Now the Coast Guard is not a "front line force" like the Marine Corp or Army? By your definition neither is the Navy. Since you obviously haven't read the US Code that defines our mission and have no real idea of what it is we do I just can't let your disrespect to my service drop. The Coast Guard has high endurance cutters and patrol boats in Iraqs neighborhood right now. Port Security units have served on the ground there at the request of the Navy. You seem to know very little about who was conducting boardings there to cut down on arms and oil smuggling, or who was helping to secure oil rigs. Hell, we even had a buoy tender there to put ATON in place for the Navy and other shipping traffic. The theatre commander stood up to SECDEF when he suggested that our assets would be better used back in the states and basically said, "Thanks, but I need them right where they are." The first organization(besides NYFD and NYPD) to respond to terrorist attacks in Manhatten was the Coast Guard. It may not sound like a whole lot to you but considering my service has barely over 40,000 active duty members it is actually quite a lot.
Every military service is a "front line service" whether you like it or not. Just because you don't think so doesn't make it true. My suggestion to you would be to read up on the Coast Guard and our history, research and read about what the Coast Guard is doing now and where we are going (Deepwater would be a real eye opener for you), read the laws that define our missions, and drop your preconcieved notions of what the Coast Guard "is".

 

[355sigfan]

Now the Coast Guard is not a "front line force" like the Marine Corp or Army? By your definition neither is the Navy. Since you obviously haven't read the US Code that defines our mission and have no real idea of what it is we do I just can't let your disrespect to my service drop. The Coast Guard has high endurance cutters and patrol boats in Iraqs neighborhood right now. Port Security units have served on the ground there at the request of the Navy. You seem to know very little about who was conducting boardings there to cut down on arms and oil smuggling, or who was helping to secure oil rigs. Hell, we even had a buoy tender there to put ATON in place for the Navy and other shipping traffic. The theatre commander stood up to SECDEF when he suggested that our assets would be better used back in the states and basically said, "Thanks, but I need them right where they are." The first organization(besides NYFD and NYPD) to respond to terrorist attacks in Manhatten was the Coast Guard. It may not sound like a whole lot to you but considering my service has barely over 40,000 active duty members it is actually quite a lot.
Every military service is a "front line service" whether you like it or not. Just because you don't think so doesn't make it true. My suggestion to you would be to read up on the Coast Guard and our history, research and read about what the Coast Guard is doing now and where we are going (Deepwater would be a real eye opener for you), read the laws that define our missions, and drop your preconcieved notions of what the Coast Guard "is".

This is getting stupid. So now the Coast Guard is a front line military force. What ever you say.
Pat

 

[Old Dog]

Not to further hijack this thread, but SFVet stated

Actually for everyone else that may be true, however for LE we used HP in the M9's at my base

I have to call bullcrap on this one. Support this statement, please. What base? What branch? DoD Police, contract security, or active duty military police? I just can't buy that, because I know better.

 

[355sigfan]

Not to further hijack this thread, but SFVet stated
I have to call bullcrap on this one. Support this statement, please. What base? What branch? DoD Police, contract security, or active duty military police? I just can't buy that, because I know better.

The Military is allowed to use hollow points when involved in anti terrorist functions and when not in battle with another legitmate military force.
Pat

 

[Old Dog]

The Military is allowed to use hollow points when involved in anti terrorist functions and when not in battle with another legitmate military force.

No, not for military police (active duty), DoD Police or contracted security.

 

[355sigfan]

No, not for military police (active duty), DoD Police or contracted security.

No your wrong. It can be used and has been used for anti terrorist activities. There is even a military contract 45 acp JHP load for the Socom pistol. Its a 185 grain +p jhp load.
Pat

 

[Old Dog]

Dude, give it a rest, will you? SFVet was saying the MPs at one of "his bases" used JHPs in their M-9s, I called BS on that. I personally don't care what you think you know, but, by the way, I've never seen an MP with a SOCOM pistol, either.

 

[355sigfan]

Dude, give it a rest, will you? SFVet was saying the MPs at one of "his bases" used JHPs in their M-9s, I called BS on that. I personally don't care what you think you know, but, by the way, I've never seen an MP with a SOCOM pistol, either.

My point was that the military may use JHP's under certain circumstance such as for law enforcement functions. Which falls under what MP's do. You called BS without any documentation backing up your side. So put up or shut up.
Pat

 

[Old Dog]

Geez, first you argue with our active duty Coastie on whether the CG is a frontline military outfit (it is) ... now this.

Anyway, Pat (may I call you Pat?) ... having just retired (the ink's not dry on my DD-214 yet) after more than a quarter-century of active duty, of which more than half of which was spent in physical security and law enforcement, having worked primarily Navy, with the USMC, in support of EOD and other SpecWar, on numerous bases, AND being intimately familiar with our regulations (including, for example, IG inspection items, SECNAV, OPNAV, CMC instructions), AND dealing regularly with various Security Officers, Arms/Ammunition and Explosives Accountability Officers, Weapons Officers, AND having MORE than a passing familiarity with our ammunition procurement process (through NAVSUP) AND dealing with the Naval Operations Logistics Support Center, AND having seen how JAG reviews ALL our weapons and ammo prior to us going in theater ... let's just put this subject to bed now, please.

While I have no doubt there may exist some specialized units that are able to use JHPs, it is NOT the norm and your domestic MPs on stateside bases are not authorized to use them. You would not believe the hassle there is just to have to go outside normal supply channels for anything weapons related or ammunition related, much less taking it into the war zone. Please earn some battle stars on your GWOT Expeditionary, Iraqi and Afghan Campaign medals before presuming to tell those in the military what they are currently using for ammo or whether you think they are in fact "military."