Which Handgun Caliber(s) SHOULD our Military be using?

[seeker_two]

.22lr--training & silent operations.

.45ACP--silent operations.

10mm--general issue.

W/ the right load, 10mm can do the .45's job and vice-versa, but I like the idea of a few more rounds in the magazine of a .41MAG level pistol...

 

[HS/LD]

9mm

and

.45ACP

Oh my that is what they are using.

You should have included the FN 5.57

Regards,
HS/LD

 

[shootingfarm]

45ACP, if I was going thats what I would want.




Paul

 

[wanderinwalker]

9mm is an easy choice. It's been around the block longer than the .45 ACP. Plus, the guns hold more ammunition in general. Proper handgun training is to launch MULTIPLE rounds at ANY attacker. So if I launch 3-4 rounds, with a 9 I have 11-13 rounds left. With a .45, I have 3-4 rounds left. What do I do now?

IMO, 9mm gives you more options.

 

[MrAcheson]

Thanks to the Hague Accords when we talk about military sidearms, we are talking about ball ammo or soft points. Hollowpoints are expressly forbidden in the treaty. So when you start thinking about .357s and 9mms keep in mind that hollowpoints are out of the question for a military firearm.

Personally I think .40 is probably the best choice in a general issue military caliber. 10mm recoils too much for some as the FBI learned. A .45 sidearm would have to be single stack for general issue (try teaching a small handed woman on a double stack .45) so its mag capacity would be limited. It has good momentum and muzzle energy and it makes a fairly large hole.

Both the US and Britian have blown up or broken sidearms (berettas and hipowers respectively) trying to hotload 9mm for more stopping power. If 9mm is so good why haven't we heard of militaries doing this with other calibers?

 

[Blackhawk]

9mm NATO.

Many reasons, including political and treaty ones, plus, as Zundfulge said, logistical.

BTW, a handgun as a military tool isn't that big of a deal in the overall scheme of things. If you have to use it, somebody has screwed up big time.

 

[DonGlock26]

I'd go for the 9mm- good penetration,reliable feeding,& effective. Did anyone see Blackhawk Down? U.S. troops are being placed in far away lands in small groups that can be cut off. I would want 45 rounds of 9mm as opposed to 21 of .45, if I was guarding a supply dump in Saudi Arabia by myself.-IMHO.

Don

 

[Scott13]

I think the one their using currently "9mm" would be fine if they would only be allowed to carry Hollow points . I've never understood why they cant ??? in a war people get killed by regular hardball rounds , so whats the big deal

 

[Mark IV Series 80]

I think that our Military should go with four standard handgun calibers:

.22 LR - Training and Special Operations.

9mm - General Issue, for the average handgun carrier.

.38 Special - For investigators, and others who need to carry a concealed snubbie, or who need a backup gun.

.45 ACP - For anyone who wants to carry a .45 instead of the other calibers, and who can qualify with it.

 

[eagles1181]

Now you are creating a QMs nitemare. 4 times as many kinds of ammo to keep up with. 4 times as many things to make sure you get the right amount of each. 444 times the problems.

Eagle

 

[HeadCleaver]

Their current caliber is just fine.

 

[RustyHammer]

If it gets down to handguns, the enemy is to close to begin with. So, at that point, what ever they can get their hands on!

 

[HadEmAll]

Hurry up and vote, you guys. The Joint Chiefs of Staff are waiting for your selection. LOL

 

[billcameron]

For the military the pistol is a secondary weapon that is shot little. Also I don't think we have any submachine guns in general inventory in the military. Therefore, pistol ammo is used just for pistols and pistols are not fired much so weight of ammo is of no really concern. The 45 acp is a tested, proven round so why not stay with it. Probably also stay with proven 1911 that takes a lot of abuse and is easy to maintain. Lack of "double action" is no real problems as even today most military carry is without round in chamber.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Call me a fogy, but I voted for the 45.

 

[GW45]

Has anyone been reading the magazines? I work in G-1 Operations at MARFORLANT for the Marine Corps - I read in the magazines and here at work about the Marines and other U.S. Forces in Afgan and other places that shall not be named and that 9mm ball ammo sucks.

"You take on multiple targets and have 11 - 13 rounds left?" Try 2 to 5 if you have 3 targets - it's taking 3 to 4 rounds of 9mm ball to take these guys down - some special ops forces carry .45 and one to two rounds is all they are requiring.......think about it - politically correct ammo is not the best ammo to have in combat - you need what works. You have a group rush you and you have to shoot each target center mass as we our trained and it takes 3 to take out the first BG, you think the other 2 are just gonna stop and wait their turn? No, you're dead.

If all the U.S. Forces carry .45 or maybe .40 - they'll all have the same ammo and weapons - I don't care about what everybody else has out there, I want something that will do the job.

Granted the 1911 is out dated for combat in the desert and jungle - maybe not.

But from the front lines the 9mm is failing in it's job performance.....

 

[Zorro]

7.62X25 MM

A VERY! Hot Communist block round. Eats Bullet Proof stuff for breakfast!

 

[foghornl]

45ACP as the launcher, and as much Rem Golden Sabre as I could carry over with me...

 

[jsalcedo]

9mm is better against body armor.........

Since when have they been wearing bullet-proof dishadashas and kofis in Afganistan and Iraq?

Our enemies of the last 50 years have been hyped up religious
or political fanatics that are a little too motivated to be bothered
by a puny 9mm.

Didn't we learn that in the Spanish American war?

As far as logistics and ammuntion supply...

If we can't keep our soliders in at least 3 magazines of .45acp
on a regular basis then our military has much bigger problem
than deciding what caliber to use.

I'm not going to go into anecdotal reports of drugged crazies
taking 15rounds of 9mm without noticing they are hurt BUT....

If you were confronted with being shot at point blank range with one round of FMJ which would you choose 45acp or 9mm?

 

[scotjute]

Voted for .45 ACP because it has a proven track record and hollow points are not allowed. My personal favorite would be .357 with hollow points. The 9mm is ok but the .45 ACP would do the job better.

 

[makdaddy03]

My vote goes to the 40 S&W.

 

[Soap]

.45 ACP.

Handguns are rarely used in combat. But they are part of a soldier's armament. As such, they should inspire confidence. Even if 9mm ball performs the same as .45 ball, the .45 will simply instill more confidence.

 

[HadEmAll]

"But they are part of a soldier's armament. "

More accurately, they are a part of SOME soldier's armament. A small minority of actual ground troops.

 

[goon]

Why a pistol?
A pistol is about the worst weapon that guy could end up with.
I only carry them because I would draw too much attention if I was carrying a Mossberg riot gun.
I say keep the 9mm, but give the guys mini-UZI's or MP5K's. Something small with good firepower and better range than a handgun.
Think about it. If you are a tanker, and you end up out of your tank getting shot at by an AK, wouldn't you want something select fire?
I would.
Unless I was 600m away with a bolt-action.

 

[Joe Demko]

Even if 9mm ball performs the same as .45 ball, the .45 will simply instill more confidence.

In whom? The minority of soldiers who are gun enthusiasts? So, we should base the decison on instilling confidence in a minority that is part of another minority (soldiers who are issued sidearms). If confidence is the issue, then it would be cheaper and just as effective, if not more so, to simply mount a public relations campaign within the military touting the efficacy of the 9mm.