New Army Handgun: We're Really Doing This

Status
Not open for further replies.
Call me crazy, but I'm going to venture a wild guess that the Special Forces get better handgun training/instruction than the average enlisted man.
 
Tactile indicator?
Click to expand...

Because the index finger can actually go into the trigger guard at the rear and if it finds the trigger there already, the gun is not cocked. From the side the trigger is not activated. Even with gloves a persons index finger is pretty useful for propreoception of a trigger positioned at the rear, vice the middle of the trigger guard.
 
When my brother-in-law (Army SF) is undercover wearing civilian clothing, they carry glocks. Seems they should just go that route since the special forces trust them.
--------------------------

Nothing against Glock, but the SF guys are the best of the best and have countless hours of training and that specialty. This about a general issue weapon that fits a broad range of uses. I am not sure Glock is the best overall choice for a general issue weapon. SF guys also use the Beretta on many occasions.
 
Because the index finger can actually go into the trigger guard at the rear and if it finds the trigger there already, the gun is not cocked. From the side the trigger is not activated. Even with gloves a persons index finger is pretty useful for propreoception of a trigger positioned at the rear, vice the middle of the trigger guard.
Click to expand...

Sticking your finger in the trigger guard to determine if the pistol is cocked is a pretty poor idea IMO. Do a press check, examine it visually are both better ways of determining if it's cocked. You might say a press check only determines if the chamber is loaded. This is true, but if the chamber is loaded and the striker isn't cocked on a Glock, you've got serious problems. The act of pres checking the pistol would also cock the striker as well were that the case.
 
kcub said:
If they go glock, how long before there will be pining for the good ol' Beretta?
Click to expand...

I'd start today, despite my previous Beretta bashing.

I don't feel that the Glock, in any variation, is a suitable sidearm for general issue to the U.S. Army.
 
At the end of the day is this less about Berretta, GLOCK or any other specific brand/style of handgun and more about the Army simply wanting the .45acp?
 
At the end of the day is this less about Berretta, GLOCK or any other specific brand/style of handgun and more about the Army simply wanting the .45acp?
Click to expand...

IMO, no. We're still part of NATO, changing both pistol and caliber would be a huge undertaking and I don't see where the money would come from. A few hundredths of an inch don't turn a pea shooter into the hammer of Thor.
 
herdman - Nothing against Glock, but the SF guys are the best of the best and have countless hours of training and that specialty. This about a general issue weapon that fits a broad range of uses. I am not sure Glock is the best overall choice for a general issue weapon. SF guys also use the Beretta on many occasions.

______________________________________________________

They do carry the Beretta when in uniform (which he claims to hate), but when they need concealment and wear civilian clothes to blend in, they carry Glocks. Just food for thought.
 
Last edited:
Are the standard US military troops that much more incompetent than Austrian, British, Iraqi, Israeli, Latvian, Lithuanian, Luxembourgian, Malaysian, Norwegian, Romanian, Swedish, Uruguayan, or Venezuelan (all who issue Glocks as standard equipment) troops that they can't be trusted with a "safe action" type trigger such as a Glock or M&P?

Seems that it wouldn't be too hard to get some real data on AD's from armies that have been using them for awhile and compare it to current US data using the Beretta.

Lots of people might be surprised by the results if they look at some ACTUAL data.
 
How many different stories have we read on here concerning various LEOs that have a case of "Glock leg"?

And I don't know much about the IDF, but in every picture I see of them when they aren't directly engaging the bad guys, every seems to be wandering about without magazine in their weapon.

Further more, isn't "Israeli Carry" pretty much condition three?

I have a hard time picturing the guys and girls in my HHC who get to the range twice a year, if we're lucky and I beg the Colonel the right way, carrying a Glock in a real environment.
 
Last edited:
If the DoD did decide to go with Glocks, the troops would not be allowed to carry them with a round in the chamber. Condition 3 only. Too dangerous.
 
And if one of my Troopers is having to draw his or her sidearm, something is really bad, and they'll probably need that handgun in the fight right the hell now, not ten seconds from now after racking the slide and getting into a pistol stance.
 
Are the standard US military troops that much more incompetent than Austrian, British, Iraqi, Israeli, Latvian, Lithuanian, Luxembourgian, Malaysian, Norwegian, Romanian, Swedish, Uruguayan, or Venezuelan (all who issue Glocks as standard equipment) troops that they can't be trusted with a "safe action" type trigger such as a Glock or M&P?
Click to expand...

No, but a lot of those other countries don't have the press and/or lawyers making mountains out of molehills, at least to the extent as the 'ole U S of A.
 
How do the troops carry the Beretta M9?

Round in the chamber cocked safety on?

Round in the chamber hammer down?

No round in the chamber?
 
Are the standard US military troops that much more incompetent than Austrian, British, Iraqi, Israeli, Latvian, Lithuanian, Luxembourgian, Malaysian, Norwegian, Romanian, Swedish, Uruguayan, or Venezuelan (all who issue Glocks as standard equipment) troops that they can't be trusted with a "safe action" type trigger such as a Glock or M&P?
Click to expand...

My thoughts too...
Many of those countries have required sign-up, so they get a lot of folk who really dont want to be there, let alone mess with a Glock.

Same for many of our LEO's, some really dislike firearms and joined the force despite having to carry one... yet they have managed for the last 20 years or so, albeit with more than a couple "incidents", but still...

My 5'2" tall 100lb ex was a heli avionics tech in Fort Hood, she had no interest in firearms, but shot my CZ75, G23 and 1911 just fine.

I fully expect all of our professional warriors to properly handle any sidearm or rifle handed to them.
If they can't we have bigger issues than which pistol we buy them...
 
how do the troops carry the Beretta M9?
Click to expand...

Depends on what the ROE dictates.

Sometimes you can carry with a mag in, hammer down on empty chamber and safety engaged.

Sometimes magazine in, round chambered and safety on, which lowers the hammer. There is no provision to carry with the hammer cocked and safety on with the M9.

Have heard of some carrying with the chamber loaded hammer decocker's and safety off. This just requires drawing and pulling through the first long double action pull for the first shot.

Some locations and duties require no magazine inserted and chamber empty and safety on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top