The Verminator
Moderator
Do you have the naive notion that every SEAL is a ballistics expert?
Believe me, they're not. I've talked to a lot of them.
USMC Raiders chooses the Glock 19 over the issued 1911
- Thread starter johnelmore
- Start date
- Status
Do you have the naive notion that every SEAL is a ballistics expert?
Believe me, they're not. I've talked to a lot of them.
My final 2cents: All I can say is that I am professionally trained and teach a CCW class. I shoot with many skilled LE. Not one of are SWAT I shoot with would ever give up their 1911 45acp. They switched from the Glock in 9mm years back and the dept has no plans on any caliber change. That said I carry the 9mm in compacts and the 40, and 45acp in mid and full size guns. I would consider a Seal a incredible source for real world application in caliber choices. I understand they are stuck with fmj but all calibers have advanced from technology with their controlled expansion and bonded bullets so its a great time for all calibers.
The Verminator
Moderator
SEALS are just like anybody else. They know what they've heard about bullets, probably from other SEALS who are repeating all the old stories that Jeff Cooper and others told. Being a SEAL doesn't make you a ballistics expert.
Second thing is......they are not stuck with FMJ. That's Geneva Convention stuff.
Our current war is not a "Geneva Convention" war, obviously. Guantanamo violates the Geneva Convention and we obviously don't regard our enemy as worthy of any fair, ethical or moral treatment.
According to one source from an Army Delta Unit quoted in 2013 speaking on his units sidearms...
Some accounts maintain that the G 22's were beating themselves to death during training and were dropped (I haven't verified that but I've heard it around).
As a result of the change back to 9mm Delta changed the way they trained in the transition away from 45acp...
So in Delta Force, at least one unit, they believed that they needed more rounds to put a person down with the 9mm versus the .45acp, and made changes in training to reflect that. According to some they labor under a delusion.
So whether one agrees with their practice or not, it is what they have done. I suggest Zombietactics write a strong letter of disapproval to the Army explaining that they labor under a delusion, are wrong, and only he can send them a list of technicians who will explain it to them.
tipoc
Some accounts maintain that the G 22's were beating themselves to death during training and were dropped (I haven't verified that but I've heard it around).
As a result of the change back to 9mm Delta changed the way they trained in the transition away from 45acp...
So in Delta Force, at least one unit, they believed that they needed more rounds to put a person down with the 9mm versus the .45acp, and made changes in training to reflect that. According to some they labor under a delusion.
So whether one agrees with their practice or not, it is what they have done. I suggest Zombietactics write a strong letter of disapproval to the Army explaining that they labor under a delusion, are wrong, and only he can send them a list of technicians who will explain it to them.
tipoc
The Verminator
Moderator
This thread is a grand example of just how strong popular misconception and firmly entrenched firearms myth can be.
If a SEAL regurgitates mythology it is no less mythology.
They call this popular wisdom because it's popular.....not because it's wise.
If a SEAL regurgitates mythology it is no less mythology.
They call this popular wisdom because it's popular.....not because it's wise.
Once again...it is not one SEAL. The primary sidearm for the Marine Rangers is a 1911 built by Colt.
As of three or so years ago the SEALS were equipped with...
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/05/robert-farago/the-guns-and-knives-of-the-navy-seals/
I'm quoting here from an interview with the author of the book: "Kill Bin Laden: A Delta Force Commander's Account of the Hunt for the World's most Wanted Man"
The fella doing the interview points out that the person he's interviewing carries a concealed Glock. He is currently making custom 1911s.
http://www.guns.com/2015/02/17/delt...is-making-a-custom-1911-for-mission22-part-i/
Again, I'm not posting this as an argument for the 1911 or against the 9mm or Glock in particular. It's so fellas can understand and see the thinking of some of those in the military on why they use a 45 and some a 1911.
tipoc
johnelmore
New member
Hey now. Just because your favorite Seal or Green Beret chooses a certain pistol doesnt mean its right for you. Im not going to choose a Sig even if the Seals use it...even if the NRA came out to say its one you should have. You should choose the pistol or rifle which works best for you. I honestly feel a revolver works best for me and thats what I choose as my nightstand defensive system. I have other pistols, but for certain situations a revolver works best for me and a 1911 works best in other situations. The Sig is not my pistol of choice.
The Verminator
Moderator
From what we've seen here, that is in doubt.
It makes no difference how many regurgitate mythology.....it is STILL no less mythology.
If many continue to believe it......it is still no less mythology.
People believe what they want to believe......they don't give a damn about the truth.
In fact, if the truth disagrees with them......they reject it immediately in favor of whatever nonsense they have embraced.
God forbid they should ever admit they were wrong.
That's the case with the SOCOM H&K M23 but not with the 1911. They found it difficult to run the suppressor they wanted on a 1911.
http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=1947
http://navyseals.com/weapons-demo/mk23/
Both articles touch on why they retain the round and the guns.
tipoc
Last edited:
SPEMack618
New member
You don't have to be the second coming of Townsend Whelen to know what works for you in a gunfight versus what doesn't.
The Verminator
Moderator
Whelen never claimed to be a gunfight expert that I know of.
If you have a pool of people that have been in a lot of pistol fights and seen a lot of wounds from various caliber pistols, name them.
If you have SEALs or Marines or whatever......let's have a list of their eyeball to eyeball pistol duels with various calibers, wounding data and statistics substantial enough to make a case.
This Kyle character has been mentioned. Exactly how many people did he kill with a pistol and how many different calibers did he test out for efficacy?
Folklore and what he or his buddies may have heard from old sea stories told in bars don't carry any weight.
So......they got nothing? I thought so.
zombietactics
New member
Well, this thread is not about me or what I believe. The Army will do whatever it does. Whatever they do does not alter the laws of physics, which make impossible any notion such as "knockdown power".
The Army (and Marines, for that matter) have all sorts of excellent resources at their disposal, but that does not mean that they always make decisions based upon what the "the best thing". Budgets matter, and so do lines of supply. Even if there were a demonstrable difference (there isn't) between battlefield performance of .45ACP "hardball" and the 9mm NATO load, I'd imagine they'd stick with 9 owing to weight and size, which has bearing on all sorts of other things.
I'll note that you jumped to several conclusions not (pun warning) militated by the text you quoted. I can explain, if you have any interest.
I can post a LOT of references from qualified sources, but it seems silly to do so if they will be evaluated based upon who they are, rather than an understanding of the data presented.
So far as the "who" is concerned, I've already presented Larry Vickers (Delta Force), Kyle Lamb (Army SF) and Kyle DeFoor (SEAL Team 6) ... and wellas MARSOC trainer Steve Reichert, regarding problems with the 1911 design. That's simply a case regarding reliability of the gun, which can readily be assessed by direct observation.
The subject of wounding effects and terminal ballistics cannot be correctly assessed in such a manner, owing to the nature of the environment. It's a well-know fact that eye-witness testimony is regularly falsified by video evidence. People simply do not recall what they have seen, or what has happened, even in simple convenience store robberies. Consider the far more chaotic environment of combat in war ... and don't deceive yourself that anyone knows with any clarity what any particular round is doing. We've yet to see a single piece of video footage where a 45 (or 40 or 9) "knocks a man down" or "spins him around" as some have suggested in these kinds of discussions over the years. This isn't surprising, as physics would tell us the same thing.
The evidence of medical examiners, forensic pathologists and trauma surgeons indicates that there is no difference between the wounds created by handguns in the 9/40/45 range. That's science ... decades of data. I'm not sure what more needs to be said than that.
Even so, I'll end with this, and there is a lot more where this came from:
"Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed “shock” of bullet impact is a fable and “knock down” power is a myth."
John C. Hall
Unit Chief
FBI Firearms Training Unit
Unit Chief
FBI Firearms Training Unit
Last edited:
Theohazard
New member
I agree with zombietactics; using anecdotal evidence from people in the military won't necessarily give you the right answer. I served four years in the Marine Corps infantry, and I can tell you that BS gun myths are alive and well even with the people who should know better. Marines (and others) aren't scientists and they don't have an objective, empirical approach to the subject of terminal ballistics.
Even the most seasoned operator hasn't seen anywhere near enough handgun wounds to provide a scientifically valid sample size. And even if they had, those shootings wouldn't have been analyzed in an even remotely scientifically objective way. So it's a logical fallacy to use their unscientific anecdotal evidence as gospel with a subject like this.
Even the most seasoned operator hasn't seen anywhere near enough handgun wounds to provide a scientifically valid sample size. And even if they had, those shootings wouldn't have been analyzed in an even remotely scientifically objective way. So it's a logical fallacy to use their unscientific anecdotal evidence as gospel with a subject like this.
Fellas seem to miss the point of this thread. Seems some may want to.
First the question of whether MARSOC is replacing their 1911s with the G19 is settled...they are not at least not at present.
In a number of special forces units in the military the soldiers have an option of what guns and calibers they choose. In the MARSOC units at least now have access to G19s in addition to the P226, H&K, and the M9. These are in addition to their primary weapon and in addition to the 1911.
Some because they have confidence in the weapon and the round and their skills with the same, prefer and use the 1911 and the 45acp.
Some here are strongly opposed to that choice. It doesn't matter the reasons the Marines or some in Delta, etc. give for their choice, what matters is their confidence in the weapon. That is a great attribute. They are correct in their choice. You can argue the particulars with them.
The question here has never been what is the "best" handgun or caliber for the military. That issue has been settled. The question is that some disagree with the choice of some special forces units to allow some soldiers to use the 1911 and the 45acp.
Some soldiers have cited the better accuracy of the 1911, it's handling, and it's more powerful round as reasons they use it. Other soldiers disagree and prefer to use other weapons. This is good, this option, within reason, in my opinion.
Since 1986 the Marines and all branches of the service have had access to some superb 9mm handguns. It galls some that some small number of elite forces still use the 1911.
The fact that there are differences of opinion in the military and between honest and responsible combat soldiers means something. But some here seem to miss that.
Fellas care to argue that there is no such a critter as "stopping power". But that question is not on the table here and is a digression. It is not relevant to this discussion. This is the case even if a number of Generals use the phrase often and have made choices based on a belief. Because even if you are correct...so what?
Should special forces combat soldiers have a choice in their sidearms? That is the issue. If some choose the 45acp because they have confidence in it. Will you still oppose that?
tipoc
First the question of whether MARSOC is replacing their 1911s with the G19 is settled...they are not at least not at present.
In a number of special forces units in the military the soldiers have an option of what guns and calibers they choose. In the MARSOC units at least now have access to G19s in addition to the P226, H&K, and the M9. These are in addition to their primary weapon and in addition to the 1911.
Some because they have confidence in the weapon and the round and their skills with the same, prefer and use the 1911 and the 45acp.
Some here are strongly opposed to that choice. It doesn't matter the reasons the Marines or some in Delta, etc. give for their choice, what matters is their confidence in the weapon. That is a great attribute. They are correct in their choice. You can argue the particulars with them.
The question here has never been what is the "best" handgun or caliber for the military. That issue has been settled. The question is that some disagree with the choice of some special forces units to allow some soldiers to use the 1911 and the 45acp.
Some soldiers have cited the better accuracy of the 1911, it's handling, and it's more powerful round as reasons they use it. Other soldiers disagree and prefer to use other weapons. This is good, this option, within reason, in my opinion.
Since 1986 the Marines and all branches of the service have had access to some superb 9mm handguns. It galls some that some small number of elite forces still use the 1911.
The fact that there are differences of opinion in the military and between honest and responsible combat soldiers means something. But some here seem to miss that.
Fellas care to argue that there is no such a critter as "stopping power". But that question is not on the table here and is a digression. It is not relevant to this discussion. This is the case even if a number of Generals use the phrase often and have made choices based on a belief. Because even if you are correct...so what?
Should special forces combat soldiers have a choice in their sidearms? That is the issue. If some choose the 45acp because they have confidence in it. Will you still oppose that?
tipoc
Chris Kyle said:
zombietactics said:
zombietactics said:
Still trying to figure out where you're coming from.
You believe that the opinion of someone who has actually used different caliber weapons to stop people is a "myth", but the opinions of those who study the aftereffects are somehow more legitimate?
zombietactics said:
I'm seeing the light: If someone in the military agrees with your opinion, they are an "expert" who can "readily assess" the situation. If they don't agree, their opinions are "myths".
Makes sense now!
The Verminator
Moderator
Actually, it does matter. The reason is the key.
The reason is that the old .45 myths are stronger than science with those who are determined to remain uninformed.
Yes, ignorance really IS bliss. It's a macho thing.
The Verminator
Moderator
Who is that "someone?" Trot him out and let's hear from him.
Has that someone "stopped" hundreds of people with the .45 and seen hundreds of other people smile and order another cappuccino after being hit center mass with 13 rounds from the 9mm?
Your problem is that you are comparing unsubstantiated stories told in bars with statistics based on scientific study.
The opinions of imaginative story-tellers are simply that--opinions and stories.
Actual forensic evidence and studies of large numbers of real-world incidents are what is called science.
Science always trumps myth.
- Status