What Caliber should our Armed forces be carrying as their side arm?

9mm, hands down. First off, the majority of our allies use 9mm rounds, so if need be we can always borrow from our friends. Secondly, 9mm is a small round which means you can pack more ammo per mag.

I'd rather have a 15 round mag in 9mm than a 8-10 round mag in .45 when I lean outside cover and throw rounds down range so a buddy can get him/herself in a position to make shots that count.
 
Uh? What do you think was used when the rounds and guns were developed?

Modern hollowpoints are relatively new. BTW, round nose 38s were used for SD for ages.

Still bored.
Click to expand...

Sorry to bore you. I doubt many consider what kind of ammo was used in the distant past when choosing a SD gun and ammo.

BTW - There's a lot of difference between a round nose .38 and a FMJ.
 
[QUOTE9mm, hands down. First off, the majority of our allies use 9mm rounds,][/QUOTE]

..... and the majority of Americans wander around in Condition White, carrying no mindset, skills or hardware. We should do this also? Bad Plan, poorer argument for it.....

As for it being better to have a "15 round mag tather than 8-10 rounds" for a self-defense situation: If you can't solve the immediate situation with 10 rounds, you should have run in the first place.

"Only hits count."

I carry a 9, but only because I need to carry it concealed, which is not a requirement for a combat side arm.
 
"you should have run in the first place..."

Good thought, assuming running is an option.

Of course, one could be in an enclosed space, with the door on the wrong side of the problem.

One could be under attack by dogs; most folks can't outrun those, and hitting them can be a trick, as they tend to use speed and motion in attack mode, so multiple bullets per dog is likely needed.

One could be injured, or older, or obese, and unable to run under any circumstances.

One could be dealing with an assailant who is hyped up on any number of chemicals which would minimize pain and shock, requiring a lot of good hits to stop the problem.

I've never heard a convincing argument why a greater magazine capacity is a liability.

Now, going back to the "armed forces" aspect of this thread...

Napoleon - "An army marches on its stomach."

Von Clausewitz - "Amateurs study tactics; professionals study logistics."

If you can't carry enough of what you need, or get enough of what you need, then your needs are a problem.

Spending a lot of money to create stockpiles of ammo for a secondary or tertiary weapon is probably not strategically sound practice.

Ergo, it makes the most sense to use commonly available, relatively inexpensive, highly portable ammunition - which brings us right back to the 9mm for the foreseeable future, at least for the mainstream military. SPEC OPS folks have their own budget, and their own needs, and are really a separate discussion.
 
Jimbob86, I'm sorry. I thought this topic was about what our Armed Forces were carrying and not what the "majority of Americans" were carrying.

..... and the majority of Americans wander around in Condition White, carrying no mindset, skills or hardware. We should do this also? Bad Plan, poorer argument for it.....
Click to expand...

Most troops I've been around had proper skills, hardware, and a strong warrior mentality. Even soldiers who were in non-combat MOS' were trained relatively well and had a warrior mentality.

How is having the same caliber as your other allies in a combat zone a bad plan? What's your side of the argument that cites it's a bad plan? I would think sharing ammo would be a good idea, logistically.

I'm talking about Allies with our Armed Forces, such as the British military or the Australian military, not the next door neighbor.
 
357 Sig

Definetly the 357 sig. The speed of the 9mm and the energy of a 45. Add that with the bottle neck cartridge which is more reliable feeding wise. It has better penetration than most pistol cartridges as well. I've carried the 357 sig for work for the last 9 yrs. Working in a rural setting, it is perfect for us. Local police officers would probably be better served with the 40, since over penetration can be a factor with the sig. For military use, that would not be an issue.
 
But I've seen regular folks who have a hard time controlling the 357 as compared to the 9. So if folks don't train intensively with it - as the armed forces probably won't do - is it better to have an easier gun to shoot vs. a small gain in power. A powerful miss or screwed up second shot isn't fun.
 
10mm in a Glock.

Because the M&P is'nt made in the caliber yet.

Failing that,the 40 Smith round and the M&P because it is made in that round.

Very odd that the FBI finds the 9mm to weak when they might encounter an assailant that wants to kill them and the U.S.military procurement office finds the 9mm acceptable when all U.S. soldiers will encounter is people that want all of them dead.
 
Being in the armed forces myself. I'm an 88M - Truck Driver and like the idea of military carrying a second sidearm. The 9MM IMO is too small though. The .357 SIG or .40 should be the smallest round carried. Maybe even .45 ACP. As for the rifle. I think 7.62 x 51R is the better choice. The 7.62 x 39 would work too. Even more universal. In Afganistan. The 5.56 just doesn't reach out like their snipers can reach us. As for ammo capacity. That's why we carry several mags with us at all times for whatever we may be carrying. So having a hand gun that only holds 10 - 12 rounds. Doesn't bother me either. I'll take the stopping power of a bigger bullit with less weapon capacity over a 9MM any day.
 
7.62x39 is not really a long range round

Kind of a garden hose trajectory, not unlike a .30-30.

Bad guy snipers shooting effectively from distance are more likely to have something like a 7.62x54R.

7.62x39 would actually give less hit probability at range than our current gear.
 
For those who think the 9mm is too small, there's another thread about the Beretta pistol where people are complaining it (the pistol) is too big and heavy! But I assume no one there is posting here and vice versa.
 
As a former Infantry officer I have no problem with the 9mm (though I'd rather carry a good JHP than ball).

As an aside, my father was a green beret in Vietnam with 4 official tours and at least one other as an 'advisor'. He carried a Browning Hi-Power and not the .45 .... Why? The ability to carry more ammo.
 
As a former Infantry officer I have no problem with the 9mm (though I'd rather carry a good JHP than ball).

As an aside, my father was a green beret in Vietnam with 4 official tours and at least one other as an 'advisor'. He carried a Browning Hi-Power and not the .45 .... Why? The ability to carry more ammo.
Click to expand...

Great post and thanks for your service and your father's!

I have a few friends in the military who have used the M9 with good effectiveness against our enemies in the sandbox.

It would be nice if our troops could carry JHP ammo but we realize that's a non-starter. :(
 
We qualify several hundred cops with Glock21SFs in 45 ACP. Little girl cops too :) My vote is for a G21SF with maybe a NY trigger made in USA.
 
fredneck,

The NY Trigger with the 3 lb connector, gives a great 6 lb revolver like feel, but not the NYC 12 lb trigger!

Keep training. So they all go home at the end of their shift. (even the wee girls)
 
USAF Security Police and the M9 9mm

Real world with the M-9

In June of 1994 the Fairchild AFB hospital shooting occurred . USAF SP SrA. Andy Brown (who if memory serves was on bike patrol) shot 4 rounds from his M-9 at Dean Mellberg hitting him twice, once in the shoulder and once in the head. Killing Melberg at a range of 70-80 yards.

Melberg had been on a killing spree in the hospital with his Mak-90. He had killed 7 or 8 people including women and at least one child before SrA Brown stopped him in the parking lot.

SrA Brown got the Airman medal for his action.

It is not the pistol it is person.
 
I love the Glock 21, it's an awesome weapon, I carry one as my daily carry, but aside from the .45 ACP issue, or even a Glock 17, the United States military has an immense love, and rightly so in some cases, for sidearms with an external safety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top