Bring back the 1911A1 45cal... The 9mm was, is and always will be a joke as a battlefield caliber!...
I am a fan of the 1911 and the 45, but it's not for everyone. As long as we have small statured men and women in the military, we should continue with 9mm, though bullet selection needs attention, IMHO.
I've never had a problem with 9mm doing the job... I just hate the Beretta. Never found the 92f and its variants all that great. The 1911A1 is a good gun but ammo capacity is the disqualifier for it every time..... I don't mind 45cal I just have never seen proof of it's "mythical" stopping power. I've seen just as many guys keep coming hit by 45cal than any other. The truth in combat is this, SHOT PLACEMENT. The real question with 1911's is, how many reloads do we want to add to the process?
You can look at real shooting stats and see what calibers have better records for stopping humans. Still, when talking about handguns, stopping power is elusive anyway. I will throw stones at the 92 all day long, too. This is something that IMO, has really been at the core of the "Disdain" for 9mm. It's really about the gun. While I agree that reloads take time and therefore are risky in combat, most high cap 45s are large enough to be problematic. The M9 has a
large grip frame and long trigger reach in DA, which makes it troublesome for many, in both comfort of carry, and fundamentally important "Grip & trigger reach". If people can't wrap a hand around it and have trouble reaching the trigger, they will have
bad accuracy issues. There are far more double stack 9s that are easy to manage, almost every manufacturer has surpassed Beretta's design, including Taurus who made the same gun capable of "Cocked & locked" carry, which has made the gun easier to handle and fire for folks with less than large hands.
...the 9 was/is use as the primary handgun caliber with nato political reason it was chosen, if a soldier is unable to support and fire any firearm they have no business in uniform!, perhaps training a soldier to become proficient in using the firearm instead of replacing proficiency with higher capacity magazines.... I know many reports coming in from the middle east (front line soldiers) are not happy with the 9, my son in law who spent 1 tour iraq and 2 tours afghanistan cursed the 9, my daughter (his wife) was an MP in iraq who also had a problem with the 9...I guess caliber is a personal choice for some, I prefer the 7.62x51 and the 308 over the 5.56 the jeep over the humvee maybe age plays a factor here!
No doubt there were politics at play in choosing the 9mm. That doesn't necessarily a bad choice make... The round is the most common in the world, and even if your troops can use another platform(Which I agree, they should be able to shoot anything on the field), there is something to be said for being able to readily utilize enemy ammo & stockpiles in issued weapons. I'm not trying to discount your daughter's or son in law's opinions, but maybe they had trouble with the platform and it cast a shadow on the caliber. That's assuming that they had Berettas and I admit it may not be the case at all in their experience. I think 7.62 is a stronger round than a 5.56, but you generally have the same issues. Weight, recoil, follow up shots, etc... Training to make shots count is a great idea, but there will always be times when higher round count matters. In fact, it's never a liability, really. Not so far as I've ever known. No one can discount the 45 or 308 for it's ability, but it just doesn't suit as many people as the 9 and 223. There is also more ammo available for 5.56 even though 7.62 is a NATO round, too. They all have their place, finding it is the hurdle. As far as vehicles go.... Well....Jeeps will always reign supreme. I have a hard time believing that vehicle will ever be one upped!
