testtest

Best 3 “combat” handguns

SATRP said:
As much as I love the Model 1911-A1, especially its stellar history as a military and law enforcement handgun, I'm still of the opinion that US Military did not replace the 1911-A1 with the M9. It replaced the battle handgun, except for specialized units. The monumental advancements in military battle rifles (semiauto replicas of military weapons are not assault rifles) have caused battles handguns to become obsolete. I'd much rather carry more 30 round magazines for an H&K 416 than any handgun.

As a battle handgun, the only one of which I'm aware that was designed from the ground up to be a battle handgun was the 1911-A1 (It began life as the Model 1911.) .45 Auto. Others, especially double-action semis, were adapted for military use.

If I were in the US Military and had to carry a handgun, it would be a Springfield Armory TRP .45 Auto. The US Military could keep its Sig 9MM. I'd use my own Springfield Armory TRP .45 Auto.

If I were still driving a black & white, I'd cajole to the best of my ability to carry my Springfield Armory TRP .45 Auto. I have no clue of why sheriffs and police chiefs think that 1911-A1 has poor PR with citizens. 99.9% of people law enforcement agencies serve either are clueless of duty handguns or they don't care what handguns their cops carry. I cannot remember anyone asking questions about my duty handguns.
Click to expand...

I am one of the biggest 1911 fans out here, to start off saying. I don’t know when you were in but the M9 was the service pistol when I was in. Back in 2012 when Colt defense was awarded the CQB pistol, the Colt 1911 USMC that didn’t last long. MARSOC even was allowed to switch to Glock and preferred it. The Elite Forces, which as I’m sure you know, inside and outside of the the military including LE, have a say so in what they carry and Glock and Sig are preferred. You have some, in LE that carry a 1911, and I don’t know how to say this, but depending on the situation I’m in would dictate what I carried. If I can carry a 1911, I will. I’ve said it, Glocks are ugly, but they are accurate and work. Sigs are nice and accurate. 1911’s are pretty and work but limited, in capacity and weight.
 
BangBang said:
I am one of the biggest 1911 fans out here, to start off saying. I don’t know when you were in but the M9 was the service pistol when I was in. Back in 2012 when Colt defense was awarded the CQB pistol, the Colt 1911 USMC that didn’t last long. MARSOC even was allowed to switch to Glock and preferred it. The Elite Forces, which as I’m sure you know, inside and outside of the the military including LE, have a say so in what they carry and Glock and Sig are preferred. You have some, in LE that carry a 1911, and I don’t know how to say this, but depending on the situation I’m in would dictate what I carried. If I can carry a 1911, I will. I’ve said it, Glocks are ugly, but they are accurate and work. Sigs are nice and accurate. 1911’s are pretty and work but limited, in capacity and weight.
Click to expand...

I'm more than good with your opinion.

During the Spanish-American War, the US Army issued very obsolete single shot .45/70 rifles to the infantry. US Army brass feared soldiers would waste ammo if they had far more effective repeating rifles. Bras learned its lesson when soldiers faced the Spanish M93, a 7x57 bolt action repeating rifle. How many sof our soldiers died due to US Army brss stupidity?

If you get a chance, watch this movie. It's about the old guard refusing to accept then modern technology:

I do know that my Springfield Armory is probably the most accurate handgun I own (I've not fired my Springfield Armory Profession Model.), and that includes a few Sigs. I've carried a Sig P229 .40 S&W as a duty handgun for many years. The last gun I was FORCED to carry was an H&K USP double-stack 45 Auto. That was one huge handgun. I desperately wanted to go back to my Sig P229 (I'd much prefer a .45 Auto over a .40 S&W and 9MM, but not if I need a wheelbarrow to carry it.) because that H&K was a beast. I had to do as ordered.

BTW, my Sig P229 was extremely extremely convenient because it was very easy to carry off-duty. That meant I didn't have to sweat muscle memory.

Many old school cops that I knew, especially veterans, carried 1911-A1s off duty. I knew an old school cop (he's long in Heaven) who nearly used one off-duty when Hell's Angels picked on the wrong dude. While off-duty he did put a bullet between the eyes of a serious felony suspect who did a drive by on cops. He was the definitive old school cop and man's man. He wouldn't have taken a knee in support of BLM, which is a definitive criminal street gang.

There's a reason that the 1911-A1 has been with us (in original form that would become the 1911-A1) for will over century..

But you go with what's right for you.

BTW, my point was that battle handguns, except for specialized units, are obsolete due to technological advancements in battle rifles. We've come a very long way from the clip-fed Garand. During WWII, I would have wanted a 1911-A1 due to limited clip capacity and length of reload time. Today, I'd much rather carry extra mags for an H&K 416, especially the 11" model. Do you believe my theory that the US Military didn't replace the 1911-A1, that it tacitly recognized the superiority of the model battle rifle and its ability to extremely quickly reload another 30 round mag, is valid?

Computers began life as mechanical devices. Now they're exclusively electronic. Like battleships, technological advancements are making the new obsolete in very short order. The USS Wisconsin, the last battleship America manufactured, was obsolete before it hit water. Airplanes made battleships obsolete. The Battle of Midway was the first naval battle fought entirely by aircraft. There are more than a few military experts who've opined that aircraft carriers are obsolete due to technological advancements (drones, precise missiles, etc.). But there's HUGE money in the military-industrial complex. At 330 mil-a-copy, the military will justify the F-35. Assuming infantry battles are necessary, is it possible that unfathomable advancements in battle rifle technology have made infantry handguns obsolete? My guess is yes.
 
SATRP said:
I'm more than good with your opinion.

During the Spanish-American War, the US Army issued very obsolete single shot .45/70 rifles to the infantry. US Army brass feared soldiers would waste ammo if they had far more effective repeating rifles. Bras learned its lesson when soldiers faced the Spanish M93, a 7x57 bolt action repeating rifle. How many sof our soldiers died due to US Army brss stupidity?

If you get a chance, watch this movie. It's about the old guard refusing to accept then modern technology:

I do know that my Springfield Armory is probably the most accurate handgun I own (I've not fired my Springfield Armory Profession Model.), and that includes a few Sigs. I've carried a Sig P229 .40 S&W as a duty handgun for many years. The last gun I was FORCED to carry was an H&K USP double-stack 45 Auto. That was one huge handgun. I desperately wanted to go back to my Sig P229 (I'd much prefer a .45 Auto over a .40 S&W and 9MM, but not if I need a wheelbarrow to carry it.) because that H&K was a beast. I had to do as ordered.

BTW, my Sig P229 was extremely extremely convenient because it was very easy to carry off-duty. That meant I didn't have to sweat muscle memory.

Many old school cops that I knew, especially veterans, carried 1911-A1s off duty. I knew an old school cop (he's long in Heaven) who nearly used one off-duty when Hell's Angels picked on the wrong dude. While off-duty he did put a bullet between the eyes of a serious felony suspect who did a drive by on cops. He was the definitive old school cop and man's man. He wouldn't have taken a knee in support of BLM, which is a definitive criminal street gang.

There's a reason that the 1911-A1 has been with us (in original form that would become the 1911-A1) for will over century..

But you go with what's right for you.

BTW, my point was that battle handguns, except for specialized units, are obsolete due to technological advancements in battle rifles. We've come a very long way from the clip-fed Garand. During WWII, I would have wanted a 1911-A1 due to limited clip capacity and length of reload time. Today, I'd much rather carry extra mags for an H&K 416, especially the 11" model. Do you believe my theory that the US Military didn't replace the 1911-A1, that it tacitly recognized the superiority of the model battle rifle and its ability to extremely quickly reload another 30 round mag, is valid?

Computers began life as mechanical devices. Now they're exclusively electronic. Like battleships, technological advancements are making the new obsolete in very short order. The USS Wisconsin, the last battleship America manufactured, was obsolete before it hit water. Airplanes made battleships obsolete. The Battle of Midway was the first naval battle fought entirely by aircraft. There are more than a few military experts who've opined that aircraft carriers are obsolete due to technological advancements (drones, precise missiles, etc.). But there's HUGE money in the military-industrial complex. At 330 mil-a-copy, the military will justify the F-35. Assuming infantry battles are necessary, is it possible that unfathomable advancements in battle rifle technology have made infantry handguns obsolete? My guess is yes.
Click to expand...

Good points and I will check that movie out. Yes The SOF gets a say but even now going to the Sig M17/18 from the loooong run with the M9. HK is a hell of a gun. .45 over .9mm. I’m with you. I respect everyone’s opinions and like I said earlier, I love the 1911 I have and do carry it. Like is said you make and bring up some good points. I weight out my options on when I can or how I can carry mine. Sometimes, unfortunately it’s not feasible or does it make sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top