One Sixth Warriors Forum banner
1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
All Decade's Fault
Joined
·
2,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Guys, just a few questions on US-issue (and some non-issue) sidearms:

- AFAIK, the three sidearms normally carried by US forces are the Colt M1911 (some old-timers), the M9 Beretta (92FS) and the compact M11 Sig (Sig P228). Are there any other handguns -officially- recognized or labelled in the US inventory or is this it?

- Other than Special Forces units, are there any other Army/Navy/Marine units that are lax about what kind of sidearm their men are allowed to carry?

- I know most standard infantry troops don't carry sidearms, but is this because of official structure or can line troops (Corporals and the like) carry sidearms if they can?

- What forces in the world currently adopt the Walther P99 pistol--with the LAM module?

Just asking a few, Wavehawk.
 

·
Custom User Title
Joined
·
2,594 Posts
When I was in (USMC 92-96) the standard side arm was the M9 Beretta (92FS). The only 1911 I saw was in the holding barracks in SOI (School of Infrantry). I have heard that the USMC is moving back to the 1911 because.............well the 9mm can't stop grandma at the buffet and the 45ACP can. I can't speak for the other branches but I do think the 9mm was a mistake.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
Hi Wavehawk

Just a portion of your question is something I think I can answer. In general, all officers if combat deployed will carry a sidearm of choice, historically usually 1911a1 or M9 Baretta. Enlisted soldiers in Army or Marines will possibly carry a sidearm if a member of a mortar team, an automatic rifleman, and Military Police also carry sidearms, and I am sure there are other circumstances where a sidearm will be issued instead of or in addition to a rifle or carbine. Special Ops is an entirely different issue in that most members are NCOs and officers and I am sure that those soldiers carry sidearms of choice as well, in which case it is purely up to the individual concerned.

LongRange
 

·
OSW Trade Police (Retired)
Joined
·
11,749 Posts
The 9mm in it's military form 115gr FMJ at 1100fps is indeed a rather poor manstopping round. However, the 9mm PB has indeed killed more people than the .45ACP ever will.

If you use modern expanding rounds, the 9mm's performance becomes much more capable.

Ranger SXT (formerly known as Black Talon) is 147 gr JHP is an excellent load, as are many other 90-115 gr JHPs.

One must think when you're issuing a handgun for some 300,000 people, it must meet the needs of all of them. The .45 is difficult for many to shoot let alone master. One hit with a 9mm, is better than seven misses with a .45.

By and large in a military situation, the handgun has a very limited role. Those that require a more potent pistol, like SF types, have the extra training and resources to make issuing a new pistol to suit they're needs worthwhile.

Personally, I prefer a .357 Magnum with Federal 125gr JHP's, but in a situation where you must deal with issuing a side arm to many different size/body types, and deal with the possibility of multiple opponents, various levels of skill and training, the modern "double action" 9mm fits the bill better than anything else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,107 Posts
MK23 SOCOM(I think?) handgun. It's a big gun and hold 12 rounds of .45 ACP. I think that's all I can think of right now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
When I was in (158th AVN, 1983-88), Army aviators carried a .38 six-shooter. They may have the m92 now, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Ranger SXT (formerly known as Black Talon) is 147 gr JHP is an excellent load, as are many other 90-115 gr JHPs.

Too bad HP is forbidden under the Geneva Convention.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,861 Posts
I remember the Black Talon and Pre-Brady Bill Days...:wail :wail :wail When a person could fill a backpack full of 30rd mags at a gunshow for about $50 and get 3 Ar15s for the current price of 1 sometimes...:wail :wail :sadshake The good ol days...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
the Spec Ops boys are granted some leway on carriage. USPs are seen, as are all sort of custom shop'ed .45s. Sigs are also very common to see.

The USMC is issueing the "MEU-SOC" 45 to its front line units IE Recon, MEU, and the M-9 to other more traditional units.

Army Boys are stuck with the M-9, and most 1911's, if carried are done "illegally." The SF carries what they see fit, but normally the M9 is the weapon issued. Rangers have no choice, and use M9s, but Delta will be givin whatever he needs. 160th guys Like the Sigs and normally issued the M9

The Navy pukes on ship get the M9, and the SEALS get the same latitude as Delta. SEAL boat crews get a smiliar latidue as there passengers.

As for the Mk-23, it is by design, not a sidearm, it is an "offensive handgun" and is a very mission specific item. Its used primarilly for sentry removal, and it is not strange to have it on a backup rig dangling from 1's buttpack!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
As a "Navy Puke", (as Figure Fan so eloquently put it), I carried a .45 . Whether I was on ship, or attached to shore units, it was always readily available to me.Doctored loads, or undoctored loads, it is the most durable and efficient handgun I have ever shot. Maybe that's why I own five.........
Gunner's Mate (Guns) Chief
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
479 Posts
Grunt Speak

Can't speak for the other services...except for what I personally saw, but I was in the Army Military Police between 1974-1994. The majority of the time I was carrying the .45 ACP M1911A1 and I loved it. By today's standards, it isn't a large load (7 + 1) but it did the job. I once was issued a pistol stamped "Signal Switch & Steel" and discovered it was made just after WW2 as a 1911 and modified to A1 standards before I got it....and it still worked well up until 1981 when I departed that unit. We still carried the 1911 during Desert Storm, and refit with the M9 just after returning in the summer of '91. The M9 was a nice change (easier shooting and larger capacity mag) but alot of people complained about the lack of stopping power. I can only answer that arguement this way....the Isreali's have used (as a special weapon) a .22 CB Short to great effect (sub-sonic round and makes very little noise plus the bullet is hard to trace)....they hit what they aim at. Doesn't matter what caliber, you will never get the "Hollywood Effect" with a solid hit. Best you can hope for is an instant kill, which means they drop like a sack of potatoes...and don't get back up again later. If we're voting for the most effective caliber...my vote still goes for the nuclear-tipped anything. One shot....no victim, no witnesses,....you get the picture.
 

·
All Decade's Fault
Joined
·
2,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Hmmm...Sorry, I guess I should have clarified the question--I was working on a female figure bash and was wondering what kinds of sidearms would be technically accurate for her. I didn't want to use the usual M9 or M1911, and was thinking about the Walther P99 with LAM as a sidearm, instead.

The reason for it being primarily US forces is that she's wearing the US Army 3-color Desert Camo scheme. So I guess that only Special Forces get to pick their sidearms? The trouble is, I don't know if there are women in Special Forces, or if they are, I don't know if they're serving in a combat position.

Also, the drop-leg pistol holster that comes with the first edition CyGirl figures is...tiny. Other than the P7M13 that comes with the figure, or an InToys Sig P232 (something the size of a Walther PPK), larger guns like the M1911 or the M9 can fit, but look ridiculous.

USMCCHET92_96 the 9mm can't stop grandma at the buffet

- Bloody hell, Chet--Knowing MY grandma, I doubt even a 120mm shell could stop her at the buffet table. :p

But as to the 9mm--I'd always been under the impression that the Beretta M9 was adopted to meet NATO standards; i.e. that NATO sidearms use dthe 9mm PB and until the Berettacame along, the US was the only NATO member that still used the .45ACP round.

Bulldog Too bad HP is forbidden under the Geneva Convention.

- Of course, the Geneva Convention doesn't stop certain folk from developing and testing nerve gas on their populace or flying passenger planes full of people into buildings full of more people. And oddly enough, we hear a lot of outrage over human rights violations done by the military against suspected terrorists but not a peep when confirmed terrorists rape, pillage, and plunder civilians.

...Is it just me, or do we live in a world geared to let the 'bad guys' win?

FigureFan1701 As for the Mk-23, it is by design, not a sidearm, it is an "offensive handgun" and is a very mission specific item. Its used primarilly for sentry removal, and it is not strange to have it on a backup rig dangling from 1's buttpack!

- That reminds me--Someone argued with me that the Mk23 is based off the HK P8 first, then the USP followed; not the other way around (Mk23 based off the USP)--any truth to this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
221 Posts
During my Army days I saw these basic three side arms M-9 Beretta and .45 ACP 1911 both of which I carried at two sperate units. I seen guys carrying the .38 cal six shooter, why is beyond me I perfer the automatc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
The Mk23 bequth all other.....everything in the design lineage is a modifacation of the Mk23....

Try HKPro.com for the real story...

Chief, i owe you an apologie, my family are all puking squids! i just went the other way to the evil green.... and maybe our info is correct, just for different times?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
684 Posts
wavehawk said:
Hmmm...Sorry, I guess I should have clarified the question--I was working on a female figure bash and was wondering what kinds of sidearms would be technically accurate for her. I didn't want to use the usual M9 or M1911, and was thinking about the Walther P99 with LAM as a sidearm, instead.

The reason for it being primarily US forces is that she's wearing the US Army 3-color Desert Camo scheme. So I guess that only Special Forces get to pick their sidearms? The trouble is, I don't know if there are women in Special Forces, or if they are, I don't know if they're serving in a combat position.B]


Given this scenario, I would say you would be forced to use the Beretta. SF does get a little say in what they carry, but a lot less than people think. All normal teams are issued a Beretta except the Special Security Force teams. In an SF group, there is a company of gents who are trained in the black arts. These are "long hair" door kicker teams who go to all the cool schools, get all the cool gear, and of course get all the most dangerous missions. Those guys can sometimes get something with a little more oomph. Regular teams can request to carry the Sig if they have small hands or cannot adjust well to the M9. I've seen it and was pissed because I didn't know I could ask for one. Now guys above that who may have been featured in a very famous movie about Somalia, can carry anything they want pretty much, but again I think you would be surprised at what they might carry (nuff said). Oh, and no there are no women on SF teams. They are assigned to the Groups in support roles though.
 

·
Gunslinger, chef, guitars
Joined
·
2,132 Posts
As to the arguement of against the Geneva Convention, I had heard the US has never officially signed or agreed to the Geneva Convention. Is that true?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
684 Posts
If so, that's a new one to me! We have actually changed the way we do things because of the Geneva Conventions. My ID card says "Geneva Conventions Identification Card" and the back tells my Geneva Conventions category. No, the US very much recognizes and adheres to the conventions. I would not be aware of, nor would I be able to discuss any breaches of said convention. At least not without council.
 

·
Gunslinger, chef, guitars
Joined
·
2,132 Posts
I know that we tend to abide by it, recognize it and all, but I had heard once that we never actually signed it. That we just abide by it out of courtesy, essentially.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
684 Posts
After some referencing and a little head scratching, I found that yes, the US did sign all 4 Geneva Conventions. There is not just one. The first convention covered the treatment of wounded soldiers and those carry for them. That was signed by President Chester Arthur in 1882. The other treaties were signed in 1907, (covered treatment of wounded armed forces at sea and shipwreck victims) 1929 (detailed treatment of POWs), and 1949 (revised the other 3 and addressed civilians on the battlefield). This last convention was considered the cornerstone of modern humanitarian law. The conventions were amended in 1977 to further protect civilians and it covered conflicts within a nation.
The International Red Cross states that the U.S. has signed all of the conventions. Another important thing to remember though is that just because a nation signs it does not mean they must abide by it. It must be ratified by that nation, thus becoming law. The US has ratified all the conventions however with the exception of the 1977 protocals (don't ask me why I have no clue).
Hope this helps out with the whole Geneva Conventions thing!
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top