Pentagon seeking replacement for M9 sidearm


sdprof

Active member
The general makes a lot of sense. It shouldn't take rocket surgery to pick a replacement pistol. Any of the major offerings would be good.
 

Blueshell

Banned
The general makes a lot of sense. It shouldn't take rocket surgery to pick a replacement pistol. Any of the major offerings would be good.
Beretta produced models that satisfy everything the Army is looking for, just for the Army to turn them down. The government is puting business deals ahead of Soldier's lives by playing these stupid games.
 

Blueshell

Banned
Law enforcement agencies have used Glocks for over two decades without this "thumb safety" thing being an issue. Kinda silly don't ya think?
The manual safety is one of the Army's requirements for every issued firearm, and pistols also have to have a decocker (which means Glock needs to add a hammer, too). In order for Glock to compete, Glock needs to install a thumb safety.

Law enforcement agencies are a different animal altogether and follow different rules.
 

BigSlick

New member
The manual safety is one of the Army's requirements for every issued firearm, and pistols also have to have a decocker (which means Glock needs to add a hammer, too). In order for Glock to complete, Glock needs to install a thumb safety.

Law enforcement agencies are a different animal altogether and follow different rules.

I guess the Navy Seals don't have to follow the Army rules either. The Glock 17/19 would serve as a very reliable sidearm for any branch of service. It is a shame that politics come into play here.
 

Blueshell

Banned
I guess the Navy Seals don't have to follow the Army rules either.
Right. Because they're the Navy, and the Army is the Army, and Seals aren't reguler Army ground troops.

Two totaly different things.

If Glock wants to compete for **ARMY** contract then they're going to have to fulfill the **ARMY'S ** requirements by adding a hammer, thumb saftey and decocker to their sidearm. Far, far more soldiers carry a sidearm than do seamen.

You say the **ARMY** should adopt Glock, so GlockFanBoy, link to the gun Glock developed to meet the **ARMY'S** needs.
 

bofh

Banned
There are aftermarket manual safety solutions for Glock pistols. However, they do defeat the very purpose of the Glock pistol design. It also makes the overall gun more expensive. If the Army only wants a pistol with a manual safety, it will only get a pistol with a manual safety. Special forces within the Army may likely get to choose their sidearm from a limited selection that may include Glocks. While MARSOC and SEALs have Glocks in their selection, the Navy and Army are completely different government departments.
 

Berto

New member
I would think that a Sig would be the obvious choice.
The Taurus OSS/DS also would meet the requirements if it weren't for that pesky "fires with no provocation with the safety on" problem. Whoops.
 

johnsutter71

New member
I never cared for the M9 myself. Week pistol. Pic of me at a Iraq Army base near Ramadi Iraq in 2010. 3rd Deployment. For personal use I love the Glock 30 and I conceal carry a Glock 43. The US Army will never adopt any pistol that doesn’t have a safety. Even though we handed out Glocks like candy to Iraqi security forces when we rebuilt their military. I saw 20 foot trailers full of brand new Glocks just waiting to be given away. I wanted to cry.
Link Removed


504DevilVet
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,434
Messages
623,592
Members
74,268
Latest member
zyvaaprilia
Top