new pistol for the military

by **g4l** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:04 pm

That's quite a story! Unfortunately, I recently read that the Military gave another huge contract to Beretta for the M-9.

by **tigwelder56** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:36 pm

I always wonder what motivates the idiot bean counters to purchase the M-9's for the Military in general, but they offer Special Forces, Officers and certain other groups their choice. I know that several of the Seal Teams are provided suppressed Kimber .45's and suppressed Ruger Mk III .22's. The bozo's in charge of weapon procurement and distribution could easily find a quality .45acp semi auto, that would provide twice the performance of those toy pistols our troops are forced to take into battle today. I'm curious how much money the American taxpayers are paying for each M-9? Does anyone know? Whatever it is, it's too much for too little in return.

by **keyman** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:17 pm

Hi, tig . . . I read the other day that the Military had ordered 450,000 of the Beretta 9mms.

If that's true, sounds to me like they crapped in their nest ! ! !

by **tigwelder56** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:56 pm

Isn't that special? I did a little figuring and came up with some numbers that are absurd enough to be true. You mentioned that the US Military purchased 450,000 M-9's. Consider this SWAG and tell me what you think. Since we paid $600 apiece for a barebones toilet seat,( including the lid, I think, lol!!), I would feel safe by estimating at least an initial cost of $1000 per pistol. I realize that's twice the realistic cost. But then what do you think the realistic cost of a barebones toilet seat would be? Imagine the percentage over actual retail prices, even wholesale prices? So what I'm getting at, based on that outrageous guesstimated price, those same pistols would likely cost the taxpayer approximately $450 Million dollars! For an unwanted, under powered, last chance defense weapon, meant to protect our Military! It's a damn shame.

by **beltbuckle** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:49 am

I heard this from an unreliable source but reliable enough to ask the question...

I heard the army is switching to .40S&W soon

This imo is good news, if it's true. Can someone validate this???

by **tigwelder56** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 2:47 am

I hope you're right BB! That would be a huge improvement. Our troops and pilots need something with the balls to put someone down quickly. They give 1911's to our Special Forces Teams. Are our regular ground forces not worthy of an equally effective sidearm? I think not!

by **tigwelder56** » Wed Jul 22, 2009 2:10 am

Beyond an ongoing program determining the continued use of the 9mm for the military sidearm, there is also ammo studies being conducted. Right now they're testing and using new ammo in a beta study in both theatres of War. Federal has produced this LP-FMJ ("Limited Penetration-Full Metal Jacket") round in a military configuration.

The second Federal load the EFMJ features an internal nose cap made from what the company calls "rubber" and which seems to actually be a kind of white silicone. As it meets resistance, this bullet flattens out at the nose. Because it has no hollow cavity that can fill with clothing, sheetrock, or other intermediate substances, it has an excellent reputation for expanding despite intermediate barricades.

Read the whole article here:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... ntent;col1

by **tigwelder56** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 3:11 pm

RE: "Limited Penetration-Full Metal Jacket" Ammo Etc, Why is our Country "Limiting" Anything? These Rag Heads would Fire Nuclear Tipped Ammo if it were possible at us, so why do we limit what we shoot at them??

I just don't understand this! Let's use something that will end all this crap and bring our Boys back Home!

Maybe this sounds ignorant, but I am getting sick of all these never ending wars!! We haven't Won a thing since WW2!

by **tigwelder56** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:42 pm

Well said Bill! There are alot of people wondering the exact same thing. Seems like we're the only ones that are obeying the rules of the Geneva Convention. If the enemy doesn't give a shit about rules, then we should play by theirs. This tip toeing around, trying not to piss anyone off or hurting their poor Islamic feelings is bullshit! It's time to take off the gloves and kick some butt. If we would've had these liberal pussies running WW2, we'd all be speaking German. Can you imagine what they'd do if we started carpet bombing Iraq like we did Germany? We lost 43 troops in July, the most in one month since the war started. It's time to let our guys do what is needed to win this war and get out.

by **tigwelder56** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:22 pm

Thank's Tig!

While I am on my Soapbox, Why are these Countries that we are protecting *Not paying for our Services in Oil?? These are Rich Countries, yet we Borrow and pour in Money like it's water!

"UN Peacekeepers" are usually made up of 1 Austrailian, 1 Canadian, and the rest are Americans! What are we getting out of all this but Body Bags? The entire situation seems to be so easilly solved to all of our advantages, yet we (Our Politicians) do nothing! We have to always play "Good Guy"!

*Things need a Quick Radical Change! Send me over there with a Sniper Rifle and License to Kill!

OK, I'll calm down now! LOL

Bill