Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Palladin wrote:I move they adopt the .50 Desert Eagle

I doubt the newer namby pamby generation could handle the.50........not even sure i could.

Palladin wrote:I move they adopt the .50 Desert Eagle

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Good idea. It could double as an entrenching tool. Just point it at the ground and pull the trigger 2-3 times. Instant foxhole. And when you run out of ammo, just grab the barrel and use it as a sledgehammer.

The army will probably stick with the requirement for an external safety so no Glock.
A S&W M&P in .45 might be the ticket. They even make them in tactical doo-doo color.

dusterdude wrote:Betcha it will be a 40


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I doubt it will be the .40, there are issues about it's stopping power with ball ammo. And wear issues. It appears the .45 is leading the discussions, but we may see a tupperware .45 rather than a 1911 format, due to ease of cleaning, etc.

skeeterss0 wrote:

Palladin wrote:I move they adopt the .50 Desert Eagle

I doubt the newer namby pamby generation could handle the.50........not even sure i could.

I either carry a .45 acp, or a .357 magnum. Nothing else.

I do hope its a .45,love em


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jgreiner wrote:
I doubt it will be the .40, there are issues about it's stopping power with ball ammo. And wear issues. It appears the .45 is leading the discussions, but we may see a tupperware .45 rather than a 1911 format, due to ease of cleaning, etc.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I know folks who like to call the .40 S&W the .40"short & weak". I've probably not shot over 500 rounds of it, and really have no opinion about the round. I don't have much that fires it except a couple of Glock 22s; and I'm not much of a Glock fan. Everybody KNOWS what I'm partial to; but I, too doubt they would re-adopt the 1911.

My money is on the Sig P227

http://www.sigsauer.com/CatalogProductD ... itron.aspx

I think a modern double stack design .45 would be awesome. As nice as the traditional 1911's are, I would think ammo capacity would be a concern. A 14-15 round single stack would be too long for practical use. Sig P227 with a 14 +1 would get the job done nicely. HK, SA, and Para-Ordnance all have nice double stack .45's

Given that the M11/ Sig 228 (compact pistol in military terms) and the Sig 226 both made it into service with only a decocker for safety, I wouldn't be surprised with a double action/ single action pistol makes it into specification, I would speculate it won't be a plastic/polymer weapon and it will be equipped with a rail. I also don't believe anything will come of this competition, like the past few pistol and rifle/carbine competitions and it will just be another waste of money.

grumpyMSG wrote: I also don't believe anything will come of this competition, like the past few pistol and rifle/carbine competitions and it will just be another waste of money.

My thinking as well. It's just not a priority for the Army at large and the special outfits can already get what they want off the shelf.

Chasbo00 wrote:

grumpyMSG wrote: I also don't believe anything will come of this competition, like the past few pistol and rifle/carbine competitions and it will just be another waste of money.

My thinking as well. It's just not a priority for the Army at large and the special outfits can already get what they want off the shelf.

Here on the sidelines, patting' my foot.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I give this less than a 50-50 chance of becoming a formal program of record. I just can't imagine that the pistol was that important during the last two wars. Sure, they'll find a case where somebody shot an insurgent 7 times with their M9 and he kept coming. Guns are like camo - old school things that people love to debate over and over. The army made a big mistake with their choice of ACU a decade ago, and now they are fixing it, but I don't see the same thing happening for their pistols.

The real debate would be whether the military should use hollow points, or is it more important to give the appearance of being kind and gentle when killing someone?

trailrunner wrote:I give this less than a 50-50 chance of becoming a formal program of record. I just can't imagine that the pistol was that important during the last two wars. Sure, they'll find a case where somebody shot an insurgent 7 times with their M9 and he kept coming. Guns are like camo - old school things that people love to debate over and over. The army made a big mistake with their choice of ACU a decade ago, and now they are fixing it, but I don't see the same thing happening for their pistols.

The real debate would be whether the military should use hollow points, or is it more important to give the appearance of being kind and gentle when killing someone?

Hague convention prevents such things as expanding ammunition. However, last I checked they still used depleted uranium rounds so I am sure the military is not for keeping a gentle hand when killing, but anything other than ball is a war crime, or at least violation of the convention.

I could see them going with a Smith and Wesson M&P in .40 if the went striker fired and Sig Sauer P226 in .40 for the double/single action and decocker... Although, we may be surprised with an HK model on the drawing board.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

BertMacklin wrote: Hague convention prevents such things as expanding ammunition. However, last I checked they still used depleted uranium rounds so I am sure the military is not for keeping a gentle hand when killing, but anything other than ball is a war crime, or at least violation of the convention.

The US didn't ratify the part of the Hague convention that prohibits expanding ammunition, and therefore isn't technically bound by the treaty. I also believe that both parties in the conflict have to have signed the treaty for it to be effective.

The depleted uranium is generally an AP round, chosen for its very high density and some other properties.

trailrunner wrote:...The army made a big mistake with their choice of ACU a decade ago...

trailrunner wrote:

BertMacklin wrote: Hague convention prevents such things as expanding ammunition. However, last I checked they still used depleted uranium rounds so I am sure the military is not for keeping a gentle hand when killing, but anything other than ball is a war crime, or at least violation of the convention.

The US didn't ratify the part of the Hague convention that prohibits expanding ammunition, and therefore isn't technically bound by the treaty. I also believe that both parties in the conflict have to have signed the treaty for it to be effective.

The depleted uranium is generally an AP round, chosen for its very high density and some other properties.

One of those properties is that it turns the next generation of locals into a still born freak show in jars.

I know a couple SF guys who said they carried what ever side arm they wanted in the sand box on missions. The one I know the best carried a Glock 19. One of my absolute favorite hands guns.

I've heard the same. One of my buddies (Army Captain) said he took his Glock 22, EOTech/magnifier, sling and his own mags for his issue AR on his last 2 deployments.