The Internet's Original Gun Critic

100,000 More Beretta M9’s for the Army

Beretta has announced that the US Army is set for the M9 for another 5 years and has ordered another hundred thousand M9 handguns.

So there you go… No new Army handgun for some time to come.  Sorry guys.

Of course, the M9 isn’t all that bad, when running off of good Beretta made magazines.  It’s full sized frame makes it controllable, confidence inspiring, and it’s both accurate and reliable… again, when running off factory mags and not after market.    Of course, my problem isn’t the gun, but the chosen caliber.  Maybe we can get an upgrade kit and make them all .40’s at least?  No?  Oh well.  The 9mm has done a good job with what it’s had to deal with.  The problem though is that the US Military has to use FMJ ammunition, where as we can run good JHP’s if we like.  If the Military could use some good old Hollow Points, then I think the complaints about stopping power would diminish greatly.

If not HP’s, then how about EFMJ’s?  Expanding Full Metal Jackets.  They look like regular Ball ammo but expand on impact.

EDIT:  Okay, okay… It’s my fault.  I just got a Beretta 92 and all the Generals at the Pentagon are like “Ogre went with the M9?  Order 10 thousand more!  No, Scratch that!  Make it 100 Thousand!”  Then they all pulled out Cigars, slapped each other on the backs, and went back to telling Golf stories while the Marine General looked smug and quietly swirled his brandy knowing the Marines just bought a bunch of 1911’s for their Boys.
Yes, the DOD totally works on my recommendations:

Okay then:

1.  Build more F-22 Raptors.
2.  Build new M1 Battle Tanks.
3.  Build new A-10’s.
4.  Buy a shit ton of the Remington ACR’s chambered in 6.8SPC, with suppressors to match, roll these out to everyone with an 11 Series MOS first, other MOS’s can get them later.
5.  M9’s for everyone in Uniform.
6.  That uniform will be some form of Multicam.
7.  Anyone in Uniform with the nickname “SOAP” will be put on permanent KP duty.
8.  The Army will bring back the original WWII Jeeps with modern upgrades to engine, suspension, and coms…. but they will be the same size and weight as the originals, and they will look the same… because they were badass.
9.  Sergeants will be allowed to tell off Second Lieutenants.  “Sir, that’s a real fucking stupid idea… Sir.
10.  Have a fighter pilot mistake Nancy Pelosi’s plane as a Drone Target.  OOPS!!!

Please?

44 Comments

  1. Elijah's Gravatar Elijah
    09/17/2012    

    On point 9, let’s implement the Starship Troopers model of officer recruitment.

  2. Retired CATM's Gravatar Retired CATM
    09/17/2012    

    Even I, Mr Beretta to some, would prefer the M45 from Colt!

  3. stomper17's Gravatar stomper17
    09/17/2012    

    For number 1, well…we could crank out F-15SEs quicker and cheaper. And the SE is good to go.

    • LC DerKrieger's Gravatar LC DerKrieger
      09/18/2012    

      The F-15SE is nearly as expensive as the F-22 had we bought 300 of them. It’s not nearly as good as the F-22 too. Why not just build more proven F-22s?

      • 09/18/2012    

        The SE Eagle is primarily for Export. It’s only partially stealthed out, and even then, only from the front. This does not give us the distinct advantage the F-22 has.

  4. Curtis's Gravatar Curtis
    09/17/2012    

    We have more guns than any other country. How the hell are we still buying military arms from another country?

    • HiVelSword's Gravatar HiVelSword
      09/17/2012    

      At least the ones they ordered will be made here.

    • harp1034's Gravatar harp1034
      09/17/2012    

      The M9s are made in Maryland by Americans for Americans.

      • lip's Gravatar lip
        09/17/2012    

        M9 worst handgun ever.

        • 09/17/2012    

          Really? Then how come it did so well in the selection trials?

      • Curtis's Gravatar Curtis
        09/17/2012    

        My point was that it is not an American company.

  5. Mattitude's Gravatar Mattitude
    09/17/2012    

    I believe the A10 has been out of production for quite some time. I don’t believe that I have seen any aircraft numbers made after 1982 at either Myrtle Beach AFB, Spangdahlm AB or even at Pope AFB before their birds left back in 2008. It’s a badass airframe but extremely outdated with its original mission pretty much gone.

    • 09/17/2012    

      Mission gone? No, its just coming up.

      • LC DerKrieger's Gravatar LC DerKrieger
        09/18/2012    

        Getting the A-10 back in production today would be impossible. However…who wouldn’t like something better, like a heavily armed & armored UAV built around the Avenger gun? Without the pilot and armor for him you might be able to pack on more firepower than the old airplane.

        • 09/18/2012    

          Not impossible. Just not a flip the switch easy thing to do. I’d rather have a pilot in the air than a Drone and a drowsy Controller.

  6. Sean's Gravatar Sean
    09/17/2012    

    I like the suggestion for more A10s. Start with a gun, and make it airborne – what’s not to like?

    I’m desperately trying to come up with a function for the classic WWII battelship. Maybe one could “observe” the goings-on in places like Tripoli?

    • 09/17/2012    

      I used to frequently visit the USS Missouri when it was at port in Bremerton Washington. It was basically a floating museum. The guns are massive… pictures and movies do not do those things justice. I totally fell in love with the Battleships.
      But I can see the Navy’s reasons for their retirement. Even if they were fitted with new engines and all new navigation… The platform is just hopelessly outdated. It would be like putting an MP3 Player in a 1938 VW Beetle.

      • Retired CATM's Gravatar Retired CATM
        09/17/2012    

        Actual in service time for the 4 Iowas is probably lower than 70% of the fleet

    • HiVelSword's Gravatar HiVelSword
      09/17/2012    

      “I like the suggestion for more A10s. Start with a gun, and make it airborne – what’s not to like?”

      I like that idea too. But I also like the idea of it on a 25-30′ tall Mech holding it like Ahnold/Jesse Ventura.

      Scare those sand fleas so bad they’ll never come out of their holes.

      Alas, needs a small nuclear power source.

      • Flint's Gravatar Flint
        09/17/2012    

        Alas? Hardly. You need to market it properly:

        “Plus, it would be so badass that it would have it’s own nuclear power source!”

  7. Sulaco's Gravatar Sulaco
    09/17/2012    

    The A10 became the best we have ever seen at close air support tank busting, which I don’t think was the plan for the airframe when it was built. Just a happy coinkadink when the sand box erupted the first time. Looks like we may need all that were built with current events in play…

    • Wild Deuce's Gravatar Wild Deuce
      09/17/2012    

      I thought the A-10 was built specifically for busting tanks? … Soviet tanks? … Soviet tanks in Eastern Europe heading west (Germany)?

      From Wiki: “The A-10 was designed for a United States Air Force requirement to provide close air support (CAS) for ground forces by attacking tanks, armored vehicles, and other ground targets with a limited air interdiction capability. It is the first U.S. Air Force aircraft designed solely for close air support.”

  8. Brian Parramore's Gravatar Brian Parramore
    09/17/2012    

    Might as well throw in some turbo prop P-51 Mustangs.

    • 09/17/2012    

      If we get involved in more Brush Wars in Africa… Yes.

    • stomper17's Gravatar stomper17
      09/17/2012    

      Someone actually made such a thing.

  9. Phlemdog's Gravatar Phlemdog
    09/17/2012    

    Can’t do any expanding rounds. Hague Convention says, “The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions.”

    Stupid, I know. And I made it a point with leadership, since I was on a stateside base. The M9 had HP rounds, but it was a supply thing with the 5.56mm. Cheaper to buy everything the same, and less likely to screw up where it goes.

    I didn’t much care for the M9, honestly. Felt like I was holding a fence post.

    • Sean's Gravatar Sean
      09/17/2012    

      From Illinois white tail hunting regs:

      “Non-expanding military style full metal jacket bullets cannot be used to harvest white-tailed deer; only soft point or expanding bullets (including copper / copper-alloy rounds designed for hunting) are legal ammunition. ”

      What’s “humane” for hunting, is banned by convention in war, and vice versa???

    • 09/17/2012    

      The Hague Convention should only be viable when we are fighting others who have agreed.
      Right now we are not – so why are we holding ourselves to it?

      • stomper17's Gravatar stomper17
        09/17/2012    

        Great point. Lets unload with some jacketed glass!

  10. Kaso's Gravatar Kaso
    09/17/2012    

    Per Number 5, that would have to be expanded to include the M11.

    My sister is in the military, and the M9 would be way too big for her mitts. My P228 with an E2 grip and a short trigger is just about right for her.

    • Wild Deuce's Gravatar Wild Deuce
      09/17/2012    

      I was thinking the same thing. The M9 puts our female/smaller warriors at a disadvantage. Why not supply the best tool for the fight?

  11. Sulaco's Gravatar Sulaco
    09/17/2012    

    Ummmmmm P-51 Mustang. My all time fav!!!

  12. 09/17/2012    

    1. I would much rather see the Army buying S&W M&Ps, or even (ick!) Glocks, over the M9. They are both better performers than the M9 (IMO).
    2. I agree on the A-10. But, I think a better idea would to build Burt Rutan’s designed replacement for the A-10. Same gun system with updated frame, engine, and avionics.

    • Chem's Gravatar Chem
      09/18/2012    

      I love the A-10, but I am not convinced that we need that particular gun system. We should keep that gun and its capability in the inventory for anti-armor work. But for most of the CAS support we need today I think something like the A-1 Skyraider with its low tech, four 20mm single barrel cannons in the wings is what we could use. The 20mm will open up nearly every threat armor system except first line Main Battle Tanks, its ammo consumption rate is much lower, the airframe is cheaper to operate. The need to lay scunnion down on bad guys in a low air threat environment is not likely to go away and an A-1 type system could do it. There is nothing wrong with the high performance (jet) systems, but using them for all CAS is like swatting flies with a hammer. Its like owning a pick-up truck that can race NASCAR. That is awesome but it costs a lot for guys who are going to spend their time carrying cargo.

      • 09/18/2012    

        That’s pretty much what Rutan designed. It was called the Ares. There was nothing preventing them from mounting the 20mm cannons on the wings.

        http://bagera3005.deviantart.com/art/Scaled-Composites-ARES-180395035
        http://youtu.be/zG9LlHcX8lg

        • 09/18/2012    

          I saw the Ares in person at the EAA Airshow in Oshkosh, WI. It was a radical looking aircraft. Strange.
          But the flight demo was amazing. Absolutely amazing. It maneuvered like a house fly.

      • 09/18/2012    

        I like the idea of a new Sky Raider, or bringing back a new P-51. But at this level we have something better for this mission.

        The Apache Longbow.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiWG5Eb58F8

        • Chem's Gravatar Chem
          09/18/2012    

          Rotary wing systems will nearly always cost more to maintain than a fixed wing, especially propeller driven fixed wing. Most fixed wing will also have greater loiter time than a rotary wing system, higher speeds and better performance at high altitudes. Additionally Longbow was conceived as the Aegis Cruiser of helicopters, uniquely adapted to fire and control all its Hellfires simultaneously and to be able to let a single aircraft control multiple aircraft’s missiles. In other words it is more expensive than a pre-longbow Apache with mods that optimize it to kill armor. It was conceived of to let a Company of Longbows slaughter a motorized rifle regiment in seconds.

          If there is more to Longbow in the video that lets it excel in operations against dismounts and unarmored vehicles than pre-longbow apache upgrades I apologize in advance, I am operating from a system that doesnt allow streaming video. So I am running off the top of my head.

          • 09/18/2012    

            The Rockets carry a lot of different sorts of warheads. Some are absolutely horrific against infantry. Never mind that gun.
            You’ve seen the video. Its like a wicked sniper rifle that blows it’s targets into stew chunks.
            But your right about the cost.
            Here’s the thing though… We already have them and we don’t have any Spads. We’d have to build a facility, tooling, and all that developement to get some new Spads up into the air.
            We’ve got the facilities to roll out more Apaches any time we need them. So in reality, we could roll out an Apache cheaper than a new Fixed Wing platform.
            Your right also that we don’t need Hellfires for CAS… Fine. We could always just hang some Gun Pods and more rocket pods. All good for CAS.

  13. Chris's Gravatar Chris
    09/17/2012    

    Why couldn’t the Hague Convention just have said something like: All international disputes will be resolved by a best of 5 game of Battle Chess 3D…

    Because warfare is not a game, and banning more effective bullets is something only sensible if you fight behind a desk with strongly worded letters and other peoples lives.

    • Flint's Gravatar Flint
      09/17/2012    

      The Hague Convention in question is also from 1899. Perhaps an update is in order?

      The argument at the time was something like, “when shot, a civilized soldier immediately stops fighting and calls for a medic, so causing him undue harm in the process is uncivilized behavior.”

      That argument is obviously meaningless in modern warfare. Modern attitudes on all sides are that the honorable thing to do is to keep fighting as long as you are capable. So a bullet that incapacitates with one or two shots is actually more humane, compared to putting a dozen rounds into someone in order to stop him from effectively fighting. Hollowpoints cause more damage per bullet, but less damage per incapacitation.

  14. Sicktone's Gravatar Sicktone
    09/17/2012    

    Hopefully Pelosi will have Diane Feinstein along for the ride…

  15. Chem's Gravatar Chem
    09/18/2012    

    The problem is hippy mentality. The just cant wrap their brains around more effective bullets being a good thing. Its the same mentality that had NYPD using FMJs until the 1999 despite the clear evidence to the contrary for decades.

    • Chem's Gravatar Chem
      09/18/2012    

      So who keeps disliking stuff about changes to the Hague Convention as it pertains to expanding ammunition? Please, by all means lay out your argument. I could make a few valid arguments of why we should not start using expanding ammo, but I wont because I personally think the reasons to use expanding ammo outweighs them. I might disagree but I dont hate. Please share.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>