• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

1911 .45's

braindrain said:
Let me start by saying that simply because one person says he carried a weapon not only doesn't it make it a good choice it doesn't make it true. A gun company naming a gun after someone does not mean that was that persons issued weapon.
Click to expand...

True, but companies like Springfield Armory normally aren't going to put their name (along with Chris Kyle's name, etc.) on a piece of garbage either.

As for testimony, in his best-selling book "American Sniper," Chris Kyle tells how his Springfield Armory TRP may have saved his life during combat.

“In 2004, I brought over a Springfield [Armory] TRP Operator, which used a .45 caliber round. It had a 1911 body style, with custom grips and a rail system that let me add a light and laser combo. Black, it had a bull barrel and was an excellent gun—until it took a frag for me in Fallujah. I was actually able to get it repaired—those Springfields are tough.”

braindrain said:
The vast majority of non JSOC SEALS generally carry either the sig in 9mm or a few of the over weight to bulky HK 23. Tell me why exactly do you think the SEALs are all adopting a Glock in the as their new combat pistol.
Click to expand...

Tell my why the United States Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command use special procurements like the Kimber Warrior and Desert Warrior 1911 models?

braindrain said:
Furthermore your whole knock down power argument is nothing but nonsense. No pistol ammo knocks someone down. The FBI has done extensive research into handgun shootings by caliber and they all say the same thing. Shoot placement is what matters. A bit kill zone shot with a 45 is no more lethal than a non kill zone shot with a 9mm. In fact the number of rounds necessary to kill a perp rounded to the whole number is the exact same between 9mm and 45.
Click to expand...

If everyone were an expert marksman then why not use .22's instead of 9mm's? After all, there's probably been more fatalities by .22's than 9mm's over the years, and .22 rounds and firearms are usually cheaper to buy. So the point you're missing is that most combat soldiers aren't expert marksmen with a sidearm, so when you don't nail someone in the vital places, knock-down power is extremely important. The .45 ACP is well known for it's stopping power. It's all about the transfer of kinetic energy. A 230 grain .45 slug simply carries more energy with it than a 9mm.

braindrain said:
So tell me again how much more effective it is.
Click to expand...

Very.
 
Logicman said:
True, but companies like Springfield Armory normally aren't going to put their name (along with Chris Kyle's name, etc.) on a piece of garbage either.

As for testimony, in his best-selling book "American Sniper," Chris Kyle tells how his Springfield Armory TRP may have saved his life during combat.

“In 2004, I brought over a Springfield [Armory] TRP Operator, which used a .45 caliber round. It had a 1911 body style, with custom grips and a rail system that let me add a light and laser combo. Black, it had a bull barrel and was an excellent gun—until it took a frag for me in Fallujah. I was actually able to get it repaired—those Springfields are tough
Click to expand...
I never once said that 1911s were complete garbage. They were a great design for their time and better then anything else available for a very long time. But as with most things eventually a better design has come around.
And he says it saved his life by stoping some frag. Not really the gun doing anything other then being in the right place at the right time. Furthermore not to speak ill of the dead but I take everything Kyle said with a grain of salt. As I would of anyone who is trying to sell a book and make money.

Logicman said:
Tell my why the United States Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command use special procurements like the Kimber Warrior and Desert Warrior 1911 models?
Click to expand...
First of all just because one unit uses something doesn't mean all that much. Excspecially when every other unit in SOF is using something different. And finally as I pointed out in my earlier post MARSOC is already moving to a different handgun. Care to guess what that weapon is. Why do you think that is happening if their 1911s are so great. To add to that why do you think that they were the only unit whithin SOCOM to use 1911s.
Logicman said:
If everyone were an expert marksman then why not use .22's instead of 9mm's? After all, there's probably been more fatalities by .22's than 9mm's over the years, and .22 rounds and firearms are usually cheaper to buy. So the point you're missing is that most combat soldiers aren't expert marksmen with a sidearm, so when you don't nail someone in the vital places, knock-down power is extremely important. The .45 ACP is well known for it's stopping power. It's all about the transfer of kinetic energy. A 230 grain .45 slug simply carries more energy with it than a 9mm.



Very.
Click to expand...

You are right that most folks in the military are not great marksman. Which is why having 15 rounds in your pistol can be a very big advantage. Thank you for helping prove my point.

Knock down power is a phrase that people who don't know what they are talking about use. No handgun has the power to knock someone down. Shot placement is the only thing that matters. I have personally seen 120lbs afghanis get hit with 300wm rounds in non vital areas and continue returning fire. If you think a 45acp has anywhere near the energy of a 300wm then I don't know what to tell you. A hit to a non lethal area with a 45 is just as ineffective as a hit with a 9mm.

Here you may want to do some reading on the topic.

FBI 9MM Justification, FBI Training Division - Soldier Systems Daily

And finally caliber is not what we were discussing. You can buy Glocks in pretty much every mainstream caliber.
 
You keep saying a military man would choose a 1911 but are not backing it up with anything. I can tell you that I know very few SOF guys who carry 1911s back home in the states while the vast majority carry either Glocks or M&Ps.
Click to expand...

And "guys I know" is not valid evidence either.

What I've said, and my position, is that experienced military men tend to choose the 1911 in caliber .45 ACP.

Until we can get a verified and scientific poll of all the elite forces, we'll have to declare this part of the discussion a draw.

I'll give you one thing, though--as the Millennial generation takes over Glocks may well become more popular for several reasons (some valid, some not).
 
I am in the Army by the way.
Click to expand...

What part of the Army?

I'm interested because the news that the Glock 22 (Caliber .40 Smith and Wesson) is standard issue is surprising.

I'm surprised that there is no news release or any link given for this as is usually done.

One would think that if any number of Glock 22s were being issued there would be a link.
 
What you say about budget restraints is true across the military as a whole but fall well short when you start talking about units within SOCOM and those are the folks that due a ton more pistol shooting then the rest of the military. The budgets for things like weapons are much much larger per person within those units. A perfect example of that is our sniper rifles. Both our 110s and XM2010s come with expensive high quality scopes on them. Those scopes sit in our arms room never being used because our unit as a whole simply prefers a different reticle so we just bought different glass for them and never use the original ones.
Click to expand...

Interesting.

What unit are you talking about?

How many sniper rifles are you talking about?

What are the two scopes you mention?

How is the reticle different?

How much do these scopes cost?

Did you replace the issue scope with your own money?
 
No I am not wrong. What you say about budget restraints is true across the military as a whole but fall well short when you start talking about units within SOCOM and those are the folks that due a ton more pistol shooting then the rest of the military. The budgets for things like weapons are much much larger per person within those units. A perfect example of that is our sniper rifles. Both our 110s and XM2010s come with expensive high quality scopes on them. Those scopes sit in our arms room never being used because our unit as a whole simply prefers a different reticle so we just bought different glass for them and never use the original ones. And we are talking about scopes that are in the 3200 to 3400 dollar range. So no it is not simply a cost issue as to why Glocks are used over 1911s
Click to expand...

You realize that what you wrote says nothing about the budget constraints of the military, right?

If the army could buy a satisfactory scope or sniper rifle made mostly of cheaper materials for one third of the cost.....you bet they'd grab a bunch instantly.

Just like they do with the Glocks.
 
As to MARSOC. Using 1911s you are right that the do have and use them but all the guys from there I have worked with preferred Glocks. And apparently enough of them felt the same way as now they are moving to Glocks over their 1911s.
Click to expand...

Again, "all the guys from there" is not evidence.
 
Vox said:
And "guys I know" is not valid evidence either.

What I've said, and my position, is that experienced military men tend to choose the 1911 in caliber .45 ACP.

Until we can get a verified and scientific poll of all the elite forces, we'll have to declare this part of the discussion a draw.

I'll give you one thing, though--as the Millennial generation takes over Glocks may well become more popular for several reasons (some valid, some not).
Click to expand...

I agree that it not valid evidence. I was just stating what I have seen in my last 11 plus years in the military.
 
Vox said:
What part of the Army?

I'm interested because the news that the Glock 22 (Caliber .40 Smith and Wesson) is standard issue is surprising.

I'm surprised that there is no news release or any link given for this as is usually done.

One would think that if any number of Glock 22s were being issued there would be a link.
Click to expand...

I am Army Special Forces. An 18C to be exact. I assigned to a company that's a bit different then most line SF companies.

Glock 22s are not standards issue. Either in the Army as a whole or SF just certain companies have then.
 
Here's a link that will give you a rough idea of what we're talking about.

http://emptormaven.com/img/Pistol_Round_Terminal_Ballistics.jpg


That's nice. Hoe about you actually look up the FBI studies as to the average number of rounds per caliber required to kill someone. Guess what. The average shooting either 45 or 9mm takes the same number of rounds.
Click to expand...

How about you give me a link to prove that?

The link I showed you graphically portrays the actual tissue damage that would result from the various rounds.

I think anyone who looks at those pictures will note the moderate damage done by the 9mm as compared to the massive damage done by the .45 ACP used in the 1911.

Now ask that person which they want in a face to face life or death confrontation.
 
braindrain said:
I am Army Special Forces. An 18C to be exact. I assigned to a company that's a bit different then most line SF companies.

Glock 22s are not standards issue. Either in the Army as a whole or SF just certain companies have then.
Click to expand...

Interesting.
 
braindrain said:
You are right that most folks in the military are not great marksman. Which is why having 15 rounds in your pistol can be a very big advantage. Thank you for helping prove my point.
Click to expand...

Bull. You wouldn't need 15 rounds if you had a .45 .

braindrain said:
Knock down power is a phrase that people who don't know what they are talking about use. No handgun has the power to knock someone down. Shot placement is the only thing that matters. I have personally seen 120lbs afghanis get hit with 300wm rounds in non vital areas and continue returning fire. If you think a 45acp has anywhere near the energy of a 300wm then I don't know what to tell you. A hit to a non lethal area with a 45 is just as ineffective as a hit with a 9mm.
Click to expand...

Comparing a .45 to a 300wm now? LOL. Compare your 9mm to a 300wm and see how you like it.

One lawman reported that the .45 ACP has a 90% kill ratio compared to 75% with the 9mm. While I don't have his original source for that I do have a chart of the stopping power of a .45 JHP to a 9mm JHP, and the .45 wins.

THE STOPPING POWER OF DIFFERENT HANDGUN CARTRIDGES

There's plenty of stories about how bad guys took one 9mm round after another and still kept fighting. I believe the FBI "Dade County Shootout" was just one example. And that's why they pushed for 40mm instead of 9's.

And one other thing - war is hell, and your polymer Glock is not going to hold up, in the long run, better than a steel framed 1911. And when that happens you won't have to like it.

So you take your Glock to war, I'm taking my 1911 .45.
 
I like my Glock 1911 personally

753f1597e8833719140abff7bf5d59e8.jpg
 
No pistol ammo knocks someone down. The FBI has done extensive research into handgun shootings by caliber and they all say the same thing. Shoot placement is what matters. A bit kill zone shot with a 45 is no more lethal than a non kill zone shot with a 9mm. In fact the number of rounds necessary to kill a perp rounded to the whole number is the exact same between 9mm and 45.
Click to expand...

In real life face to face confrontations we don't get to "round off" numbers.

Yes, in real life pistol ammo knocks men down. It does that by inflicting sufficient damage to cause the man to fall to the ground. This is better called "Shocking Power." It is real. It causes people to fall down.

This usually happens with damage to the central nervous system--example, the spine. The advantage of the .45 ACP over the 9mm is that it delivers more energy and can thus damage the spine when a hit in the same spot NEAR the spine with a 9mm would not deliver sufficient damage to the spine (note the width of the damage done by each round as shown on the link I provided).

So, shocking power can make a difference. It can save your life.

Killing and shocking power do indeed have measurable differences.

The most well-known example was in the famous FBI Miami shootout with two well-armed and tough perps where several agents died or were badly wounded.

One of the perps took a hit early in the fight from a 9mm that entered his side and was headed directly for his heart but lacked the power to get there and didn't do enough damage on the way.

That perp kept on fighting and killed and wounded several FBI agents who could have been spared had that bullet possessed more shocking power, done more damage and put him out of the fight more quickly.

Yes, in that case even a slightly more powerful round would have reached the heart.

Degrees of power DO matter.
 
I do see both sides of this argument.

Logistics dictate that 9mm ammo will be more available in many situations.

Cost IS a huge factor for government agencies and taxpayers appreciate frugality.

In the military application your opponent has body armor and you're shooting for the head......do you want 15 rounds or nine rounds? With another 15 quickly available........

In the military application you're already carrying far more weight than you want.......so a lighter gun and ammo means a lot.

If cheap, lightweight and ugly works better......why not use it? I can think of no good reason.

Since I am now a civilian, however.......I loves me some 1911.

:peace:peace:peace
 
Springfield TRP Operator with the full-length rail. Beautiful. I've got one just like it and it's a real a*s-kicker. Love the trigger action vs. a Glock also.

Springfield TRP Operator.jpg
 
Logicman said:
Bull. You wouldn't need 15 rounds if you had a .45 .



Comparing a .45 to a 300wm now? LOL. Compare your 9mm to a 300wm and see how you like it.

One lawman reported that the .45 ACP has a 90% kill ratio compared to 75% with the 9mm. While I don't have his original source for that I do have a chart of the stopping power of a .45 JHP to a 9mm JHP, and the .45 wins.

THE STOPPING POWER OF DIFFERENT HANDGUN CARTRIDGES

There's plenty of stories about how bad guys took one 9mm round after another and still kept fighting. I believe the FBI "Dade County Shootout" was just one example. And that's why they pushed for 40mm instead of 9's.

And one other thing - war is hell, and your polymer Glock is not going to hold up, in the long run, better than a steel framed 1911. And when that happens you won't have to like it.

So you take your Glock to war, I'm taking my 1911 .45.
Click to expand...

Truthfully a .45 with better stopping power is useless, in a battlefield environment. Shot placement is key, and control over your weapon. This works the same in a civilian environment for self defense.

When people ask me what gun they should get for defense, I tell them to go to a gunshop with a range that lets them fire them, and find the one they are most comfortable with. The 9mm is more similiar to the .38 special in size and power. The .38 special despite every claim of being too weak has remained the most used revolver ammo for 100 years, because it works.

9mm is like 38, it is not the most powerfull round, but it works very well, and has a nice balance between size, weight, and power. The 9mm pistols are medium frame, making it more ideal to issue to tens of thousands of soldiers, who very wildly in size,weight and gender. I personally love the 1911, but for the battlefield it has shown no advantage over the 9mm.
 
Vox said:
No, you're wrong, but not completely.....and with good reason, I think. Cost consideration is not part of your assessment.

I know Glocks pass many tests and I own and shoot Glocks. They are excellent.

You think Glocks are chosen by the military because they are better.

No, Glocks are chosen because the military can get a Glock 19 for $320 and a high quality 1911 .45 would cost three times that much.

There is also a need for ammo compatibility with NATO forces.

There is also the fact that not everybody can handle the recoil of the 1911 .45 and, for them, the Glock in 9mm is a better choice (more women getting into this all the time so smaller weapons make sense).

And, we must face it, the Glocks work!! And better yet, their low price makes them almost disposable, so fewer highly trained techs are needed for upkeep. (That's another budget consideration.)

However, if you give an experienced military man a choice he'll probably choose that expensive 1911......but the military won't buy it for him--why should they?

That said, the MARSOC and the SEALS still have thousands of very high grade 1911s and they aren't mothballed......they are ready for use and I don't doubt they're still used by some.

By the way, what branch of the military are you in? Who is issuing Glock 22s now?
Click to expand...

The military does not issue glocks as standard for anyone, infact it is required the guns issued to the military as well as equipment be made in the us. Even the berreta is made in the us, even though it is an italian company due to agreements between them and the us govt. This is so our supply chain cannot be interupted by war.


Special forces are generally the exception, They have a wide range of issued weapons, from full auto m-16's and m-4's the regular military is not issued, to a range of submachine guns assault rifles handguns etc. It is common for special forces in the middle east to be issued an ak-47. Sf is not regular forces, they simply issue based off their needs and their mission, while the regular military only uses standard issue equipment, which is most often an m-16 a4 or an m-4, if officer just an m-9, and depending on situation soldiers might get dual issue m-16 and m-9.
 
Goshin said:
Love 1911's. Don't own one just the now, but its on "the list".



Lead brick of a carry gun though.
Click to expand...

Same here. Been meaning to fix that problem - lack of a 1911 for a couple of years.
 
Here's a great old Satin/Nickel Combat Commander from about 1973.

I rescued it from a guy who was abusing it and it now lives happily with me.

It's had the full gunsmithing treatment. Reliable, accurate and pretty.


 
beerftw said:
Truthfully a .45 with better stopping power is useless, in a battlefield environment. Shot placement is key, and control over your weapon. This works the same in a civilian environment for self defense.
Click to expand...

The point you're missing is that most combat soldiers and civilians aren't expert marksmen with a sidearm, so when you don't nail someone in the vital places, knock-down power is extremely important. The .45 ACP is well known for it's stopping power. At that point it's all about the transfer of kinetic energy. A 230 grain .45 slug simply carries more energy with it than a 9mm.

beerftw said:
When people ask me what gun they should get for defense, I tell them to go to a gunshop with a range that lets them fire them, and find the one they are most comfortable with. The 9mm is more similiar to the .38 special in size and power. The .38 special despite every claim of being too weak has remained the most used revolver ammo for 100 years, because it works.

9mm is like 38, it is not the most powerfull round, but it works very well, and has a nice balance between size, weight, and power. The 9mm pistols are medium frame, making it more ideal to issue to tens of thousands of soldiers, who very wildly in size,weight and gender. I personally love the 1911, but for the battlefield it has shown no advantage over the 9mm.
Click to expand...

Well, I prefer American made 1911 steel on the battlefield instead of Austrian polymer. But to each his own.

Have fun at the range!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom