Beretta M9

[RangerX]

Ok, if this topic has been beaten to death, let me know, I can't find any thread relating to the topic of the M9 Beretta.

I happen to love the M9. It came into service I believe in1985? I did not have a chance to ever qualify with the 1911 before the M9 was introduced, but did qualify with it eventually. I happen to love the M9 and am interested in the Rangers, past and present, thoughts on the M9 and if they had the chance to pic one sidearm as a "commercial off the shelf" pistol what would it be?

Do you Rangers like the M9? Is it merely a tool that your willing to put up with? or is it one of your favorites?

It's great for shooting cats and civilians.

[BadMuther]

I prefer glocks. They go bang everytime, something the beretta's don't always do.

[Draco]

Glocks are for those that cant handle REAL firearms ....I am at Ft Hood atm training folks for deployment. I was talking to a Colorado LE and he says there is a study out there showing Glocks have MORE negligent discharges than any LE sidearm in history. (disclaimer...looking for link) But I wont own a Glock...it's Kimber, Colt, or HK for me (SIG owners are brothers ).

I have over 10 HKs sidearms from the P7M8 to my Tactical to my carry USP 40 compact. And it's no secret to those on ArmyRanger.com....I carry my Kimber or my USP 99.9% of time.

"Insured by HK is not a saying...it's a way of life!"

[FireFinder]

I traded a Glock 21 for a USP Compact in .40 and bought a USP 9mm full size with Meprolight night sights last year. I also added a Glock 17 top end for my 34, a 2nd generation police trade-in Glock 19, and the STI 9mm pistol.

I really like the USP's. I want to add the LEM trigger to both of them, I am so used to a high thumb hold on my STI's, that I tend to ride the decocker/safety lever on them.

Can't say that I've ever shot a Beretta, but I did shoot the Taurus clone of the 92, and wasn't too impressed.

[BadMuther]

Glocks have fewer moving parts, hardly ever break and are accurate and g2g right out of the box. No screwing around, no safeties, hammer drops, misc BS.

KISS.

Don't blame a weapon for a lack of training. (ND's)

Keep all those other double to single nonsense.

Try going from gunpoint to close range h2h and back to gunpoint a few times and you will appreciate the fact that you can drop your glock into the holster and it's still safe and secure. Try that with your sig's, Hk's etc. Unless you are trying to tell me that in 3 meters with an aggressive a-hole you are so well trained that you can decock and holster, draw and decock and holster repeatedly.

A look at any police range begs otherwise.

But hey, to each his own.

[BadMuther]

Just because some of us may have been discharged from the Army years ago doe's not mean that mean that we have no further training or handgund development skills. As for that matter, In my case, tactical training was something that the military missed for the most part when I served.

I've learned more on the outside than ever in the inside of the military as far as tactical handgun skill sets were concerned. I do agree that If I had to take my skill set to the "SANDBOX" a Glock would be one of my first choices, but then again, nobody said you had to carry the H&K USP series with a decocker and traditional safety! Ever hear of the LEM trigger? V2,V3 etc.

"DONT THE BLAME THE GUN FOR LACK OF TRAINING"

I certainly never did blame any of the guns mentioned as being less than proficient for carrying into the heat of battle, but I'm not whining either about any of the sidearms that I own. I'm just not one to bow to the thrown of Gaston Glock for his otherwise "OVER HYPED" handgun. Will the Glock serve your needs, you bet it will, but so will the H&K's the SIgs and the 1911's

Relax dude, my post was in response to Draco, not you.