TexasCHLforum.com

Beiruty ,

I did a very quick scan and couldn't find: Rimfire or center?

On a side note: If one acquires this caliber in a pistol is the ammo commonly available?

Thanks

Abraham wrote:Beiruty ,

I did a very quick scan and couldn't find: Rimfire or center?

On a side note: If one acquires this caliber in a pistol is the ammo commonly available?

Thanks

Ammo is available but expensive.

http://www.cabelas.com/handgun-ammuniti ... on-1.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ok. I just asked several recent veterans.army/navy and an older usmc veteran . 3 army veterans said they had no sidearm. 1 who is my cousin did but he was a non com e8 master sergeant when he left. 1 is current non com in navy e6 and or po1. He is navy special warfare eod and I know at one point he was issued an m9 but he cant really talk about all the specifics. I know he gets deployed with seals and went through much of the same training.Needless to say he has a ton of training. The usmc vet was around before the m9 and never saw combat but trained with a 1911. Needless to say not all are issued sidearms.

Keep in mind that money is going to be a huge factor in selecting a new pistol and/or a new caliber. One of the main reasons the military selected the Beretta 92 over the Sig P226 was due to cost. 9mm ammo is also less expensive than .45 ammo.

Keep in mind that money is going to be a huge factor in selecting a new pistol and/or a new caliber. One of the main reasons the military selected the Beretta 92 over the Sig P226 was due to cost.

I thought it was a trade: Berettas for extended lease on US military bases in Italy.

:-)

5.7 ammo is becoming much more difficult to obtain according to my friend who really likes that round. Of course, if the military were to use this round, then it would have to be non-expanding, so it would only be punching a .224" hole in the badguy. Since our troops are required to use non-expanding ammo, it does make sense to use ammo that punches a bigger hole in the target.

Beretta does offer the PX4 Storm line in .40 & .45 that was developed to pass the military's standards in sidearms. The 96A1 might pass, too.

I would be very surprised if this was/is done in the immediate future due to the economy.

I read the US ARMY TANK Command receently ordered 9mm Ruger P95 s'. http://www.ruger.com/news/2004-12-23.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pistols are only to fight your way back to your rifle! All you would ever need is a mag or two.

Besides a personal box of hollow points don't cost that much!

SF18C wrote:Pistols are only to fight your way back to your rifle! All you would ever need is a mag or two.

Besides a personal box of hollow points don't cost that much!

I don't think they're allowed to use HP ammo regardless of how they obtained it.

Gordie Howe wrote:I read the US ARMY TANK Command receently ordered 9mm Ruger P95 s'. http://www.ruger.com/news/2004-12-23.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That story is from 2004 and those pistols were for the Iraqi military/security forces.

Dave2 wrote:

SF18C wrote:Pistols are only to fight your way back to your rifle! All you would ever need is a mag or two.

Besides a personal box of hollow points don't cost that much!

I don't think they're allowed to use HP ammo regardless of how they obtained it.

Oh ok

Expanding or frangible small arm projectiles are prohibited for military use according the Law Of Armed Conflict or LOAC.

"C. Consideration of Specific Weapons. As noted above, HR article 22, states that the right of belligerents to adopt means of injuring the enemy is not unlimited. Furthermore, “it is especially forbidden . . . to employ arms, projectiles or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering.” (HR art. 23(e)). The following weapons and munitions are considered under this general principle.
1. Small Arms Projectiles. Must not be exploding or expanding projectiles. The 1868 Declaration of St. Petersburg prohibits exploding rounds of less than 400 grams (14 ounces). The 1899 Hague Convention prohibits expanding rounds. Though not a party to either convention, U.S. practice accedes to these prohibitions as being customary international law. Current state practice is to use jacketed small arms ammunition, thereby reducing bullet expansion on impact.

a. Hollow point ammunition. Typically, this is semi-jacketed ammunition designed to expand dramatically upon impact. Customary international law and the treaties mentioned above prohibit use of this ammunition in armed conflict against combatants.

b. Frangible ammunition. Ammunition designed to break apart upon impact, thereby reducing ricochet. These rounds are also known to produce wounds similar to those suffered by victims of hollow-point ammunition, possibly violating the principle of unnecessary suffering. Use of this ammunition may be lawful in limited situations to significantly reduce collateral damage to noncombatants and protected property, e.g., during a hostage rescue, aircraft security mission, or urban combat to minimize penetration of walls or risk to bystanders."

http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/ ... k-2012.pdf

So the Iraqis get the cast-offs ?

donkey wrote:

Gordie Howe wrote:I read the US ARMY TANK Command receently ordered 9mm Ruger P95 s'. http://www.ruger.com/news/2004-12-23.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That story is from 2004 and those pistols were for the Iraqi military/security forces.