TOTD: Which gun should Big ARMY/FBI select?

I was going to say Gen 3 19 but the 17 makes more sense for .mil and G4 is more modular to fit a variety of shoooters and the mag release is reversible.

Sadly I doubt the Army will allow a gun with no manual safety so I say the FNP. They already have a good working relationship with FN and obviously their guns are some of the best around.

Glock 17 for all of the above. If the Feds need something for an undercover role, 26 or 19.

Since the .mil will probably be squeamish about not having manual safeties as always, M&P Cores with the long slide and factory slide milling for RMR optics. Done son.

Hmmm...this is a hard one, and I have mixed feelings on it.  First of all, it must be understood that military personnel rarely get any pistol training or range time.  The solution to this is just not as easy as saying, "well, give them more training".  Nope, not gonna happen.  Especially these days, when I talk with local Marines about the state of my beloved 'Corps...everything now is diversity training and classes about not killing yourself or beating your wife.   Not much military training going on these days in the military.  When I was a young private, I was a SMAW gunnner (which is a crew served weapon) and my T&O weapon was an M9.  I never even touched one until the day I had to go to the range and qualify...thankfully we were able to shoot the course of fire once before it counted.  Keep in mind, zero weapons handling training, manual of arms, proper draw techniques...you get the idea--and this was a MEU-SOC in the highest decorated infantry regiment in the Marine Corps, not some weekend warrior Army bullshit.  I didn't see that pistol again until we were drawing weapons and departing for Iraq.

Twice, twice while in my parent unit did I ever shoot a pistol in training.  I never received proper pistol training until I went to school to be a combat marksmanship instructor/trainer.  Thankfully, and as a result of that school, I went to a temporary assignment to start up a regimental level marksmanship training unit tasked with prepatory instruction for Marines doing rifle qualification and included the pistol course of fire and training.  My classes were the first official pistol training many senior staff NCOs and officers had ever received.

All that said, the Beretta M9 is a fine service pistol...especially knowing that at least 90% of those carrying one likely has had no training with one.  That big horrible slide safety/decocker is perfect for anyone who doesn't know any better.  For those reasons, even though a Glock 17 is superior in every way, a service pistol needs to have a manual safety.  These days, one of the FN offerings would be a nice improvement over the old Italian steel (I liked the Beretta, as long you used factory mags, it was reliable, rugged, and accurate--still want one for old time's sake).

The role of the military service pistol is vastly different than that for home defense, CCW, or police work.  Now, your special forces dudes?  Sure, give them Glocks and Sigs (they have been for years) 'cuz they get the proper training and range time.  Oh, and Gen4 Glocks for military use? No way, never.  Anything with modular back straps and crap would be of no use and a logistical nightmare.  What will end up happening, you will be issued a Gen4 Glock with the one backstrap that doesn't fit your hand and the other's missing from the "kit".  That's the real world military.  Going back to the role of a service pistol, it is primarily a FOB cruiser for upper ranks who don't want the hassle of having to carry a rifle around base--this after M4s became the issue longarm.  In fact, when I was in, the M4 was suppossed to replace the M9 has the T&O weapon for officers and Staff NCOs.  Nope, instead they gobbled up the coveted carbines and kept their pistols.  During my first tour in Iraq, I gave my pistol to my buddy who was turret gunner in a DIY armored Humvee so he could shoot at assholes who maneuvered under elevation limit of his M240.  He kept it tucked in the front of his pants.  I liked using that pistol for all the room-clearing we did, but honestly, I just did so 'cuz I felt like I needed to.  Never missed it once I gave it up.  On to my second tour in Iraq, doing all sorts of high speed shit, when we were operating out of helos and Ospreys I just tucked my pistol in the velcro map pouch on my TAG chestrig and dummy corded it to a carabiner on my flak so I wouldn't lose it fast-roping or rappelling.  I only kept it so I had something to cruise the FOB with

Long winded, sorry, but my experience in the military and with pistols is not unique and I thought it would shed some light on what criteria a service pistol should meet.  Carry on

Just to piggyback OM, I never had an issue with the M9 either and I like them but I'm not a fan of manual safeties. I'd buy a G model though.

I have OIC'd my fair share of small arms ranges and the ones that keep me on edge the most are the M9 ranges. Statistically there are more negligent discharges with M4/M16s just because there are more Soldiers assigned these as their primary weapons but I have seen way more close calls and dumb shit on M9 ranges but the poor marksmanship and familiarity is what really stands out.

Most Soldiers can be expected to be decently competent with a rifle, but I never have that expectation on M9 ranges. If I am walking my firing line on a rifle range and hear a "where is my safety or a how do I load this thing?" I would expect to see the nearest NCO drag that Soldier off the line for remedial training. But I hear that constantly at pretty much every firing iteration at least once on an M9 range and the reaction is different because Soldiers are waay less familiar and comfortable with the M9 and you see things like Soldiers trying to load the magazines backwards and the horrible flinching, anticipating the shot, and overall poor technique. A few of my Soldiers just came back from Afghanistan and have tons of horror stories about how the Docs, vets, and other medical personnel they deployed with were doing stupid shit like LTCs leaving their pistols on a break room table for 8 hrs, or nurses carrying their M9s cross draw but on the small of their back.. or dropping their magazines on pavement at clearing barrels and freaking out thinking they shot themselves.

As much as I love Glocks I would not trust most Soldiers in general with a pistol without a manual safety, that is just a ND waiting to happen and I doubt Glock would add a manual safety. I like the MK11 Sig and every unit I have been in that has them I always try to beg and bribe the armorer to assign me one. As much as I like them again I would not trust most Soldiers with anything without a safety.

I did like my FNP 45 when I had it, I think it would be a great service pistol but again the backstraps would disappear. I have seen Soldiers break anything and everything imaginable, from an Army perspective I would almost immediately rule out any polymer framed pistol.

So I think that really leaves us going back to the 1911 like the Marines lol. Im with Omega, I don't think anything is wrong with the M9, I think poor training and the fact that we can't use hollow points is the biggest issue with service pistols. This is just a waste of money that addresses neither of these, I would rather have a new rifle than a new pistol, hell even Mexico has a new service rifle I swear we are going to be fighting wars on Mars with the M-series of rifles and they will still have the same complaints about jamming on Mars dust lol.

If we were rolling the the dough I wish we would replace the service pistol concept with a PDW platform like the MP7 or something. I think Soldiers would be waay more comfortable with a PDW and a 5.7 chambering would be a good workaround the pesky geneva ban on HP while still being able to fuck shit up.

Damn thats pretty ugly.

I knew it was somewhat fucked up. I also knew that any modular parts that can be lost will be lost (I was more thinking Gen 3 if not the Sig because I don't think the Gen 4 that big of an improvement) and that it's more geared towards the lowest common shooter, but I didn't think that they received that little training on it or that it was *THAT* fucked up. That sucks.

I was thinking if you were issued one that they trained you on it in nauseating detail. In today's Military I don't imagine more training is going to happen either.

Did you guys see Sig's much?