January 27, 2006: After two decades of use, the U.S. Department of Defense is
getting rid of its Beretta M9 9mm pistol, and going back to the 11.4mm (.45
caliber) weapon. There have been constant complaints about the lesser (compared
to the .45) hitting power of the 9mm.
I am torn on this issue. While I agree that they need a replacement for the Beretta, that opinion has much more to do with the Beretta itself, rather than the caliber. For instance, it is my understanding (I could be wrong) that a good number of the SFOD-D guys are carrying 9mm Glocks over in the desert. A lot of this has to do with reliability, but the fact is, if they can carry anything they want (and I'm pretty sure they can) then why do they "choose" a caliber that is supposedly so inferior?
My own opinion is that if you are down to your sidearm, things are pretty ugly already and it's not going to matter a whole lot at that point other than the overall reliabilty, and the shooters ability to hit the target. But as I said, I am torn on the issue (and by no means an expert), and would love to hear more input on the subject.
Update: I just received some inside intel that SFOD-D guys are actually carrying .40 S&W Glocks, which I was unaware of. This of course throws a little bit of a twist into the whole debate. Pretty reliable info, too.