45 don't kill any better or worse than 9mm or bayonet, use of appropriate ammo is what should be addressed.
Well that just ain't so; sorry. Don't get me wrong, the 9mm has proven itself quite well, but we know that a .45 does do more damage.
We'd be the laughing stock with a damn 1911.
Ain't many laughing at the US Marines, they just keep buying 1911's and it's working fine for them.
Anyone who would take a 1911 over a Sig Sauer P227 (organic apples to GMO apples) has NEVER been in harms way...The End!
The Sig Sauer IS more reliable than a 1911, I'll give you that. That doesn't mean the 1911 is unreliable. The 1911 has proven time and time again to be sufficiently reliable for the mission. Seriously, if it goes 1,000 rounds and the Sig goes 3,000 rounds before a stoppage, what bearing does that have on combat? Since when has anyone fired anything more than a few dozen rounds from a handgun in combat? In the history of warfare, has anyone EVER fire 1,000 rounds from a handgun in a firefight? I love reliability, but you need to keep the discussion relevant.
Also, a 1911 is FAR easier to maintain than a Sig. Ever taken the lower half of a Sig apart? It's a small parts and springs nightmare. Regardless, I think we'd be better served with the Sig.
Anyone who would choose a 45 over a 9mm ain't NEVER had to hump cases of 45 ammo into combat...The End!
Now that's some truth. Cases of .45 are DAMN heavy!!
I hate Glocks but believe it could fill the bill.
I agree, if it's a 9mm. There are some serious down sides to the Glock, but the benefits of that type of weapon system just make SO much sense for a modern military. Maintenance and repair of a Glock is as simple as things get, and the price of the gun is much lower. A real down side to the plastic frames is that they can be broken from impact, and that WILL happen; it happens in LE use, and they're comparatively easy on guns. But the plastic frame is corrosion resistant, will go oodles of rounds, never has to be refinished, and cheap to replace if it fails. That design just makes sense. The G21 is just too big and fat for anyone, male or female, with small hands. I have pretty big hands (I wear an 11 1/2 ring), and I dont care for the grip. But a single stack .45 or just G17 would be good.
Another consideration is woman in combat humping 45...Dats funny right there!
I just can't count how many women I've seen or know who shoot a .45 ACP 1911 just fine; it's a training issue. My daughter at age 12 gained a PREFERENCE for my LW Commander in .45 ACP, and believe me...you just wouldn't want that 12yo shooting at you. Now she's 16, doesn't shoot all that much, but will still drill a 50 yard IPSC target every last shot with that LW Commander. It always comes down to training. As for the weight of the gun, a full sized 1911 isn't all that bad, especially if you can carry it non-concealed.
