Originally Posted by fnfalman
Yeah, when the last time Israel fought a real war, what handguns were they using?
Uncle Sam thinks otherwise. So do I. The M9 and its civilian equivalence had been through some serious craps. Can't say the same about the Glock.
Israel has been fighting a war since the 1940s.
That's because Uncle Sam probably used some old school military hard-asses who refused to even consider a "plastic" gun when they were replacing the 1911 in the 1980s.
Why would I choose a gun that has almost 2x the individual parts, is heavier, and holds (standard) less ammo? Furthermore, how many times does the average soldier even pull their sidearm in modern conflict? I'd venture to say never.
BTW, I have the 92, don't get me wrong it's a good gun, but there is no real advantage over it compared to a Glock, especially in a conflict zone like the Middle East where sand can more easily foul the open action of the Beretta when compared to the Glock (it's happened enough to warrant an investigation by the Army).
And like you said, the Brits have adopted it, replacing their decades old Hi-Powers..
Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire