Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 11/17/2002 6:27:45 AM EDT
What is with these "gun-shop commando types" who
are constantly bashing the AR-15 ?
Any problems that this weapon had were solved 35 years ago.
Why do they keep telling these same old tired stories over and over ?
I have noticed however most of the time it comes from people who have no experience with it,
or just can't afford one.
Link Posted: 11/17/2002 6:29:44 AM EDT
don't know.

there are at least 2 avenues you can take.

1. ignore them
2. educate them
Link Posted: 11/18/2002 5:05:20 AM EDT
Those are the same people who disdain any handgun caliber that doesn't start with 4 and any rifle caliber that doesn't start with a 3.

It's impossible to educate them, so I simply ignore them and advise newbies to do the same.
Link Posted: 11/18/2002 1:39:45 PM EDT
The same thing happened with the Berretta when it replaced the 1911, and it'll happen when some new rifle replaces the M-16. It's the crotchety old timers not the weapon.
Link Posted: 11/18/2002 1:44:19 PM EDT
.....except, of course, the Beretta really DOES suck.
Link Posted: 11/18/2002 4:10:46 PM EDT
I carried a Beretta 92 on duty for quite a number of years. I think it's a great gun. It sure beats a revolver or an old time Colt 45 auto.

I believe the other folks here are right. There are some people who just can't stand change. Even when you can prove something new is better, they hate it because it's new and different.
Link Posted: 11/19/2002 2:23:57 AM EDT
Well the Beretta is not a bad pistol but it has its flaws. It was also selected in part because of military bias from old timers that wanted a hammer. This unfairly disqualified the Glock. If it were not for that the US military would be carring Glock 17's.
PAT
Link Posted: 11/19/2002 5:35:52 AM EDT
I firmly believe that Beretta USA got a new employee when they met the Program Manager M9 pistol.
Link Posted: 11/19/2002 5:36:07 AM EDT
The complainers are also the first dorks at the range to ask you, did you convert that to full auto?

I, too, like the Beretta. Very reliable, regardless of the slide cracking rumors. It goes bang every time, and to me, that makes it a great pistol.

I just ignore the "experts", especially the ones who tell you how superior the M1 or M14 is, but don't own any of these rifles.
Link Posted: 11/19/2002 5:47:07 AM EDT
Having carried the M9 in Combat, I wish the Army would have gone with something with more stopping power. Two to three hits center mass and they kept coming. That I diden't like at all. And why is it the "SPEC OPS" use .45s? Go figure.
Link Posted: 11/19/2002 8:38:32 AM EDT
They are most likely referring to the first guns that went to Vietnam. The ones soldiers were told not to clean. Todays modern guns are really nice. I can truly say I have never shot a gun that was more fun and easy to shoot.

Turbo5
Link Posted: 11/19/2002 10:42:23 AM EDT
It wasn't that we were told not to clean them. We couldn't keep them clean. The tolerances in the chamber area and the locking lugs were too tight. A little dirt, and you'd get a "jam". My XM16E1 would fail to eject the 18th round fired and push the bullet of the 19th round back into the cartridge case. This was a common "jam".
The M16A1 was a much better rifle.
The M9 did have a cracking slide problem according to the folks I work with who worked on the pistol.
Link Posted: 11/19/2002 12:26:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Rick_USA_Ret:
Having carried the M9 in Combat, I wish the Army would have gone with something with more stopping power. Two to three hits center mass and they kept coming. That I diden't like at all. And why is it the "SPEC OPS" use .45s? Go figure.



Handguns are poor stoppers in any caliber. A .45 hitting the same structures as the 9mm in the above example (which failed to incapacitate immediately) would not have stopped an aggressor immediatly either. Barring a CN hit all handguns require 5-10 seconds minimum to incapacitate.
Top Top