The militarys latest handgun might not be safe
- Thread starter Thomas D'Arcy McGee
- Start date
mactroneng
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
Forget Glocks, forget Sigs, just bring back the M9s/92 series pistols. Or even 1911s.
I thought part of the issue with the F-35 was cold weather, maybe I'm wrong.
I thought part of the issue with the F-35 was cold weather, maybe I'm wrong.
Right
Since we are already off-topic from the OP...
The whole (controversial) discussion on F-35 as a single engine, multi-role fighter being able operate across the vastness of Canada was the fear that should there be an issue, there are limited options for the pilot to land. For many current expeditionary missions in contributions for collective defence, the area of operations tends to be quite close to the supporting air head. Conversely, the lack of infrastructure and logistical support in various parts of Canada tends to have people worried. It comes down to having reasonable operating concepts and employing the equipment correctly.
F-35s are used in a number of northern regions/countries (albeit one could also argue that most are coastal and practically all within a small JOA). The F-35 was never meant to be a super interceptor and Canada shouldn't necessarily view it as such to operate the span of the entire northern region.
That said, the JAS-39 Gripen has a completely different employment concept, ie not American idea of operating from perfect air fields with all the requisite logistical/maintenance support. It is meant to operate in disperse and capable of relatively austere conditions with limited support assets (but that comes as a cost of complete overhaul of C2 doctrine and organisational management). There could be a case made that if Canada wanted to more robust, austere capable F-35, the B/C models would be more suited than the A model because of SVTOL.
- Location
- WMU248 near Edmonton
well I personally like the Browning or the new Cz series
having used Glocks and SIGs I am happy that we are getting the SIG over the Glock for a bunch of reasons.
I would rather have an old BHp then a Glock.
the whole SIG accidental discharge is just a big red herring.
Oh and I'm a guy that has deployed, twice, where the only weapon I had was my pistol so its not a secondary.
having used Glocks and SIGs I am happy that we are getting the SIG over the Glock for a bunch of reasons.
I would rather have an old BHp then a Glock.
the whole SIG accidental discharge is just a big red herring.
Oh and I'm a guy that has deployed, twice, where the only weapon I had was my pistol so its not a secondary.
themachinist
CGN Regular
- Location
- lower mainland , bc
You have my curiosity, why not the glock
Good GOD man, are you trying to start WWIII? :O
Thomas D'Arcy McGee
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Hello,
Thank you for responding. Which particular CZ model(s) are you referring to?
Well, a Glock won't shoot unless you pull the trigger.
Truth, and a fact a lot of people seem to have difficulty wrapping their head around. Glocks cannot fire until the trigger is pulled because the striker is not energized until the trigger is pulled.
How else is he going to get CGN Cred. over xdk guy
And as woodchopper has mentioned it is just a Red Herring , possibly to allow the discussion to once again be opened so that down stream bottom dwellers can try to attempt to gain favor in procurement ?
right, so, what would you know /sarcasm
that said, I've personally witnessed Sigs firing on their own, with no fingers near the trigger, I've witnessed factory ammo going off out of battery and all sorts of other shenanigans. I wouldn't trust a 320 in my holster for any reason. Now that said, Bruce Gray has done a ton of work trying to disprove the very things I've seen, and can't replicate them regardless of how much he f#cks with the guns he's using. So, I dunno? I'd still prefer a Glock over the P10 if I had to carry a gun for work as well, and I own both, the P10 gets shot less than any gun in my safe other than my S&W M&P 9mm (first gen piece of crap)
maple_leaf_eh
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I threw out the F35 as an example of unsubstantiated criticism of laser-focused defence programs. No one complains when the army can't buy boots, 4x4 trucks, or keep enough cold weather gear on the QM shelves. But they lose their minds over boutique or highly visible contracts. So much that the review and approval stages genuinely impede acquisitions. I worked with a LCol Aerospace Engineering officer who lamented her troubles keeping an modernization program for a small fleet of fixed wing aircraft on schedule. The contractor was habitually late and renegotiating the contract, to the point that redelivered tail number 1 was a different aircraft than tail number 12. She had her hair straightened back by her bosses reprimanding her for impeding commerce, overstepping her reporting authority and every other sin in the book - because she wanted the letter of the contract upheld. In Canada if it has wings, just about every decision is out of DND's control; if it has tracks or wheels, no one breaks a sweat.
We still train with and use the P225. The C22 is being adopted in priority. There are no more safety issues with it than any other firearm.
Thomas D'Arcy McGee
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
How do you know if you have never used it?
The CAF is calling the P320 a C22. It's not a new model made by Sig. It's a P320. Sig doesn't call it a C22. It's a P320.
As far as " how would you know".... I can only state my own experiences. Probably 10k rounds in training and competition... that's a guess. But I'm surrounded by guys who have shot more than that.
Having said this, the P225 with decock just feels better.
I've used both...alot. And bought my own P320 for training. you?
Last edited:
