I was re-reading an old magazine article by LAV in which he stated “I am a firm believer that every adult male in this country should be able to effectively use the standard-issue service rifle (M16) and service pistol (M9). “
Now, if somebody asked me how to learn to effectively use an AR, I would tell them to buy a quality AR from a reputable maker, outfit it with a sling, light and possibly an RDS, buy a bunch of ammo and take a class from a competent instructor.
So I have to ask myself why I have never considered this same process for an M9. Wouldn’t this same process hold true for the M9?
That said, the AR platform has some fairly unique operational characteristics (the rear-mounted non-reciprocating charging handle, the left side bolt release/catch, the forward assist).
The Beretta is a lot more similar to alternate competing designs in fundamental operation. The safety/decocker can take a little getting used to if you’re not familiar with the Walther P38/PP-series, S&W steel/aluminum autos, or Ruger autos. But otherwise experience with any traditional double-action/single-action will translate over very nicely to running an M9.
Take a 92FS to a TigerSwan class and you’ll be given state-of-the-art instruction on the pistol.
I would guess what LAV meant was how to load, field strip, clean, lube, reassemble and operate the pistol. How the safety needs to be positioned to fire and how to ensure during the draw that it is off; how to prep the trigger during the press out so the DA part isn’t a problem, how to transition to the the SA trigger after the first shot, etc. In an advanced sense, perhaps how to examine the locking block for stress cracks, when to replace the springs, how to identify an Italian magazine from a Checkmate…
I agree with what LAV said to a degree, with the exception of, you should have what ever pistol you shoot well with. Learn to shoot both (AR & Pistol) effectively, as though your life depends on it, and be ambidextrous with both. I’m pretty sure that if you are an experienced shooter, like folks on this forum, and regularly train (formally, or doing drills at your home range), you will have no problem effectively employing most weapons out there. Personally, I feel you should be familiar with as many weapons as you can, especially the mainstream ones (ARs, AKs, Auto/Pump Shotguns, Glocks, M&Ps, Sigs, 1911s).
I’ve owned a couple of Beretta’s just to try them. I think if you consider yourself a serious student of the game, you should expose yourself to as many different weapons platforms as you can. You never know when you may be forced to press one into service under less than ideal circumstances.
I think in general its good to be familiar with certain weapons that are so common and so widespread we are likely to encounter them sometimes in our lives and possibly even pressed to use them. The AR and the Beretta M9 due to virtue of the fact they are so ubiquitous with our military. Like Rogerin TPA I’d also include the AK, pump shotguns, bolt action rifles, lever action rifles, revolvers (some people don’t know how to open the cylinder:o), 1911’s, and Glocks. There are others of course but as a means of example.
I think this is a great point and that firearms enthusiasts, especially those who rely on them for defense should be familiar with many platforms in general. I know many people in the Military only know how to shoot a Beretta, because that’s all they were taught and are baffled when they can’t find a safety on a Sig. Of cousre my opinion is that those in the Military that are taught/re-taught the Sig platform are better off anyway.
Sadly, the only M9s I have encountered were in the Army. The magazines seem to be sub-standard. That said, it was always fun to watch the Officers have a ruff time with them. When I was offered an M4, I declined, because I had an M16A2 that I knew would function without fail. It never failed me and that’s why I’m here to talk about it.
I am kind of guessing LAV was speaking of the idea that our nation has civilians that are able to defend our nation with the nations weapons. Similar to other countries where service is mandatory. I would guess any of us here could use an M9 in a pinch, possibly not as well as a pistol we carry/train with but have enough firearms experience to be able to use it in its role as a secondary weapon. However there is a rather large percentage of Americans who either have never fired a weapon or have very limited exposure to a combat type weapon and would struggle using any form of pistol or combat rifle.
Well citizens are supposed to be the “well trained militia” and the “protectors of our society” so it would make sense to have an affininty for those patforms becuase thats whats in the hands of our men and women in uniform and in armories across the country. Thier numbers outweigh most if not all the other platforms in the safes of civilians across the US.
I wouldnt mind getting my hands on an older M9 since the newer civvy versions feel less rugged .
I totally agree with him. When I received my commission in 1995 I purchased a 92FS and despite my feeling at the time that there were many better pistols (this feeling was based ENTIRELY on what others had told me - mostly at gun shops), I realized that it was the weapon I was going to have to qualify with and the firearm I was mostly likely going to use to defend my life with. Thus I dedicated myself to becoming as close to “one” with it as I could at the time. Fifteen years later, despite the fact that I am issued a different pistol and no longer in the military, the 92FS is my go to, and favorite pistol. Obviously I learned to love it despite my initial hesitance.
I am always asked by servicemen what pistol they should buy. I tell the the Beretta. It makes no sense to me to train on a system that you will not carry in combat. The Glock/1911/M&P/Sig/insert your pet pistol here may be a better pistol, but it isn’t what you will have with you when Hajji is trying to kill you. And given the fact that the current trend of pistols have a lot less levers and knobs than the Beretta, the differences are great enough that a thorough familiarity would be good.
While I agree with many here that there is value in learning other systems, I think that that should come after a good level of mastery of your primary system has been achieved and for most soldiers, handgun mastery is a long way away.
Take a 92FS to a TigerSwan class and you’ll be given state-of-the-art instruction on the pistol.
chalk me up in the “be familiar with rifle and handgun” group, but I don’t know that I agree with the M9 as a choice…
truthfully, in the cont U.S., it almost makes more sense to be proficient with a Glock, since, in a situation where you would need to arm yourself with a weapon other than your own, you are much more likely to encounter Glocks across various jurisdictions than any other weapon (I know that in some areas that is not the case, but I would be willing to bet that there are agencies in all 50 states that use the Glock in some incarnation)
in truth, where I live, I’d need to familiarize myself with a G21, a P229 in .357 sig, a G22, P229 in .40, and probably several I am missing and the M9 (several military bases nearby)
If there is a scenario where the military, reserves, or guard are active in the country and in my area, that probably means a lot of the above weapons are available…
if we were a country more like Switzerland I would agree more with a specific platform…but we have so many various platforms in use that you are likely to encounter, being proficient in the use of all arms is probably more realistic…
train with and know how to use what you own or are issued…(i do like the idea that soldiers should buy M9s…in fact, maybe I should have done that so many years ago…I never mastered the M9, and to this day dislike DA/SA platforms)
I can shoot a Beretta just fine but I don’t think its an important ability. Frankly the Glock is a far more common side arm in this country. I say shoot the guns you prefer and own well. I will continue to enjoy shooting my 1911’s and my AR’s.
Pat