The public has sung loud and long. The M9 must go! 9x19mm is a poor pistol cartridge! Our Soldiers and Marines are being hampered by an inferior handgun and cartridge.
As is typical of arguments posted online by random, anonymous people, the truth is deeper than they realize.
Check out this photo used as a lead for the current round of M9 bashing:
Perhaps it isn't the pistol's fault...
Interestingly, none of the geniuses commenting on this (all self-described handgun masters, of course) seemed to notice the poorly-posed poser modeling the vile M9 is “shooting” with the safety/decocker on, using a questionable grip/hold, and apparently has no use for sights as the rear sight is missing. Perhaps he was trained by a point shooting advocate, I don’t know.
Here’s the real problem. Most Marines, Soldiers, police, and gun owners tend to be novice marksmen, especially with handguns. Very few people have trained to shoot a handgun well enough to offer a competent opinion on the matter. Let’s look at some ranges.
Army pistol mess
As you can see, there is no real trend in hits and the entire barn door (full sized silhouette) has shots sprayed all over it. And these are the shots that actually hit, all of them receiving full value. On this particular Army course, shooters are given 40 rounds to engage 30 targets and are considered qualified if 16 of the 30 targets are hit, somewhere. Soldiers can miss nearly half the time, even with ten extra rounds, and still pass. The “fast” stages of the course allow two seconds per shot and the bulk of the course is slower. Note the base of the target is blocked by the mound protecting the target lifter and that mound is a beaten zone of many very low, errant shots.
The Marines in the peanut gallery are likely chuckling, so let’s look at an example of their ranges.
Marine pistol mess 1
Marine pistol mess 2
The metal carrier behind the block wall holds a silhouette the same size as the Army target and that waist-high wall has taken a healthy beating from bad shots jerked and flinched several feet off target. Of course, the wall only shows shots pulled off target that went low. The rest ended up in the berm somewhere else. As seen closer up (Marine pistol mess 2) the chewed up top line of blocks is not made of concrete, purposely used to avoid splatter towards the shooters from the excessive number of low shots.
Sample of a typical Army qualification range. This is at full speed and the flinching on an empty pistol is common.
From a range hosted for personnel selected to participate in a “Best Warrior Competition” Yes, the slow reloads off the provided table are at full speed and the tables are common on nearly all of these qualification ranges.
These are the results on qualification ranges with large targets, generous time limits, fixed courses of fire, and no real pressure. Imagine how much worse the shooting is when the stress and variables of combat are thrown in. Given the users wielding it, is the M9 truly ineffective? Even if it is, are shooters like this capable of a valid opinion on the matter?
Most Marines, Soldiers, police, CCW, and gun owners won’t invest the effort needed to train to a high level of skill and very few public sector organizations will expend the resources needed to make them do so. I’m not casting aspersions, just trying to address reality. If the DoD decides on a new pistol, or any other weapon, the results will be similar because the end user isn’t magically more skillful with a shiny new issue item.
Firearm User Network 
David B. Monier-Williams
Jul 10, 2014 @ 11:59:37
It would seem that the military have both the lack of funds for proper training and proper training. So, if we go back to the 45acp, we’ll go back to WWI when the troops couldn’t handle them and used them as tent peggers.
LikeLike
Tyrus Moulder
Jul 10, 2014 @ 13:55:25
It is my sincere hope that any change in the handgun category does not include a step backwards towards the 1911. The M9 is a large pistol for its caliber. I do not claim to have the final answer on best handgun for general military use, but the Glock-17 or the S&W M&P in 9mm are two pistols worthy of consideration. The problem of training (as described in your post) will not go away anytime soon either way. One more thing John, I want to thank on behalf of my fellow marines for pointing out the Army’s performance shortcomings first. The closeup provided in Marine pistol mess-2 was a bit much, however.
LikeLike
George Harris
Jul 10, 2014 @ 14:49:53
John,
You hit the nail on the head. What good is more power if they can’t use what they have??? They would be better off working on better performing ammunition than going to a whole new platform and with all the money saved provide a little better training for the troops. You and I both could stop all the holes in the wall or divots in the ground with 30 minutes of training but that is so out of the main stream that it scares the conventional trainers to death.
BTW, MG Lesniak the new DCAR was at Benning recently on the pistol range and shot a knot with his M-9 at 15 YDS after which he was asked where he learned to shoot like that. His response was MSG George Harris of the USAR Marksmanship Team. He likes to shoot and is good at it. Hopefully he will become the CAR before his time is up. We can only hope.
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Jul 10, 2014 @ 17:08:38
@Tyrus Moulder
>> One more thing John, I want to thank on behalf of my fellow marines for pointing out the Army’s performance shortcomings first
No problem, sir!
>> The closeup provided in Marine pistol mess-2 was a bit much, however.
I merely took photos of the Marine pistol range in the condition we found it in. I guess you’ll have to consult with your fellow Marines to help address the reasons those bullets wound up all the way down there… :)
Lest anyone think I’m a jerk, the real point is we can all stand to get better. The first step is the not-so-pleasant realization our troops and cops (and the rest of us!) aren’t the experts they’re assumed to be.
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Jul 11, 2014 @ 06:47:16
More on why your firearm choice isn’t as critical as you are:
http://sheriffjimwilson.com/2012/07/25/if-you-can-shoot/
LikeLike
Anonymous
Jul 11, 2014 @ 09:21:40
I suppose they want to go back to the 1911 because it has “tremendous knock down power” and holds just 7 rounds. First, most troops never see or use pistols. Pistols are rarely used in combat–just like bayonets. As an Army MP (78-81 + Reserves) I had complete distain for the 1911. I was a very good shooter before entering the Army and tested some of our guns. At 25 yards, they would have a 50-50 chance of hitting the targets. Malfunctions were common. Until a fellow police officer showed me his new P-226 and 1000 rounds of ammo, I thought all auto-pistols suffered problems. 9mm will kill just as well as the 45 ACP…maybe better as it penetrates intermediate barriers better…on the battlefield or on the street, there are barriers the operator has to contend with unlike a 2D range. As a former Armorer and Training Specialist for the 2nd largest SO in the US, I must say that our 92s were nearly malfunction free: (One had a spring that needed replacement). We also had the military shoot-qual-train at our range and I was able to test fire and evaluate all the hard use M9s they brought to the range. I found them to be far superior to the 1911s–either from the Army or from a gunshop. Here’s the real stat: US police officers have a hit ratio of only 18 to 20% on the Bad Guy at only 12 feet. That has not changed in 30 to 40 years. Most of that is extreme stress and fear–which is different than the 2D range on a nice summer day. Ted A Sames II, SISSTRAINING.COM
LikeLike
Colorado Pete
Jul 11, 2014 @ 11:43:40
Nothing wrong with a good 1911. Most of the old GI ones suffered from tiny sights, terrible triggers, and loose tolerances – not conducive to accuracy. A modern iteration with hi-viz fixed sights, a 4-lb. trigger, and “medium” tolerances hits just fine. And since as some here have pointed out, pistols are rarely used in modern military fighting, an 8-rd magazine is no great drawback, especially if you are carrying a dual mag pouch as well – AND if you can shoot well under pressure. A double-stack of 9mm may be comforting (if only false comfort) if you can’t hit squat. Which as stated above seems to be the real problem.
If you want to stick with a double 9 there are any number of modern plastic iterations smaller and lighter than the M9. And if you like retro classic steel, the old Browning P-35 had a fine record.
And as Cooper pointed out ages ago, it isn’t the killing ability, it’s making the other guy cease hostilities before he shoots you.
The real issue is skill under pressure.
LikeLike
John Veit
Jul 11, 2014 @ 17:51:36
I understand that the Marines are going for a new 1911 pistol because the 9 mm doesn’t have enough stopping power.
That was the same type of argument used back in the early 1900’s to justify the original 1911.
Here’s a link to an article that covers the testing of the 1911, including testing on cadavers
http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/background.htm#IMAGE
Applegate said the 1911 was not a natural pointer (it shoots low). There is a US WWII film about that.
Here is a link to an article about that:
http://www.pointshooting.com/1a1911x.htm
And here’s a link to an article with info from Applegate’s book on that.
http://www.pointshooting.com/faschap.htm
Also the 1911 can jam if the index finger is used along the side to aim the gun and the middle finger is used to shoot it.
The original guide on the 1911 and other Military manuals published up until the 1940’s carried a caution about shooting the 1911 that way, which makes the point :-) that shooting a pistol that way was known method of shooting at that time (actually since 1853).
……….
And here’s a link to the FBI’s paper that provides info on adoption on the adoption of the 10 mm, and gives you an insight into the thinking that goes into the making of such decisions.
http://www.pointshooting.com/1a10mm.htm
Lastly hi-cap pistols with fat grips are heavy, hard to grip by folks with small to medium sized hands, unless the grip is necked down. And if of high caliber, they are harder to control due to their recoil.
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Jul 11, 2014 @ 21:20:30
Still more on this:
http://www.gunnuts.net/2014/07/10/harder-hitting-nonsense/
LikeLike
David B. Monier-Williams
Jul 12, 2014 @ 17:02:47
Even if you’re a good shot things can get scary. This is a story told to men by Bill Allard, Joe Cirillo’s partner in the famous short lived NYC Stakeout Squad.
Joe and Bill entered a sleasy hotel in NYC to arrest a nasty. The was a stairway directly ahead of them with a landing leading back to the rooms. Suddenly the man they were after appeared on the landing on his way to the stairs. The man drew and started firing. Bill emptied his 38 special and his back up 1911, even though the man went down, he was still trying to shoot him. The man died where he lay. Bill was scared stiff as he had emptied both his guns and the man still trying to squeeze off a round while he stood there bare-ass naked.
Bill couldn’t believe it. He went to the morgue to examine the body. All shots were grouped in and around the heart.
It’s amazing what the human body can do especially if it’s full of heroin!
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Jul 12, 2014 @ 20:02:47
At least Allard got his hits. Probably had something to do with Allard’s skill that went far beyond qualification standards. Terminal effects are even less when shots fired fail to hit intended targets.
LikeLike
David B. Monier-Williams
Jul 12, 2014 @ 20:47:25
What, to me is criminal, is other than for Post Teams or higher, marksmanship in the military is a lost art.
LikeLike
E.D.M.
Jul 14, 2014 @ 21:18:49
And here we go, around the same merry go round…again.
I think you pretty much got to the crux. The issue with pistol marksmanship, just like rifle marksmanship, is that the training and skills of the shooters is evident. Using a “bigger hammer” isn’t the fix. It’s the same problem as the guys I saw when I lived in Montana who insisted that you couldn’t use anything less than 300 WM on a deer. When I saw these same guys at the range zeroing their rifles for hunting season, I understood why they felt that way.
The 9mm is a fine round when applied properly. Sure, there are newer and “better” designs for service pistols available today, but at least the M9 is a known quantity for the relative few that it gets issued to. IMO, more training and better ammo would be dollars better spent.
That said, with all things being equal, and I’m stuck with ball ammo, I would rather take a double stack 45 like an FNX-45, M&P 45, HK 45, or something similar. But I have the hand size, and feel competent enough in my skills to use it (note, I’m not a match shooter by any means, but I can keep shots to an A or B zone at reasonable distances and reasonable times).
LikeLike
Paul Mazan
Jan 27, 2017 @ 17:09:40
The Air Force solved the problem of poor performance by the average Airman with a handgun. They never issued us handguns unless you were an officer or a Sky Cop. That is not to say that our rifle ranges didn’t get shot up just as badly as the pistol ranges you pictured. When you get 1/2 day shooting with the rifle in basic and then qualify once a year (1966-1970) you don’t see much improvement
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Jan 27, 2017 @ 17:26:26
>> The Air Force solved the problem of poor performance by the average Airman with a handgun. They never issued us handguns…
Well, that’s one way to solve the problem!
LikeLike