quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
Red dots are definitely the wave of the future. No question.

Wait... These "mall ninja gizmos" and "toys" used by people with "questionable judgement and skills" are now all of a sudden "the [unquestionable] wave of the future"?

Of course they are. I can acknowledge that and still believe it's a misguided choice. You see, that called being objective and thinking independently. I'm not emotionally chained to these toys.

BTW, you agree with the Marshal Service that the 1911 is the currently the best design available to use as a combat sidearm?

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
BTW, you agree with the Marshal Service that the 1911 is the currently the best design available to use as a combat sidearm?

For that level of shooter, in that specialized role, potentially yes. That's for them to decide, since they know their specific requirements better than anyone else, and have done the vetting and testing to make an informed decision. They apparently believe it is.

But for general LE issue, no. (The USMS as a whole are not adopting this anyway.)

Besides, I already stated that earlier in the thread.

Additionally, the FBI HRT, a similar high-level federal LE special operations unit, also uses a 1911. Yet similarly, the FBI as a whole has not adopted the 1911, nor would it be the best option for general FBI issue.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
BTW, you agree with the Marshal Service that the 1911 is the currently the best design available to use as a combat sidearm?

For that level of shooter, in that role, yes.

For general issue, no.

But I already stated that earlier in the thread.

Additionally, the FBI HRT, a similar high-level federal LE special operations unit, also uses a 1911.

That's interesting. I don't think that's the best available design for any level of shooter. So, I guess we disagree again.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
And believe it or not, to both the people actually utilizing them as well as many others, their expert real-world experience and testing outweighs your amateur armchair quarterbacking.

I'm not allowed to have my own opinion or question their decision because I'm just a civi with a keyboard in my holster. OK. The Navy Seals don't seem to think that's the best choice either but I guess SOG has much more experience in actual firefights than those guys. Or perhaps, the Marshals are just at a much more proficient level with their firearms.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
I'm not allowed to have my own opinion or question their decision

Sure you are. That is why we have discussion forums.

But when you so vociferously deride legitimate proven equipment with terms like "mall ninja gizmos" and "toys", and snarkily dismiss some of the best shooters in the country as having "questionable judgement and skills", it does cause you to come across as a smug "keyboard commando" know-it-all to other folks.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
The Navy Seals don't seem to think that's the best choice either but I guess SOG has much more experience in actual firefights than those guys.

SOG isn't infiltrating foreign shorelines from submerged submarines, or deploying for months from remote forward operating bases with minimal support.

Different units with different missions = potentially different equipment.

It's possible for one tool to be a better option in one scenario, and another to be a better option in a different scenario.

It's also possible for there to be multiple appropriate tools for a given situation, with the user being able to take their pick from a variety of good options and still get the job done correctly.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:

BTW, you agree with the Marshal Service that the 1911 is the currently the best design available to use as a combat sidearm?

What is your problem?

You really seem troubled by the fact that this particular group has selected this firearm, after extensive testing by their people, relative to their mission.

Best possible choice? Who knows. I very much doubt there is such a thing. It is THEIR choice, however.

And no, it's not a 1911. It's a 2011, which differs in more respects than capacity.

What the US Navy SEAL teams use is irrelevant.

We are all putting way too much emphasis on a centralized decision to adopt a new standard for a department (albeit a niche department). Such a decision involves many factors that are not merely related to performance.

“Race on Sunday, sell on Monday” has long been an effective marketing strategy. Certainly racing (or professional use) can also serve as effective further R&D for the later consumer versions or updates. But much of that overall strategy hinges on the fact that we fans overly view the raced item as a full endorsement but that assumption is often flawed given that the race team’s decision process is more complicated. Even more so, if the race team is a governmental agency, etc.

We all have our opinions. USMS SOG has its mission requirements. Like any good tradesmen, they know what tools that are essential for the job. If you have the chance to shoot a STI 2011 Staccato, I’d invite you to do so & formulate your experience. They are impressive pistols.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
What is your problem?

You really seem troubled by the fact that this particular group has selected this firearm, after extensive testing by their people, relative to their mission.

Best possible choice? Who knows. I very much doubt there is such a thing. It is THEIR choice, however.

And no, it's not a 1911. It's a 2011, which differs in more respects than capacity.

What the US Navy SEAL teams use is irrelevant.

I don’t think you’ve read through this carefully so let me clear a few things up for you.

First of all, I really couldn’t care less what these people use, and that goes for any other alphabet agency. They can use the new Bersa .380 Super Lightning Tactical with Leupold 3X9 variable scope, integrated Leatherman Wave combat grips and a rail-mounted air horn. I just don’t care. I never in my life bought something because someone else endorsed it.

However, the world seems to revolve around who’s carrying what for some people. I offered my opinion and the response was “LOL”, condescending graphics and remarks and so forth. I’m basically being told by the “experts” we have here that I should just accept that this is the most advanced handheld weapon system ever selected for the most elite warriors that ever visited us from Krypton. It simply MUST be by virtue of who they are. They can’t possibly be wrong because of all the rigorous testing, field experience etc. That’s fine, I don’t know anything because I don’t work for or been trained by the government.

But that’s how the SEALS reference becomes relevant. SOG and the FBI went one way and the SEALS went another. They can’t both be right (and neither can be wrong by virtue of who they are according to others). Rogue and others claim that SOG/FBI got it right. I’m simply asking them to explain how the SEALS got it wrong.

Rogue’s answer is different missions. Ok let’s see. The SEALS are in actual firefights much more often, typically against multiple opponents that are willing to die trying to kill them. SOG/FBI typically go after a single individual who won’t offer resistance (like Roger Stone). SEALS feel that a Glock with conventional sights is best for what they do.

One of them got it wrong. Which one and why?

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:
I had questions about red dot durability until I went to a class on RMR's for duty pistols at IALEFI in May. I used a Trijicon Type 2 and it was a beast. I am now a believer

I see you are in FL. Check out Hilton Yam over at 10-8 Performance. He offers a two day duty pistol oriented RDS class that I hear is awesome.

I see he is doing it at Sig Academy in December

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:
I had questions about red dot durability until I went to a class on RMR's for duty pistols at IALEFI in May. I used a Trijicon Type 2 and it was a beast. I am now a believer

I see you are in FL. Check out Hilton Yam over at 10-8 Performance. He offers a two day duty pistol oriented RDS class that I hear is awesome.

I see he is doing it at Sig Academy in December

I’m thinking about going, actually.

But, he ll have a bunch of classes in So. FL next year.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
One of them got it wrong. Which one and why?

This reminds me of an observation by Frank Salter, “[A]ll sides to a scientific debate over theory cannot be equal, unless they are all wrong.”
But what we’re discussing here isn’t scientific theory, but rather choices that are based on factors and considerations that may vary significantly among users. It’s quite possible for two handgun choices to be different while neither is “wrong” in the sense of being unsatisfactory.

I like the 357 SIG cartridge and I like SIG Classic line pistols, specifically the P226 or P229 with DAK trigger. On the other hand, Glocks chambered for 9mm are much more popular guns. I can shoot the SIGs faster and more accurately than most LEOs I’ve encountered can shoot their Glocks, but if they were forced to use a 357 P226 as a duty weapon their performance would be even worse than it is with their Glocks. So, whose choice is wrong?

Sometimes it’s possible to measure specific operating differences, but not always, and more to the point, operational differences aren’t always what matter. I don’t rely on a 357 P229 as my primary concealed carry gun because I can operate the trigger faster than my P320s’, but for other reasons. Those other reasons may not be as important to other people as they are to me, and they might (and probably will) chose a different handgun. Our choices, however, don’t make either of us wrong—only different.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:
I had questions about red dot durability until I went to a class on RMR's for duty pistols at IALEFI in May. I used a Trijicon Type 2 and it was a beast. I am now a believer

I see you are in FL. Check out Hilton Yam over at 10-8 Performance. He offers a two day duty pistol oriented RDS class that I hear is awesome.

I see he is doing it at Sig Academy in December

I’m thinking about going, actually.

But, he ll have a bunch of classes in So. FL next year.

Someone will inevitably argue that he's not the best instructor or it's not the best instruction.

quote:

Originally posted by az4783054:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:
I had questions about red dot durability until I went to a class on RMR's for duty pistols at IALEFI in May. I used a Trijicon Type 2 and it was a beast. I am now a believer

I see you are in FL. Check out Hilton Yam over at 10-8 Performance. He offers a two day duty pistol oriented RDS class that I hear is awesome.

I see he is doing it at Sig Academy in December

I’m thinking about going, actually.

But, he ll have a bunch of classes in So. FL next year.

Someone will inevitably argue that he's not the best instructor or it's not the best instruction.

No doubt.

He’s a good dude that I’ve known for years. Good to see him back at the helm at 10-8.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
One of them got it wrong. Which one and why?

I can think of one difference - SEALs infil/exfil thru many ways but one of which is the ocean. Maybe iron sights and Glocks withstand such environment better than optics and race guns.

I'd note that if a SEAL is actually down to using his Glock, shit has gone all kinds of wrong, and whether it it iron sights or optic is the least of the problems at hand.

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:
I'd note that if a SEAL is actually down to using his Glock, shit has gone all kinds of wrong, and whether it it iron sights or optic is the least of the problems at hand.

Yep. This exactly. I ll post more tonight but the comparison is that there is no comparison.

Guess who shoots more people a year with a pistol? SEALs or USMS? USMS by about a factor of 10.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:


I don’t think you’ve read through this carefully so let me clear a few things up for you.

Let me stop you right there. You don't think. That's all you needed to say.

Point of fact, I've read every response, and "carefully," too. After all, I wouldn't want a paper cut now, would I? We must be careful when reading a thread, after all. Good god.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:

First of all, I really couldn’t care less what these people use, and that goes for any other alphabet agency.

And yet you are so devoted to this topic, it's got you so fired up, that you're every other response in the thread. You've made it you against the world, Scott Pilgrim.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:

But that’s how the SEALS reference becomes relevant. SOG and the FBI went one way and the SEALS went another. They can’t both be right (and neither can be wrong by virtue of who they are according to others). Rogue and others claim that SOG/FBI got it right. I’m simply asking them to explain how the SEALS got it wrong.

You make a lot of straw-man arguments, which by definition are fallacies. You understand?

If the US Marshalls Service SOG uses one firearm, and the US Navy Seals use another, then one must be wrong?

No, this does not make either one wrong. You've introduced this concept: you've invented the idea that one must be wrong: this idea lives in your head. It's untrue. Why do you keep bringing it up?

Try to follow this: the US Navy does not select the firearms that the US Marshalls carry.

The US Marshalls do not select the firearms that the US Navy will carry. Each is free to select their own firearms. They may select what is right for them, and for their mission. What a SEAL carries is entirely irrelevant to what a member of the Special Operations Group carries. This remains true no matter how many times you attempt to say otherwise.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
SOG/FBI typically go after a single individual who won’t offer resistance (like Roger Stone).

You're not interested in truth: you're all about falsehood, I see. By definition, a troll. Either that, or you really have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Regardless, you can safely be dismissed and put on the ignore list. Thanks for playing.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:

Ignored post by pessimist posted August 30, 2019 01:31 PM

Fixed it.

Whatever. I'll be breathlessly awaiting the next circle jerk when the Utah Department of Corrections Anti-Inmate Terrorism and Hostage Mitigation Tactical Task Force selects their next pistol.

Enjoy your new USPSA gun.

embedded troll

I like the look of that pistol, and 160 of them is not an outlandish expenditure. But, if I had that assignment, I’d ask for a $3800 10-inch .300BLK or 5.56 rifle, and a $500 Glock 17 MOS. I suppose they have decent rifles already.