Navy Seals Condone 9mm

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think people are comparing apples to oranges when they talk

about what SEAL's, DELTA, or HRT ect. uses. These guys not

only are highly trained BUT: they are going in as a group (against

hardened terrorists who operate in larger groups) with

explosives, gases, body armour, and sub-guns / assualt rifles,

and many other high-tech toys. There handgun needs are very

different than a lone civilian against 1-3 common criminals.

Also I have seen other episodes of the History Channels SEALS

and the sposkman was the same guy they had as a L.A. County

SWAT member. Don't know if this is the same guy though.
 
On a side note,
I've seen an episode of Real TV where an officer shot a BG with a .45 cal. (he actually mentioned the cal.) in the stomach area after the BG tried to stab him and tried to get to his .45 cal pistol. The BG engage the officer in a struggle after being shot for a good 3 min. or so. The officer eventually managed to handcuff him (great show of restraint, IMO). Surprisingly when help arrived, the BG still managed to get up and walk to the ambulance.
After seing that show I become a believer in shot placement.
Yup, its true, even a .45 can fail! There's no majic bullet/caliber, shot placement is the key!





I saw the same show and that was the officers fault for not shooting that guy a 2nd and 3rd time. I was amazed at how the officer conducted himself in that situation.



Wilhelm
 
Well, I will say this, If you went to any of the Teams, be they Delta, Seals, Army SF, or what have you and ask a group of them what they would want instead of what it is they might be issued........you can pretty much bet the general consensus wouldn't specify a 9mm!

I myself personally, believe one of the greatest injustices inflicted upon our armed services was the adoption of the M9 Beretta.

2xTap
 
I condone 9mm too. Placement is key with anything.

I've been shot at with 37mm, rockets, and small arms fire to no effect. They all had something in common. They missed.

Placement! :D
 
Keep in mind that they don't ever expect to use a handgun, either. If you have M14s, M16s, M4s, MP5s, etc. to choose from, then you ARE NOT going to use a handgun. Remember, folks...handguns are DEFENSIVE weapons. Despite the whole SOCOM pistol thing (which no one in the military seems to like) where the adminstrators specified a pistol for use as an offensive weapon, no one with any sense is going to take a pistol to a rifle fight when they have a choice in the matter.

For my 2 cents, I have seen very few special ops-type guys who were worth much with a handgun. If they were, it was mostly because they were gun guys to begin with and practiced on their own time and dime. When push comes to shove, you break out a long gun, not a crappy little handgun of ANY caliber.
 
Well Buzz, I really am not too concerned about SEAL or seal. If the guy on the show was trying to be impressive awe-inspiring, he did not do it.

The 'triple tap' as you called it and that you say is to assure the target it down is fine, only it isn't a triple tap but a double COC and then a single to the head as was demonstrated in the show with a clear transition and delay in the shots between the chest and head.

I still think the guy was fairly idiotic as displayed by his attitude. His comments that you wont' put down they 9 mm round after a seal puts two rounds through your heart and one through your head is passive-aggressive blowhard crap. Instead of describing the drill in functional terms, like you did Buzz, the gun defends the 9 mm round with a threat. That is pure unnecessary crap. If the only way he can defend the round or explain its use is by saying that I, as the viewer, won't have much to say after he shoots me several times, well then I stand by my comments about the guy being an idiot. He may be very well trained, but as for public speaking he is an idiot.

Look at is this way, the guy is trying to defend the use of 9 mm ammo on targets. When he made the threat of saying that I, the viewer, won't be asking any questions after he shoots me simply shows that he is lacking. Let's face it, you shoot me or anyone else twice in the heart and once in the head with any number of calibers and I won't be asking any questions, but that does not mean the calibers are not very effective compared to others. So, the guy apparently is unable to articulate any sort of explanation other than one involving violence. In short, he failed to actually answer the question as to the 9 mm's effectiveness or substantiate whether it was more or less effective than any other round.

And once again, the three shot drill is designed to make sure the person is down, no doubt, but it is also designed to compensate for not being able to always hit the intended target, hence why two shots are to the heart area (to stop heart, cause bleeding out) and then one to the head if the heart shots didn't do the job and the reason there are two shots to the heart or COC is in case they head can't be hit. Part of the reasons shots to the head or to the heart may not work are because of body armor, deflection of the round by hard tissues, or inability of the round (9 mm, Hmm?) to penetrate adequately to the appropriate organs.
 
I've seen this show, and the segment in question, a few times. Has it occurred to anyone that we have not seen the entire quantity of video/film shot for this segment? Maybe they had asked the guy about the 'ineffective, weak, candy-***** 9mm' compared to the manly .45 ACP?

I'm not a huge fan of the 9mm. But I own one. I wouldn't want to get shot with one, any number of times. Or a .22LR, or a .380, or a .32....you get the idea.

Maybe this guy had been pressed a bit about the 'stupid military decision' to go with the 9mm? When on film, I would probably choose to at least support the decisions of my superiors, even if I didn't privately agree. How the heck do we know?

OTOH, maybe he is cocky. I'd be cocky too, if I could legitimately pin on a budweiser. Which I can't. I also know that I would not call anyone who could an idiot to his face, without a huge smile on my own, and even then I'd be careful. Of course, the errornet is different, and you can do stuff here that you would never do for real....
 
SEALS don't "condone" 9mm's; they use them zealously.

Furthermore, "cocky" is considered a required attribute for SEALS. Per our old friend, Plato, "He who knows not, and knows not that he knows not is a fool. He who knows and knows not that he knows is the greatest fool of all."
 
Here is a post that I picked up some time ago that proves that the .45 is not always superior in all situations. As a matter of fact I often wonder wether 1/10 of an inch in diameter is really all that superior when comparing the 9mm to the .45acp. As you will see this test is nothing new, it was conducted way back in 1948. I think that the low penetration factor of the .45 was a real concern to many of the worlds militaries and that the 9mm's higher velocity and penetration was a real plus when using the sub-machine guns. Interchangability between a pisol and sub-gun of the same caliber was also a factor. In other words why have a .45 cal. pistol (even if it was surmised to be slightly superior in a pistol) and a different caliber in a sub-gun when it wasknown that the 9mm was the superior sub-gun caliber in terms of flatter trajectory, superior penetration, and lower recoil and therefore more controllability.



Here is the 1948 test

I actually posted this in April of last year (and commented then that, although it really only constituted penetration testing - not "knock-down" or "stopping" power, I nevertheless found it most interesting!
Grant Rombough, Medicine Hat, Alberta

Here's the entire previous post:
I just HAD to respond to this thread by quoting a 1948 Springfield Armory report on some pentration tests they conducted using an Inglis HP, with a Colt .45 1911A1 as a sort of "control" pistol. The report is quoted below (verbatim) from pp. 178-9 of Clive Law's new book, "INGLIS DIAMOND: The Canadian High Power Pistol". Sorry about the resulting length of this post, but I trust many of you will find it absolutely fascinating. (Now I know that "penetration" does not equate with "stopping power", but I certainly found the comparative performance of the military .45 Ball ammo surprising!)
Here goes:

SPRINGFIELD ARMORY
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
MEMORANDUM REPORT SA-MR 20-2100

L O Spaulding/lv

24 August 1948

SUBJECT:
Effective Penetration Range of 9mm Parabellum Ammunition.

OBJECT:
To determine the greatest range at which the subject ammunition will penetrate the M1 helmet.

SUMMARY:
M1 helmets were fired at using different 9mm ammunition to determine the greatest penetration range. A Canadian 9mm Parabellum ammunition having a velocity of 1250 f/s penetrated the M1 helmet at 130 yards, which was further than any of the other ammunition tested.

REFERENCE:
Project TS2-7875-2024 J O 7875-6160

MATERIAL:

1. Weapons
a. Browning FN 9mm Pistol, HP Inglis-Canada, Serial Number 8T2367
b. Colt Automatic Pistol, Cal .45, 1911A1, Serial Number 1651407

2. Ammunition
a. Special 9mm Parabellum cases and Cal .38 S&W Special Bullets (Metal clad, 158 grains) and loaded to a velocity of 850 f/s.
b. Winchester 9mm Parabellum, 116 grain bullet, Lot WRA22026, 1,150 f/s instrumental velocity at 53 feet.
c. Cartridges, Ball, 9mm M1, 116 grain bullet (Parabellum) (Code T2CAB) Lot DIL- 617 (Canadian) 1,250 f/s instrumental velocity at 53 feet.
d. Pistol Ball Cal .45 M1911, Lot E C S25250.

3. M1 Helmets

4. Outdoor range facilities

PROCEDURE:
An M1 helmet was placed on top of a stake, back of which a target was set up to facilitate aiming and to lend support to the helmet. The 9mm Canadian pistol was then fired from a muzzle and elbow rest at the helmet. In the event the helmet was pierced, it was moved away from the shooter 10 yards and the procedure repeated until failure to pierce the helmet resulted. This procedure was followed with the special 9mm ammunition and with the high and low velocity 9mm ammunition. A similar test was run using a Colt Cal .45.

RESULTS:
1. The special 9mm Parabellum case with a Cal 38 S&W bullet penetrated the M1 helmet at 50 yards, but not 60 yards.
2. The Winchester 9mm Parabellum (1,150 f/s velocity) penetrated the M1 helmet at 120 yards, but not at 130 yards.
3. The Canadian 9mm Parabellum (1,250 f/s velocity) penetrated the M1 helmet at 130 yards, but due to lack of longer range facilities was not fired beyond this point.
4. The Cal .45 ammunition penetrated the helmet at 30 yards, but not at 35 yards.

CONCLUSION:
It is concluded that the Canadian 9mm Parabellum ammunition with the 1250 f/s velocity, had a longer range penetration power than any of the other ammunition tested.

Prepared By: L O Spaulding, Ordnance Engineer
H F Hawthorne, Ordnance Engineer
E W Hopkins, Head Ordnance Engineer

:
 
These may help explain the results... What is sectional density and why is it important?


What is the sectional density of my bullet?

Don't forget... diameter is one dimension. When we look at the area of a .45" circle vs. a .355" circle(area = pi x radius x radius)...

my math comes out to... the area of a circle with .45" = .159 sq. in and .355" circle = .099 sq. in.

Thus, a circle with a diameter of .45" will have a 60% greater surface area than a circle w/ dia of .355" (if my math is correct ;). Now even then, this is two dimensional and I guess you would have to bust out the calculus to compensate for the... er... ogive? to determine the true surface area. But my point is that you aren't just getting hit by the diameter but moreso the surface area of the bullet.

If your foot was 60% bigger, it would be significant. But these are bullets and they are handgun bullets at that. So the difference isn't really that significant in the relative magnitude of things.

Is 9mm good enough? Is .45 good enough? How about the new 5.7mm bullets? What if they penetrate more? I think the key here is to pick who you really feel has the credentials to be an "expert" and go with what they choose. Either that, or just get good with what ya got.
 
BTW...

http://www.ramo.com/weapons/ammo.shtml

Weighing only half as much as a 9mm round and with 30% less recoil, the 5.7 x 28 mm enhances accuracy in both rapid aimed shots and full automatic fire. The projectile transfers nearly all of its energy to the target on impact, thus minimizing over-penetration and greatly reducing collateral risks. In contrast, a 9mm round loses only 30% of its energy on the primary target and often causes unintended damage. This round will penetrate modern fragmentation vests and helmets at ranges up to 200 meters.
Click to expand...

Is this "better?"
 
My high school friend is a SEAL Instructor. Asked him what I should get for a handgun... he told me to get an H&K .45.
 
:scrutiny:

Why is it that it's always the ones who haven't been there, done that who always want to question or critique the policys and descisions of our Spec Ops personel.

:neener:
 
Why is it that it's always the ones who haven't been there, done that who always want to question or critique the policys and descisions of our Spec Ops personel.
Click to expand...

'Cause it's a forum where people speak their minds? :D

Besides...the actual specials operations personnel don't have the final say in the weapons they carry. Although many people like to comment that "SEALs carry whatever they want", that just isn't the case. Like any governmentally-funded entity of any sort, it is normally people who ARE NOT on the front lines who make such decisions and the operators make due. Special operations personnel have more leeway than, say, a regular infantry grunt, but, in the end, if they are told to carry weapon x instead of weapon y, they will be carrying weapon x. Orders is orders...

An interesting side note that I didn't realize until I was talking to an active-duty SEAL a couple of years ago...not all SEALs keep in training for combatative stuff. I didn't realize that. He said that he had barely touched a weapon in nearly a year. His platoon had been doing some deep diving and underwater demolitions for most of the past year and he hadn't done anything but shoot some qualifications with an MP5.
 
I too have seen this special on TLC. The younger of the two SEALs who was interviewed was the kind of guy that the SEALs make fun of. He was "that guy". I guess he was a SEAL, but I'd be willing to bet he was a firearms instructor, or armourer, or some other administrative member of "the Teams".

I have met a couple of guys that said they were Navy SEALs. They told me all about it, and that's pretty much all they talked about. I do not know if I have ever met a Navy SEAL.

I have known several guys who said they were Rangers and one that was ex-Delta Force... I believe every one of them.

One thing that they all had in common... They didn't talk much, and when they did, they didn't talk about SOPMOD's and SOCOM's and "Mozambiques" (2 to the body, 1 to the head)... They talked about beer, girls, night clubs, music, and football. If you ask them enough questions, they may share a story, but it's not going to sound exciting and gung-ho... They were just matter-of-fact, almost boring stories... "they woke us up, we got on the plane, we didn't know if it was training or not, we flew for a really long time, we all decided this must be for real, then they told us, then we jumped, we landed, we surrounded Noriega's compound, then we came home."

:neener:
 
I'd have to agree with Krept and Steve, in as much as what SEALS do and what the average CCW holder experience are worlds apart. 9mm has its place, of course -- commonality with subgun, worldwide availability, high capacity magazines, etc. That's different than a mugger with a box cutter at three feet in an ATM vestibule. I'll stick with my .45 ACP and .357 Magnum. But if I was on a team with supressed weapons 500 miles from the border or pickup spot I wouldn't shun 9mm -- I'd give every round a big, fat kiss.
 
The SEALs I have known were not cocky at all but very humble clean-cut guys with a hardcore training mentality, completely the opposite of their hollywood personnae. And that guy on that show did not act like the operators I have known, but more like a gun shop commando mouting off.

But never the less, I agree with him that the 9mm is very effective, and many of these guys probably like the capacity. Considering that guys that really walk the walk carry them, they must work. Who is more qualified to say than the Israelis that enter buses and planes to stop hell-bent terrorists wielding bombs and AK's, and they trust their lives and others' lives to the 9mm. Many of these guys enter with nothing more than a pistol. When do you need more stopping power than when you are facing a suicidal terrorist? You have to stop him NOW or everyone dies. If the 9mm did not work, they would pick something else.


That said, if I could find a 9mm platform I liked to carry, I would carry one, but I like the 1911 platform and the .45 fits it best.
 
Trapshooter, you are right, I think. And for you others, of course the 9 mm has a definite purpose. I have no doubt about that and I have no doubt that it can be very effectively used.

The Seal in question could have bypassed all this cockiness crap and simply noted that while many folks have suggested the 9 mm to be a dinky round, it has proven to be very effective in CQB confrontations especially when used with with a shot set, such as placing two shots to the heart and one into the the head. With such an explanation, the guy would come off sounding learned, provided a good explanation, and no threat be made to the viewer. Instead, the guy never does a very good job of explaining why it is that the 9 mm is so useful to them.

The guy is supposedly on my side and so I don't much appreciate the threats because I might belittle this particular choice of caliber.
 
Gordy, wow, thanks for showing me that gun. I like it a lot. Do you know if they make the same slim gun but a little longer in muzzle and handle? I would liketo see one that has a 4 inch barrel and holds 8 rounds of 9mm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

I
  • Locked
Navy Seal falls on grenade to saved team mates.
Replies
19
Views
1K
Accord
A
W
  • Locked
Navy Seal to Get Medal of Honor:Uncommon Valor,the Ultimate Sacrifice
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
ralphie98
R
2
  • Locked
Move To Little Creek Considered For SEAL Center
Replies
5
Views
461
Gord
G
T
  • Locked
Shot placement.
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
Bezoar
B
Skribs
  • Locked
Lungs and Physiological Stops
Replies
19
Views
670
john wall
J
Back
Top