Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Side Arms For Fly Boys.
Message-ID: <1990Nov2.202035.28348@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 2 Nov 90 20:20:35 GMT
References: <1990Oct30.052445.7246@cbnews.att.com> <1990Nov1.024817.11925@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 27
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
>From: leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Lee Mellinger)
>:BTW, the new FBI round, the .40 S&W seems like an adequate replacement for
>:a light .45 round, but it's not that much more compact.  Besides, if you
>:need anymore than 7 shots in a pistol, you are probably dead already...
>
>... From a defensive point of view, to
>give up 7 rounds of ammo with the same ballestics does not make any
>sense, tactical situations cannot be predicted and those extra rounds
>may be the difference between life and death.

Sure can, if they make the gun sufficiently heavier and bulkier that you
aren't carrying it on the day you need it, or if the two-column magazine
that's almost mandatory for the zillion-shot pistols has a feed problem
at the wrong time.  Other things being equal, nobody in his right mind
would prefer fewer rounds... but other things are *not* equal and the
tradeoffs need to be weighed very carefully.  In a pistol intended mainly
as secondary emergency armament, compactness, lightness, and reliability
are more important than the ability to fight a six-hour battle without
reloading.  Especially since going into that six-hour battle armed only
with a pistol and the usual run of military pistol training is probably
suicide anyway.
-- 
"I don't *want* to be normal!"         | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
"Not to worry."                        |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry