Handguns in the US Army in World War Two (Ad-free)
Added 2024-06-28 12:00:10 +0000 UTCWas the 1911 an emotional support totem or a viable combat weapon? Or both? American soldiers had a bit different take on handguns than soldiers of many other armies, and I think it stems from the American identity with the frontier - the Wild West was well within memory for many people when World War Two broke out. So today, let's look at the American take on handguns during that war...
Comments
B.S. has to come from somewhere.
John Simpson
2024-06-30 03:48:28 +0000 UTCHi Ian, Was there any pistol that was considered a formidable primary weapon? My guess is no, the 1911 was just regarded higher by Americans than other nations soldiers, likely not for good reason.
Paul Biedenbach
2024-06-28 23:33:47 +0000 UTCOn the plus side of the ledger, the redoubtable Walter Walsh, a pistol champion and one of the FBI's genuine badass gunslingers, killed a Japanese sniper on Okinawa with a single shot--at 90 yards. Sometimes it's not the arrow, it's the Indian.
ViejoLobo
2024-06-28 16:48:28 +0000 UTCGreat presentation! Are you trying to make Scott at Kentucky Ballistics cry? π€£
Ed McEneney
2024-06-28 16:27:22 +0000 UTCalso: 45 is best. period. handguns are great. let one get to a rifle if needed. the airbag safety belt parachut and fire estinguisher of the gunworld. as much as I love the 1911. would have no problem with say a 1917 (sw) 45acp.
Guido Schriewer
2024-06-28 15:36:24 +0000 UTCIt's a fact that handguns are more difficult to put rounds on target than a long gun. I worship at the altar of Saint Elmer, but I deliberately chose that course because rifles at 100yds are too easy. The fact is that practice makes a good shooter, something that most people don't do.
Wayne S.
2024-06-28 15:20:25 +0000 UTCOn the M1911, I found this pic of a US Army Major in the Korean War using the gap between his pistol's lanyard ring and magazine to open a bottle of beer. I thought this quite innovative! https://i.imgur.com/M4uOy8V.jpg
Kerwin Kerr
2024-06-28 15:11:25 +0000 UTCThis is a story related to me by my late father, a WWII veteran. He was a machine gunner in a heavy weapons company in Europe. For reasons unknown to myself, he had a proclivity for capturing handguns from captured Germans. One time he picked up what he called βa Polish Radomβ in 9mm. He also acquired a coffee can of 9 mm. ammo and as he says, βshot the barrel outβ practicing. He said the practice was directly applicable to his 1911, because he said the Radom had the same grip angle as the 1911. According to him, βRegulationsβ insisted that 1911s be carried in what we now call condition 3. He said to hell with that and carried condition 2. If the hammer was down, none of the powers that be cared enough to check if a round was in the chamber. At one point, while moving through Germany, a German soldier jumped off a second floor balcony. Dad pulled his pistol and shot at the guy missing him but the pistol discharged about six inches from the guyβs ear. Dad said he kind of flopped to the ground and laid there stunned. It turned out the guy was a Polish conscript doing his damnedest to flee the Germans and surrender to the Americans. That was the only time Dad shot his 1911 in anger during the war.
Nuke Road Warrior
2024-06-28 15:07:50 +0000 UTCIn service, I heard a guy say that his uncle in WW 1 had been briefed on the 45 auto and told that the cartridge was so powerful that hitting a mans little finger would result in his being spun around and knocked to the ground .
Daniel Standridge
2024-06-28 14:53:06 +0000 UTCYMMV. I was in the infantry in the 80s (and beyond), and once Reagan budgets started there was plenty of ammo. And when NTC opened up in 1980 and rotations started in 81, CALFEXs became a real thing. And there was always money and time for live fire training in the ROK, as well. Of course, none of that has to do with marksmanship training, which is what Ian was talking about, and was always a point of emphasis in the infantry.
Terry
2024-06-28 14:46:51 +0000 UTC4) As a cadet I learned that if you are firing your personal weapon as an officer, you are not doing your job. of directing the battle. If you are in a situation where you HAVE to fire it, you have screwed the pooch.
BEAUSABRE23
2024-06-28 14:32:22 +0000 UTC3) Medics are not supposed be armed, but the Banzai Boys didn't give a damn about the laws of land warfare so virtually all medics facing the Japanese equipped themselves with pistols. The Army justified the practice as being "to defend the wounded"
BEAUSABRE23
2024-06-28 14:29:49 +0000 UTCTrue, but depends on when, where, and what units. Post Vietnam to the mid-1980's, live fire training wasn't supported by the budget to the level of army training guidelines. I understand that's different now, thankfully.
John Arpin
2024-06-28 14:27:10 +0000 UTC2) The M1911A1 is heavy enough hat it makes a good club
BEAUSABRE23
2024-06-28 14:26:32 +0000 UTC1) My uncle, who went from rifleman to squad scout to squad leader enroute to Germany, ended up carrying an M1 carbine AND an M1911A1 pistol. His company had a policy that squad leaders gave their submachine gun to the scouts and were issued carbines from company support personnel who were given M1 rifles tghey stowed on their vehicles.
BEAUSABRE23
2024-06-28 14:23:00 +0000 UTCOr in the case of the Marines, range two weeks.
Stephen Woods
2024-06-28 14:13:53 +0000 UTCAn interesting and informative discussion. However, not exactly accurate (like a 1911?). While training with handguns was certainly never a thing (except for MPs), I think you went too far in generalising that to all weapons training. Certainly there wereβand areβlogistical and cost issues. But the importance of rifle marksmanship was a real thing in the US military up to the introduction of the M4. Range week was still a thing in the US military up to the 21st century.
Terry
2024-06-28 12:21:58 +0000 UTC
