Originally Posted by Overkill0084

A very naive and immature sounding statement. All wars have propaganda, good, bad or indifferent. Would you say that WW2 was unjust? Propaganda was a tool used by all players.
It's irrelevant anyway. You shoot someone because they will shoot you & yours if you give them the chance. Press releases from the white house are irrelevant when your deployed.

Afgahnastan (bad spelling don't care), Iraq, soon maybe Iran, then what, the rest of the middle eastern countries???

Are we shooting terrorists or people that are simply pissed off we have invaded their country? I'm not sure the U.S. military actually knows. I don't believe the terrorists are as organized as CNN leads us to believe.

If someone were to invade the USA, I would shoot them. I would be a "terrorist" to them wouldn't I.

I HIGHLY RESPECT the people in the military and america is okay aside politics but I wish we could bring the boys home because these wars are ridiculous and the war on terrorism is as feudal as the war on drugs

Originally Posted by jakeleinen1

Afgahnastan (bad spelling don't care), Iraq, soon maybe Iran, then what, the rest of the middle eastern countries???

Are we shooting terrorists or people that are simply pissed off we have invaded their country? I'm not sure the U.S. military actually knows. I don't believe the terrorists are as organized as CNN leads us to believe.

If someone were to invade the USA, I would shoot them. I would be a "terrorist" to them wouldn't I.

I HIGHLY RESPECT the people in the military and america is okay aside politics but I wish we could bring the boys home because these wars are ridiculous and the war on terrorism is as feudal as the war on drugs

Whether anyone likes to admit it, war is simply a political tool. If you disagree with the politics that led to a particular war, thats fine. But all wars are not created equal. At what point does a war become "justified?" People who were sheltered and trained by afghanistan or it's proxys blew up some buildings and killed 3000ish americans some years back. Does that not meet the threshold of justification? If not, then what? If you don't engage the source of the attackers then you're simply treating a symptom.
FWIW, I was serving in the USAF on 9/11/01. So I think I can say I had a dog in the fight.

Originally Posted by Overkill0084

People who were sheltered and trained by afghanistan or it's proxys blew up some buildings and killed 3000ish americans some years back. Does that not meet the threshold of justification? If not, then what? If you don't engage the source of the attackers then you're simply treating a symptom.

if you want to get the people responsible for 9/11, you don't have to fly overseas to look for them. But thats all I will say about that.

Originally Posted by jakeleinen1

if you want to get the people responsible for 9/11, you don't have to fly overseas to look for them. But thats all I will say about that.

seriously? this is what you really believe?

Homework is power.Omg.laws of physics. Run forest run.

Originally Posted by manta

yes but glocks are known for having poor case support , compared with other semi autos , thats why you can buy barrels with better support from other sources. On a steel gun you can get away with the mag being blown out , on plastic guns the gun tends to be destroyed.

I wish my name was on here.Citizens' Military Pistol Trophy Look down and see (In Red) the top shooter. And then see how many years it was to take it from the old top shooter.

This is why I love the sport of shooting.Is to say on top.

CZs

Why do you want to know? Plan on marketing something to them?
Why they chose a particular gun may or may not pertain to why you would pick a particular gun.
My choices over the years have had nothing to do with what others have chosen. For example, teh 223 for NATO and most of the world's army was chosen because it wasn't as lethal as other choices.
The 9mm is often chosen for LE because of it's lesser recoil than other calibers so more folks can use it and use it accurately. The 40 was developed because the 9 wasn't seen as having sufficient stopping power. The US military switched from 45 to 9...not sure why but it wasn't for increased stopping power.
I know some brands have not been chosen for such reasons as country of manufacture, manufacturer support, etc. Doesn't mean they weren't better guns for the intended purpose.
Locally the few officers I've spoken with usually have choices - the dept picks the caliber and the officer chooses what gun, perhaps with some limitations. Some like glock, some S&W and some I know chose SA XD's. Some probably prefer revolvers.

Edit.

Originally Posted by Cat

Homework is power.Omg.laws of physics. Run forest run.

You have lost me. Your point please.

I think the question is compairing and apple to an orange. We all know, for the most part, the military runs the M9 Beretta, but I would say that most police forces run either a Glock or a SIG anymore. JMHO.

Your question is too vague. If you mean US LE & military, probably Beretta & Glock, but if you mean worldwide, the Chinese military is using the QSZ-92 for instance.

Originally Posted by TedDeBearFrmHell

seriously? this is what you really believe?

The more you post the more I believe we have alot in common!

Conspiracy guys are amusing to listen to for awhile.

Originally Posted by Brevard13

.....Conspiracy guys are amusing to listen to for awhile.

we are taught at the meetings to report conspiracy guys immediately so they can be picked up for re-indoctrination.

Guess those pictures of planes flying into the towers were fake...all of them including the ones civilians took ...the countless numbers of them ...damn that was a real trick to pull off that one.....JJ

Glocks worldwide is likely the best answer to the OP.....

I have read that the s&w m&p is getting very popular amongst various departments. Wonder why it was not in the poll?

The county police use S & W (I think, .40 caliber). I'm not sure what the Staties use. I'll have to look the next time I see one.

Originally Posted by surferdaddy

I have read that the s&w m&p is getting very popular amongst various departments. Wonder why it was not in the poll?

Because the poll is six years old. The M&P was only about a year old at the time.

Originally Posted by jakeleinen1

if you want to get the people responsible for 9/11, you don't have to fly overseas to look for them. But thats all I will say about that.

Unreal!!! Conspiracy theorists?

Originally Posted by chessail77

Guess those pictures of planes flying into the towers were fake...all of them including the ones civilians took ...the countless numbers of them ...damn that was a real trick to pull off that one.....JJ

Glocks worldwide is likely the best answer to the OP.....

I lost 4 relatives that horrible day. Not a day goes by I do not recall what happened that day or the 4 days afterward that I spent on site searching for survivors at ground zero! So don't get me started about it being justified! It could not have been more justified!!

I don't know.............most of them in my area are carrying Sigs or HK's........

From CZ's website: "CZ 75 B is used by more governments, militaries, police and security agencies than any other pistol in the world." Parsing the language that may mean more, countable entities/agencies rather than number of firearms in use, but it likely puts them up there somewhere near the top, I would guess

Most of the LEO in my area use the Glock 22, there are some Sigs (I think MSP still uses them?) and some S&Ws

I myself for years working security and personal protection (aka: bodyguard) industry used primarly a Browning High Power or a Walther PPK/s but I think more the industry are now carrying the different makes of Tactical Tupperware like Smith's M&P, XDM and yes even the Glock as their primary weapon.

While I don't question the quality of any of the major service handguns, they might not fit your individual needs. For concealment purposes, not everyone will want to pack a full size service pistol.