ADS

MARSOC Authorized to Use GLOCK 19s

In a Marine Corps MARADMIN message issued last week, MARSOC is authorized to use GLOCK 19 pistols, but as USSOCOM assets. This weapon has been used by SOF units for some time and MARSOC has been working diligently with their parent service to officially authorize its use during annual quals. This is a win for the CSO.

This annual MARADMIN isn’t reserved solely for MARSOC or the GLOCK pistol but rather has info that applies to the arming of all Marines. It is worth a read.

AUTHORIZED INDIVIDUAL WEAPONS, OPTICS, MODULAR ATTACHMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS FOR FY15 ANNUAL RIFLE AND PISTOL TRAINING

Date Signed: 2/12/2015
MARADMINS Active Number: 069/15

R 121653Z Feb 15
MARADMIN 069/15
UNCLASSIFIED//
MSGID/GENADMIN/CMC WASHINGTON CG MCCDC//
SUBJ/AUTHORIZED INDIVIDUAL WEAPONS, OPTICS, MODULAR ATTACHMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS FOR FY15 ANNUAL RIFLE AND PISTOL TRAINING//
REF/A/DOC/MCCDC/04SEP14//
REF/B/DOC/MCCDC/11OCT12//
REF/C/DOC/MCCDC/25NOV03//
REF/D/MSG/MCCDC/131507ZDEC11//
REF/E/MSG/MCCDC/262248ZFEB13//
NARR/REF A IS MCO 3574.2L THE MARINE CORPS COMBAT MARKSMANSHIP PROGRAMS (MCCMP). REF B IS MCRP 3-01A RIFLE MARKSMANSHIP. REF C IS MCRP 3-01B PISTOL MARKSMANSHIP. REF D IS MARADMIN 716/11 FY12 COMBAT MARKSMANSHIP SYMPOSIUM POST SYMPOSIUM MESSAGE; PARAGRAPH 3.M OF THIS REFERENCE DIRECTS PUBLICATION OF THIS ANNUAL MESSAGE. REF E IS MARADMIN 100/13 AUTHORIZED INDIVIDUAL WEAPONS, OPTICS, MODULAR ATTACHMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS FOR ANNUAL RIFLE AND PISTOL TRAINING FOR FY13//
POC/V.S. POPE/CWO5/WTBN QUANTICO, MPMS/-/TEL: DSN 278-5520/TEL: CML 703-784-5520/EMAIL: VINCENT.S.POPE(AT)USMC.MIL//
POC/G. J. BESINGER/GS12/ WTBN QUANTICO, MPMS/-/TEL: DSN 278-1178/TEL: CML 703-784-1178/ EMAIL: GERRY.BENSINGER(AT)USMC.MIL//
RMKS/1. PURPOSE. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REFERENCES, THIS MARADMIN PROVIDES ANNUAL GUIDANCE ON THE WEAPONS, OPTICS, AND MODULAR ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED (AS FIELDED AND REFLECTED ON UNIT T/E) DURING ANNUAL RIFLE (ART) AND PISTOL TRAINING (APT) AND AUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS TO THE SERVICE RIFLE AND PISTOL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR INDICATED.
2. THIS MARADMIN SUPERSEDES AND CANCELS REF E.
3. ONLY TABLE OF ORGANIZATION (T/O) ASSIGNED RIFLES WITH DESIGNATED OPTICS, PISTOLS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT THAT ARE CURRENT MARINE CORPS PROGRAMS OF RECORD ARE AUTHORIZED FOR USE DURING ART AND APT. THE INTENT IS TO ENSURE MARINES TRAIN WITH THE WEAPON SYSTEM WITH WHICH THEY WILL FIGHT. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF UNIT COMMANDERS TO ENSURE MARINES CONDUCT MARKSMANSHIP TRAINING WITH ALL REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH REF D AS APPROVED BY COMMANDING GENERAL, MARINE CORPS COMBAT DEVELOPMENT COMMAND (CG, MCCDC), THE FOLLOWING WEAPONS, OPTICS, MODULAR ATTACHMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS ARE AUTHORIZED FOR USE IN THE CONDUCT OF ART AND APT.
4. THE FOLLOWING PISTOLS ARE AUTHORIZED FOR APT:
ITEM/NOMENCLATURE TAMCN
PISTOL, M9 E1250
PISTOL, M9A1 E1245
PISTOL, CLOSE QUARTER BATTLE,
45 CAL M45A1 E1251
PISTOL, GLOCK-19, MARSOC, WITH
ASSOCIATED HOLSTER AND EQUIPMENT Q0009
5. THE FOLLOWING EQUIPMENT IS AUTHORIZED FOR APT:
ITEM/NOMENCLATURE NSN/PART NUMBER WEAPON SYSTEMS
USMC HOLSTER KIT
(12140B/RH SHOOTER)* 8465015985722 M9/M9A1
USMC HOLSTER KIT
(12140A/LH SHOOTER)* 8465015986377 M9/M9A1
PISTOL HOLSTER
(RH SHOOTER) 999-01-L00-7432 M45A1
PISTOL HOLSTER
(LH SHOOTER) 999-01-L00-7433 M45A1
PISTOL HOLSTER
W/LIGHT (RH SHOOTER) 999-01-L00-7437 M45A1
PISTOL HOLSTER
W/LIGHT (LH SHOOTER) 999-01-L00-7439 M45A1
*THIS KIT IS THE OFFICIAL MARINE CORPS REPLACEMENT FOR THE M-12 HOLSTER.
6. THE FOLLOWING RIFLES ARE AUTHORIZED FOR ART:
ITEM/NOMENCLATURE TAMCN
RIFLE 5.56MM M16A4 W/RCO E1442
CARBINE 5.56MM M4 W/RCO E0195
CARBINE 5.56MM M4A1
(CQBW) W/RCO E0190
RIFLE 5.56MM M27 IAR W/SDO E0100
7. THE FOLLOWING OPTICS ARE AUTHORIZED FOR ART:
ITEM/NOMENCLATURE TAMCN
AN/PVQ-31A RCO, RIFLE,
COMBAT OPTIC (A4) E1710
AN/PVQ-31B RCO, RIFLE,
COMBAT OPTIC (M4) E0017
SPECTER DR,
ELCAN OPTIC (CQBW) SFE16
SU-258/PVQ SDO,
SQUAD DAY OPTIC (M27) E0082
AN/PEQ-15 ATPIAL E1798
AN/PEQ-16A MIPIM E0058
AN/PSQ-18A (M203) E1779
8. THE FOLLOWING WEAPON ATTACHMENT IS AUTHORIZED:
ITEM/NOMENCLATURE TAMCN
M203A2 GRENADE LAUNCHER E0892
9. THE FOLLOWING US SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND (USSOCOM) APPROVED UPPER RECEIVER GROUPS (URG) ARE AUTHORIZED FOR ART:
ITEM/NOMENCLATURE NSN/PART NUMBER TAMCN
URG 10.3” BARREL 109001D120980 SFE09
URG 10.25” BARREL 109001D120982 SFE09
URG 14.4” BARREL 109001D120984 SFE09
10. THE FOLLOWING MODULAR ATTACHMENTS ARE AUTHORIZED FOR ART:
ITEM/NOMENCLATURE NSN/PART NUMBER WEAPON SYSTEMS
MAGAZINE, CARTRIDGE
(TAN FOLLOWER)** 1005015617200 M16A4, M4, M4A1, M27
MAGAZINE, CARTRIDGE
(GREEN FOLLOWER)** 1005009215004 M16A4, M4, M4A1, M27
SLING, SMALL ARMS
(VICKERS TWO POINT)*** 1005-016-040-627 M16A4, M4, M4A1, M27
SLING, 3-POINT COMBAT 8465015248847 M16A4, M4, M4A1
BUIS, KNIGHTS ARMAMENT
200-600M 1005014996868 M16A4, M4, M4A1
BUIS, KNIGHTS ARMAMENT
200-600M 1005015815324 M16A4, M4, M4A1
BUIS, KNIGHTS ARMAMENT
300M 1005014496306 M4, M4A1
BUIS, MATECH 600M 1005014848000 M16A4, M4, M4A1
SIGHT, FRONT FLIP LOW 1005014731410 M27
GRIP, RIFLE 1005014536655 M16A4, M4, M4A1, M27
GRIP POD, RIFLE 1005015411772 M16A4, M4, M4A1
GRIP, GRENADE LAUNCHER 1010015790712 M203
BIPOD IWNS-911/3A703 M27
FLASHLIGHT**** 6230015523289 M16A4, M4, M4A1, M27
SUPPRESSOR 1005014370324 M4A1 (CQBW) ONLY
**NOTE: THESE ARE THE ONLY TESTED, APPROVED, AND AUTHORIZED MAGAZINES FOR USE IN THE WEAPONS INDICATED FOR BOTH TRAINING AND COMBAT.
***NOTE: THIS IS THE MARINE CORPS COMMON WEAPONS SLING. THE WEB SLING IS NO LONGER AUTHORIZED FOR ANNUAL TRAINING; THE THREE POINT SLING WILL BE AUTHORIZED UNTIL UNITS COMPLETE A FULL REPLACEMENT WITH THE COMMON WEAPONS SLING.
****NOTE: THE VISIBLE LIGHT ILLUMINATOR (VLI) (AN/PVS 29) IS THE PROGRAM OF RECORD WHITE LIGHT FOR THE M16A4 AND M4 RIFLES, SIMILAR WEAPONS MOUNTED FLASHLIGHTS ARE ALSO AUTHORIZED.
11. THE FOLLOWING ARE AUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS:
ITEM/NOMENCLATURE NSN/PART NUMBER MI NUMBER
TACTICAL LATCH,
CHARGING HANDLE 1005015237358 MI-1005-OR/1
M84 “GAS BUSTER”
CHARGING HANDLE 1005015370026 MI-05538/10012A-OR/1A
ACTUATOR, GUN SAFETY
(AMBIDEXTROUS) 1005015369963 MI-05538/10012A-OR/1A
MAGAZINE RELEASE
(AMBIDEXTROUS) 1005015376498 MI-05538/10012A-OR/1A
ADJUSTABLE BUTTSTOCK
(M16A4) KIT 100501569638 N/A
12. IN KEEPING WITH THE “TRAIN AS YOU FIGHT” METHODOLOGY, IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT MARINES KNOW HOW TO PROPERLY AND EFFECTIVELY ARRANGE AND MOUNT THE MODULAR ATTACHMENTS. IMPROPER MOUNTING CAN LEAD TO LOSS AND IMPROPER ARRANGEMENT CAN LEAD TO ONE DEVICE INTERFERING WITH ANOTHER. PROPER PCC/PCI DURING TRAINING WILL ENSURE THIS DOES NOT BECOME A COMBAT LIABILITY.
13. THE RECENTLY PROCURED GLOCK 19 LISTED IN PARAGRAPH 4 IS AUTHORIZED (MARSOC UNITS). THE NEW PISTOL HAS A “Q” TAM (Q0009) AS IT IS A SOCOM ASSET. STANDARDIZED HOLSTERS FOR THIS ITEM ARE PENDING SOURCE SELECTION. COMMAND APPROVED HOLSTERS ARE AUTHORIZED FOR THIS ITEM UNTIL SOURCE SELECTION IS COMPLETE.
14. GRIP POD, RIFLE NSN: 1005015411772 FOR THE SERVICE RIFLE/CARBINE AND BIPOD P/N: IWNS-911/3A703 FOR THE M27 IAR ARE AUTHORIZED TO BE ATTACHED TO THE WEAPON BUT THE LEGS OF THE GRIP POD AND BIPOD WILL NOT BE USED FOR SUPPORT DURING TABLE 1 IN ACCORDANCE WITH REF E.
15. WEAPONS TRAINING BATTALION QUANTICO, MPMS WILL RELEASE THIS MESSAGE ANNUALLY TO UPDATE THE AUTHORIZED WEAPONS, OPTICS AND MODULAR ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED FOR ANNUAL RIFLE AND PISTOL TRAINING.
16. CONTACT THE POC WITH ANY QUESTIONS OR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
17. RELEASE AUTHORIZED BY LIEUTENANT GENERAL KENNETH J. GLUECK JR., CG, MCCDC.//

80 Responses to “MARSOC Authorized to Use GLOCK 19s”

  1. bulldog76 says:

    You should see the glock guys and 1911 guys go at on facebook over this lol

    • SSD says:

      The truth of the matter is that MARSOC doesn’t want the M45.

      • M.W says:

        Who really does when given the other options?

      • majrod says:

        “The truth of the matter is that MARSOC doesn’t want the M45.”

        Is that based on a poll? Anecdotal opinions? A BOGSAT?

        • Matt says:

          Several posts on various forums by MARSOC guys have indicated that the MARSOC shooters wanted the Glock in the first place and it was Admin who wanted the 1911. Same posters pushed out photos showing the 1911’s with cracked frames at 20k rounds.

          15+1 in the gun trumps 8/10+1, every time.

          • SSD says:

            Yes, the M45s are legacy gear from when they were Recon units. They’ve been dead lining the M45s left and right. One major issue is that Colt Cerakoted the springs which flake and cause issues.

          • majrod says:

            I’d like to see the forums…

            I’m guessing there were no MARSOC guys happy with the .45 (or maybe looking for another pistol in .45)?

            I wouldn’t say “trumps every time” when it comes to ammo capacity. There are other pistols that have more than 16 in other calibers. Would that make them automatically “trump” the Glock? I think not. There are other factors in handgun selection. That said ammo capacity is a valid issue and why I left the single stack .45 over a decade ago.

            BTW, the cracked slides on the test pistols were at 12k. More background here (and how the test was conducted a page or two before it, pretty brutal) http://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=5&f=49&t=86667&page=28

          • balais says:

            I believe it.

            I also know that the MARSOC nay sayers who disagreed with the Colt M45 acquisition were called “conspiracy theorists” and “were doth protesting too much”, and that “there was a damn good reason the M45 was adopted, by god. and dont you dare question JMBs holy altar of eternal truth!”.

        • SSD says:

          Actions and words.

          • Whitesands says:

            Interesting, it sounds as if you’ve have spoken in depth with MARSOC operators (CSO’s) on this. Truth be told, I think you SSD are the one in the wrong here, touting opinions and second hand knowledge as facts for all of thes fine followers. You are always the first one to slam someone when they can’t support statements with factual references. So please, please do provide for all, the factual evidence you have to support this wide spread hatred for the M45A1. I will give you this, most all do desire the Glock 19 for its conceal ability…. But let’s be real, how often is that a requirement? So I hope I didn’t come across to belligerent, but I would really like to see what your using as a reference for these blatant statements you are making.

            • SSD says:

              The fact that the G19 is on that message, is all the evidence you need.

              • Whitesands says:

                That’s an incredibly lame cop out! I know you know better than that! It’s was added as another tool in the tool box for specific mission sets, not as an end all be all replacement! So if you do have some factual material to support your asinine statement, I’m sure we would all appreciate seeing so that we may be better informed! Regardless, At the end of the day, alot of dudes will go down range with there 45 by choice!

                • SSD says:

                  What is your point here? I’m trying to figure out what your argument is. Are you some 1911 fanboy that is somehow hurt that one of the user groups would rather use a GLOCK? Are you even a member of MARSOC? If you are, email me and once I get you I’ll get you the info you need.

                  • Whitesands says:

                    My point is, your wrong and you have nothing to back up your statements! Don’t come at me with these condicending insults instead of facts because your omnipotent words have been challenged! Nothing more, nothing less

                    • SSD says:

                      You are coming in here questioning me. So I am going to give you an opportunity to find out what is up. Email from your NMCI or soc.mil account and I’ll hook you up. Otherwise, you know what to do.

                    • SSD says:

                      Don’t email me from some gmail account.

                    • Derka says:

                      Haha, Fanboy is but hurt.
                      The evidence is in the list as stated. If it where only for one specifik mission, it wouldnt be in the list.

                    • balais says:

                      “BUT BUT!!! MARSOC was my last glimmering shining hope for validating the 1911! dammit!”

          • majrod says:

            Actions and words? Cute answer. Is that all we need?

            The M45 is a program of record (plenty of words in ink even). $22.5 mil is being spent for 4000 of them of a potential 12k. How many Glocks at what cost are being procured? “Actions and words” right?

            And if just the announcement of the Glock being authorized are enough what does that say of the SAW that the Marines continue to field in huge numbers even after procuring the M27?

            I don’t want to get in a pissing contest but you’ve said MARSOC doesn’t want the M45 and I’m trying to understand what supports that blanket statement.

            • SSD says:

              You realize that the program was speced for USMC reconnaissance units and not MARSOC?

              • majrod says:

                No I was not but how is that relevant? MARSOC in its earliest days was also running basically hand built Kimber 1911’s because the armorers couldn’t keep up with building 1911’s for Force Recon and the birthing MARSOC. MARSOC in effect CHOSE to adopt 1911 Kimbers instead of a different pistol. The Kimber’s went as far to be called INTERIM CQB Pistol. Seems everyone understood a solution was needed to keep 1911’s in MARSOCs hands because that would have been a classic fork in the road for MARSOC to go in a different direction if it wanted to.

                Is MARSOC also unhappy with its M4 family of weapons since they were speced by other organizations?

                • SSD says:

                  That wasn’t MARSOC, that was Det One, an entirely different beast.

                  • majrod says:

                    MCSOCOM Det-1 is to MARSOC as the first ODA’s were to Special Forces except it happened in a year vs the decades it took for SF.

                    Heck, they even revived the Raiders heraldry & lineage.

                    • SSD says:

                      Det One was an experiment and much more DA-centric. The MSOBs were stood up specifically to take the FID pressure off of SF.

                      Current MARSOC much more resembles Army SF than Det One which ultimately deployed with an NSW Squadron. At the time, NSW felt very threatened by Det One as it was closer to their capabilities.

                    • majrod says:

                      Good stuff on Det 1.

                      I was not aware of MARSOC’s requirement for language, region, and specific individual training and an organizational and skill structure present in an ODA as well as the support elements that exist in an SF BN or group. The first ODA’s did not have the background training that they do now either.

                      MSOBs may have been stood up to help SF with FID as was the whole MTT effort of both branches (FWIW a lot of those guys actually ran Glocks because that’s what we were issuing the locals) and who in the end have done the majority of FID in Afghanistan and Iraq over the last decade.

            • Darrel says:

              The SAW is only fielded in extremely small numbers. It is no longer a squad weapon, it is a company asset like 240s, M2s and Mk19s. The M27 has completely replaced the M249 for all intents and purposes.

              Also the extremely expensive contract price has nothing to do with the actual quality of the weapon, or the urgency of the procurement. They went though freaking Colt, which has a long history of overcharging for their products. Obviously the procurement was based on big brass wanting something shiny to go on duty with, and not on the needs of Marsoc

              The M45 is as of now, an undeployed weapon system. No one has carried one for six months in the sandbox, and there is no one who actually runs these weapons into the dirt besides possibly Marsoc. Their opinion is probably valid, but until I hear more from them, I would take it with salt.

              • majrod says:

                “The SAW is only fielded in extremely small numbers.”

                That statement is so subjective. Does the Corps have extremely small numbers of .50 cal MG’s or M240’s? You still have more M249’s issued in the force. Even if you were right it’s not my point. Announcing a new system doesn’t automatically make the last system obsolete.

                FWIW, the M27 is a great rifle but the wisdom of its adoption remains to be seen. It’s been often compared in a heartwarming traditional way to the BAR. Sad thing is most were never taught the lessons of history about why the BAR was replaced (magazine fed, nonremoveable barrels for light machineguns don’t do very well in sustained combat). Maybe that’s why the Corps kept all its old SAWs…

                “The M45 is as of now, an undeployed weapon system. No one has carried one for six months in the sandbox, and there is no one who actually runs these weapons into the dirt besides possibly Marsoc.”

                On what is this based? What is your visibility on the 200k+ Marines out there? BTW, of course only MARSOC is probably the only unit running the M45. They are the only ones its issued to.

                • SSD says:

                  No, it is also issued to Marine Reconnaissance units. In fact, the POR was created for them and not for MARSOC.

                  • thebronze says:

                    I guess some people like to argue, just to hear themselves type…

                  • majrod says:

                    SSD yes, add Force Recon. Thanks for the correction.

                    Still don’t see who developed the POR making your case that MARSOC didn’t want the M45. Is MARSOC unhappy with the M4 family of weapons because someone else developed them?

                    Just looking for the evidence and not the opinion here.

                • Joe says:

                  As well as USMC RTT and SRT units. While these units do not see combat they put an incredible amount of rounds through their service handguns. The M45 is the gun that no one truly wants, no matter how cool and nostalgic they are.

  2. WHY DOES THE MILITARY HAVE TO COMMUNICATE IN SUCH ARCANE ALL-CAPS STYLE??

  3. DP says:

    G19, but no g17?

  4. What is exactly is a Glock 19s?

    I know what a Glock 19 is.

  5. Roy says:

    Gen 3 or Gen 4? I personally prefer gen 3 RTF.

  6. Darrel says:

    read:THESE ARE THE ONLY TESTED, APPROVED, AND AUTHORIZED MAGAZINES FOR USE IN THE WEAPONS INDICATED FOR BOTH TRAINING AND COMBAT.

    Still not going to stop me from using my PMAGs. Seriously, what the heck is wrong with the big brass? How much proof do you need that PMAGs are superior in every way to USGI Steel mags? Why are they still playing these games just to save face?

    Also, sucks that they aren’t going to let us use the Parade Slings for the range? The loop sling is a good technique. What the heck are we going to use for drill? Are they going to stop issuing the Parade Sling, period?

    The M45 is another heavy POS, and makes no sense for a SOCOM unit. The only people who want the M45 are POGs who will never be issued it anyway.

    • Rick says:

      Im not convinced USGI magazines aren’t the best thing going for the military. A lot of guys in Group and other units are going back to all aluminum mags. Cheap (Free from the .mil), reliable, no drop free problems, and light are all benefits of the USGI magazines. I recognize that some units still have the old magazines which are golden from use and whose feed lips have spread to the point that they no longer drop free. I spent a few days stomping all of the ones our unit had flat in order to force the suppl section into actually doing their job.

      Rick

      • Darrel says:

        The aluminum housing has nothing to do with the problems, it’s the cheap tilting followers. I will concede that I was issued green followers and have not played around with the tan ones to see if they tilt as much.

        I always use my PMAGs for the more lengthy courses of fire where I’m loading a full mag, but I can generally count on the USGI green followers to not give me any problems for shorter ones. The added advantage of them being government property and not “Mine” is nice, but I wouldn’t use them if I didn’t have to.

        • Rick says:

          I have around 100 of the tan ones that I have cycled through without issue other than I hate that the 28th round is on the other side.

          Rick

  7. Thank you USMC for your use and support of my namesake sling available exclusively from Blue Force Gear – Semper Fi !!!!

  8. rob371 says:

    Not trying to start a flame war, but from what I saw personally with the MSOTs recently there were a mix of sidearms but overwhelmingly it was G19s. I’m not saying that it’s definite proof of MARSOC’s preference. We didn’t take a poll or anything.

    • majrod says:

      Thanks, that observation was useful. Still leaves a lot of questions (e.g. ammo issues? etc.) but still helpful versus the blanket “1911’s suck” narrative.

    • Maj. Carter says:

      Saw the same in 2013. Mix of 1911s and G19s on one specific MSOT. Later determined it to be a company wide mixture. Can’t say there was a specific reason stated. Team Leader and his Gunny carried G19s, 2 team Scout Snipers carried 1911s, Comm guy carried a Glock. Those were the guys I saw the most of….

  9. JB says:

    Every SOF unit that actually has a choice, picks the G19 (often directly replacing a 1911.) That should be a clue.

    Sorry fanboys.

    • majrod says:

      Really?

      Who is often replacing 1911’s besides MARSOC and maybe CAG the only guys that have 1911’s to choose from?

      BTW, CAG is supposedly running a lot of .40 Glocks not G19’s. That’s about half of your sample size out the window…

      I think that “clue” is actually a wish on your part.

      Sorry haters.

  10. SPQR476 says:

    We were trying to switch to Glocks in MARSOC as far back as 2007. This was well before the rail guns, and the springfield pro models were fairly good, but a bunch would need tweaking. It was heavy for what it was, 7-10 rounds in the gun, dust, dirt, and crap could get under a cocked hammer, and you had to deploy a 2112 precision armorer to maintain them. I love the 1911, but for nostalgic reasons and because of the trigger. But, it’s not hard to shoot a Glock well, and nostalgia is a terrible reason for weapons selection.

  11. 32sbct says:

    This was asked earlier but I don’t see an answer. Are these gen 3 or gen 4 (or both) Glock 19s being used by MARSOC. Thx.

    • thebronze says:

      One can assume they’d be Gen 4’s since that’s what’s in current (major) production by Glock.

  12. AbnMedOps says:

    Agree or disagree with the specific choice of authorized items, but what impresses me is what this document implies: That USMC actually has an emphasis on on small arms selection, training, and employment as a major weapons system. Evidently they emply people with true expertise and look at small arms as a series of programs, in a systematic manner, and then clearly communicate to the field through this type of (annual?) guidance.

    Wish Big Army thought like this.

    • joe says:

      It couldn’t have anything to do with “Big Army” responsible for more than 5 times the pax of the Corps? Resources/man calculations are really a bitch.

      But really, all this means is that a MARSOC unit MTOEd Glocks doesn’t have to borrow some line unit’s pistols for their annual qualifications. They can use what they already have.

      Think about that for a minute. Think about how ridiculous it would be for some hard-charging, Tier -6 unit, to have to ask an MP or tank company to borrow some guns for qualification because they don’t keep M9s in their arms room. Or, you know, the super ninjas aren’t technically qualified in their job and thus aren’t eligible for promotion, etc.

    • majrod says:

      The memo applies to MARSOC not the USMC. MARSOC consists of about 3000 troops compared to the million in “Big Army”.

      In general I think the Marines do at a minimum pay more lip service to small arms training. When you look at actual execution it varies, has it’s strengths and weaknesses and has a lot more similarities to Army units proficiency than differences. Of course you have to get through a bunch of propaganda, ego and BS to get to that point (e.g. look at the actual conditions & standards of qualification for like units). The Corps has been very successful in branding itself in such a way that people who should know better, don’t. Don’t get me wrong. Big fan of the Corps and some of the ways they do business just not a cool aide drinker.

      Personally, I wish we could get rid of the term “Big Army”. The size of the name tapes on the uniforms are the same. Those that use the term most often seem to want to differentiate themselves in a depreciating way from their parent branch upon which they wouldn’t exist or couldn’t function if it wasn’t for that parent branch. It’s like a millennial complaining about his parents while living in their basement.

      We sow more seeds of discontent emphasizing our differences than embracing our similarities. As a grunt I didn’t commonly use the word REMF to describe non combat arms troops. It made it very hard to get support when I needed it and I didn’t need to remind them they weren’t combat arms to stoke my ego (not saying that’s what you are doing but that’s what the term does).

      • SSD says:

        This is a MARADMIN for all Marines.

        • majrod says:

          Yes SSD it is. There are bunches of M45’s and G19’s outside of MARSOC.

          • SSD says:

            Perhaps you should go read the entire MARADMIN. It isn’t restricted to those two weapons but rather vp covers several weapon systems including SOCOM issued upper receiver groups for the M4.

      • thebronze says:

        “Don’t get me wrong. Big fan of the Corps and some of the ways they do business just not a cool aide drinker. ”

        Sure. Whatever, dude…

  13. Pete says:

    Holy Shit! a Glock vs 1911 thread. I haven’t seen one of these in years!

  14. Paul says:

    Poking sacred (sacred) cows makes for great entertainment!

  15. Philip says:

    So are those who own a Glock AND a 1911 some sort of heretics?

  16. sean says:

    Holy flame Wars Batman!

  17. sc1975 says:

    Just a question but on line eleven does that mean the M16A4 will be getting an adjustable but stock?

    • Tango says:

      Very surprising to read an article so bias towards one design over the other. Fawning over one design while taking unnamed sources to detract the other. The Glock 19 and 1911 have been stablemates for quite some time. This is the USMC officially allowing the type to be carried, plain and simple. Glock 19s are in use at the USMC just like 1911. Yawn, same thing going on with the SF boys.

      • SSD says:

        The bias is at the unit level.

        • Tango says:

          Sorry, I just don’t see or hear it. Guys are always going to have a preference for one type of equipment over another. G19s and 1911s are operational in SF, MARSOC along with the FBI. Anyone want to discuss the failure of Blocks and 40 S&W rounds at the big boy level? Just different tools in the tool box. SOCOM gives guys options and that is a good thing. SOCOM guys were operating overseas over the last 12 months with both 1911s and G19s. That is a good thing indeed.