eat it, haters - USMC to adopt SERPA holster

Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Sep 11, 2005
Messages
8,983
Likes
3,535
Location
Leoburg/Fitchminster area
I believe that is in accordance with the Hague Protocols. The Geneva Conventions (the most recent one in 1949) deals specifically how certain classes of personnel are to be treated in time of war including POWs, medical personnel and non-combatants (civilians). The Hague Convention of 1907 (known as the Hague Protocols) outlawed the use of hollowpoint and other expanding and frangible small arms ammunition, to the best of my knowledge.

The US Armed Forces as have most military establishments in the world have generally adhered to this policy. I don't think you will find many hollowpoints in the magazines of terrorist used military weapons, for instance.
 

ochmude

Marine Veteran
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
6,315
Likes
1,799
Location
Yuma, AZ
I've also noticed USAF security forces/MPs with Serpas.

Now that you mention it I'm pretty certain I've seen SF guys at Westover carrying them. Oh, also I know for a fact that a couple of the MP companies in the MAARNG bought a lot of level 3 SERPAs. I helped inventory them once during drill.
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
5,419
Likes
1,897
They've also carried in useless mushy nylon abominations for years... Not exactly the final word in tactical gear... [wink]
Yeah, say what you will about the SERPA holsters (which I happen to like), but compared to the M12 holster, most anything produced by Uncle Mikes would be an improvement.
Didn't the Army switch to the 45 ACP because .38 did not do a good job at stopping the enemy?
I thought they did it to be consistent with all the other the NATO countries' pistol rounds.

Hell, most road MP's (when they still do road patrols) are usually mandated to carry safety on, nothing in the pipe with the ability to chamber given only when in a lethal force situtation, guarding munitions or VIP's, or otherwise given authorization. From a civilian LE standpoint, that's damn near a deathwish.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Sep 11, 2005
Messages
8,983
Likes
3,535
Location
Leoburg/Fitchminster area
Who cares about the holster? I'd rather carry a 1911 in a plastic bag than a Barreta in just about anything.

Didn't the Army switch to the 45 ACP because .38 did not do a good job at stopping the enemy? What is the conversion for 9mm?

Now that they ordered a bazillion plastic holsters they will be stuck with the 9mm for 200 years

In the early 1900's the Army went to the .38 Long Colt (which had a longer case than a .38 S&W but slightly shorter than .38 Spl). When the Army was fighting Islamic terrorists in the Phillipines back in that time period, the .38 Long Colt was deemed inadequate as a stopper. Consequently the SAA .45 was reissued and voila, problem solved. About the same time, the Army conducted tests on live animals and cadavers and determined that nothing less than .45 caliber was adequate in a pistol. Another factor was that the sabre was obsolescent as a cavalry weaapon (not finally abanonded until the middle 1930's, in pre-WWI also cavalry was still considered a viable branch of the service) and it was necessary to have a heavy enough caliber handgun to be able to shoot an enemy horse effectively at close range.

The Army after a trial from various competitors adopted the M1911 in .45 ACP.

In the 1980's many of the 1911's in the inventory were worn, and nearing the end of service life, some in service since before WWII. Newer double action semi-autos were on the market, and the military (the Air Force had abandoned the 1911 in the 1950's in favor of the .38 Spl S&W DA revolver) decided to go with 9mm because it was the NATO standard.
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,691
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
In the early 1900's the Army went to the .38 Long Colt (which had a longer case than a .38 S&W but slightly shorter than .38 Spl). When the Army was fighting Islamic terrorists in the Phillipines back in that time period, the .38 Long Colt was deemed inadequate as a stopper. Consequently the SAA .45 was reissued and voila, problem solved. About the same time, the Army conducted tests on live animals and cadavers and determined that nothing less than .45 caliber was adequate in a pistol. Another factor was that the sabre was obsolescent as a cavalry weaapon (not finally abanonded until the middle 1930's, in pre-WWI also cavalry was still considered a viable branch of the service) and it was necessary to have a heavy enough caliber handgun to be able to shoot an enemy horse effectively at close range.

The Army after a trial from various competitors adopted the M1911 in .45 ACP.

In the 1980's many of the 1911's in the inventory were worn, and nearing the end of service life, some in service since before WWII. Newer double action semi-autos were on the market, and the military (the Air Force had abandoned the 1911 in the 1950's in favor of the .38 Spl S&W DA revolver) decided to go with 9mm because it was the NATO standard.
There have been some advances to be considered in smaller cartridges since the early 1900's [wink]

Oh noes! A calibar war... I'm racking my fotay right now... [laugh]
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
518
Likes
23
Location
APE CO
serpa.jpg

Serpa has been in the Army for quite some time. I've had this one for my duty M11 for a while now. I used that one and a CQC in Afghanistan.
 
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Sep 11, 2005
Messages
8,983
Likes
3,535
Location
Leoburg/Fitchminster area
There have been some advances to be considered in smaller cartridges since the early 1900's [wink]

Oh noes! A calibar war... I'm racking my fotay right now... [laugh]

Advances or not, that was the rationale. I'm only giving you the history. The simple fact is that through most of the 20th and 21st Century the US Military has not placed a great premium on handguns except in some specialized operations. This isn't about caliber wars, it is about NATO standardization. You will recall that we forced the 7.62 round on our NATO Allies only to abandon it in the late 1960's.

As an aside, the Coast Guard which although an Armed Service, falls under DHS. It has adopted the Sig P229 DAK in .40 S&W.

I ain't gonna get in no kaliber wars either...
 

CRSIII

NES Member
Rating - 100%
30   0   0
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
22,961
Likes
12,630
Location
Just west of Wormtown
now that we've turned this into a caliber war, can someone define "man stopper" for me?
This will do the trick.

images
 
Rating - 100%
45   0   0
Joined
Apr 4, 2007
Messages
6,016
Likes
724
I have a serpa. No issues with it. Not sure why it "sucks".
Haven't shot myself in the leg though I don't make a practice of pulling the trigger while drawing.

I also don't feel like blaming equipment for stupid actions.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
172
Likes
12
Location
Nashua NH
It's not really a competition between the Serpa and M12 holsters, it's between the Serpa and Safariland ALS, which is current Army issue through the RFI program. Meaning if you deploy to Afghanistan, you'll probably get one before you go overseas. The Safariland is a better holster in terms of both build quality and retention, and can retain the weapon without putting your finger anywhere near the trigger. I can only assume that the SERPA bid ended up being cheaper than Safariland and that's how the Marines ended up with them. Sorry guys!
 

fencer

NES Member
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
14,229
Likes
16,250
Location
Southeastern Mass
In the early 1900's the Army went to the .38 Long Colt (which had a longer case than a .38 S&W but slightly shorter than .38 Spl). When the Army was fighting Islamic terrorists in the Phillipines back in that time period, the .38 Long Colt was deemed inadequate as a stopper. Consequently the SAA .45 was reissued and voila, problem solved. About the same time, the Army conducted tests on live animals and cadavers and determined that nothing less than .45 caliber was adequate in a pistol. Another factor was that the sabre was obsolescent as a cavalry weaapon (not finally abanonded until the middle 1930's, in pre-WWI also cavalry was still considered a viable branch of the service) and it was necessary to have a heavy enough caliber handgun to be able to shoot an enemy horse effectively at close range.

The Army after a trial from various competitors adopted the M1911 in .45 ACP.

In the 1980's many of the 1911's in the inventory were worn, and nearing the end of service life, some in service since before WWII. Newer double action semi-autos were on the market, and the military (the Air Force had abandoned the 1911 in the 1950's in favor of the .38 Spl S&W DA revolver) decided to go with 9mm because it was the NATO standard.


You are correct. While fighting the fanatic Moro in the Phillipines it was determined that a larger caliber would be more desireable. When I went through Boot Camp in 1985, I qualified with the .45. It was so worn out that it rattled if you shook it and it was so inaccurate that it would have been more effective if thrown at the target.

But the point was that a crappy holster is the least of their worries
 
Top Bottom