Why do we continue to use the 9mm?

Ammo, ammo, ammo. I carry 9mm simply because I can more easily and accurately put my follow on round on target than I can a .45 not because I suck with a 45 its simply a quicker realignment. Also I enjoy the extra few rounds I get with the smaller round.

Teaching Soldiers pistol marksmanship is very challenging. The most important aspect of shooting is "shot placement". You wouldn't have to shoot a person "3-4 rounds (or more) in the event if comes down to a pistol fight", if you are properly trained. I carry a concealed 9mm XD for protection. I don't need to carry anything else. I am confident that I can neutralize any situation with just that.

As with anything determined by Government RFP...it all comes down to money (LOL). I personally "seem" to have good grouping and control at a realistic distance with a 9mm and appreciate the fact I can get that ammo fairly readily and economically. Been a while since I fired a .45 ACP, but I can see benefits and drawbacks of any system, depending on the situation. When I did carry a sidearm on AD and in the AO, I pretty much felt that if it came down to me having to use it...things would probably be sufficiently off the rails at that point , and it was likely going to be a final effort.

The FBI also recently published testing results, and have stated that with modern ammo; 9mm, .40 and .45 have nearly identical terminal ballistics. Now we just need to start using modern ammo and ditch the ball ammo.

Part of the problem is that the 9X19 is a standard NATO round and is used and maintained in all NATO countries the 10mm is not. That and the Army just did a new contract for a new pistol.

Perhaps I am just partial to the mighty M1911A1. I grew up around firearms and the 1911 was the first handgun I ever fired and the tender age of 8 (62 years ago!) I qualified with the 1911, during all my military service (for the most part at least) I had a .45 on my hip. I happen to own several firearms, among them quite a few handguns in nearly every caliber, .380, .38 Spc/.357 mag, .40 S&W, (missing a .44 mag) 9mike mike and, of course, more than one copy of the M1911A1. I shoot them all, I reload for them all, I like them all but, I also am a CCW holder and I have two pistols listed on my permit. Main carry weapon is my Kimber Custom II .45 ACP 1911 and second is the Springfield XD 9 to carry on those occasions that require a smaller bulge. The argument has long been quantity vs. quality. A 9 mike mike will make a hole and with the proper load not come out the other side while doing significant damage while traveling through the bad guy, maybe you will need to put more than one round on target since a headshot is not really a sure thing at any distance of 7 feet. That is the reason the double tap has become a popular shooting strategy, a well-practiced discipline. Conversely, a .45 ACP is significantly large, 240 grains vs. 124 grain and, as a result, one shot will solve your problem thus making mute the argument of more rounds available in the smaller 9mm. Granted, the weight of a 1911 carried for 8, 10 or even 12 hours a day might give one a slight lean but we can all learn to live with it and stand tall. So, there you have it, holster your 1911 and you are prepared for whatever comes your way (well, for the most part anyway!) Folks using methods of carry not involving an IWB concealed holster perhaps have other ideas, especially in terms of number of rounds available without reloading. My 1911 gives me a total of 9 rounds, 8 in the mag with one in the chamber. One other feature of the 1911 is the ability to carry locked and cocked, safety on. I really don't like to carry some of these handguns that can be carried cocked with a round in the chamber but with no manual, active safety. Personal, I am not at all comfortable with passive safeties. Good example is the little girl who accidentally discharged an LEO's sidearm while it was holstered, all because of the passive safety. An active, manual safety would have prevented that accidental discharge. I wonder how many accidental discharges occur when handling/carrying a passive safety gun vs. an active safety gun. The stats would convince most anyone to get a side piece with a REAL safety. My opinion alone. By the way, I have been shooting on a regular basis for more than 60 years and have never suffered an accidental discharge nor have I ever sent a round down range where it should not have gone. Anyone can claim that if one really wanted to put in the time, training and practice required. Plus, shooting, for me, is an enjoyable activity. Sure does relieve the tension.

I too got real tired of shooting folks more than once as well- but the transition to the 9mm was to facilitate being a part of NATO and being able to cross load ammo outside the US. Which is why only SOCOM carries the .45

Good post, CW2 (Join to see). Ammo for the 9mm has progressed where there hasn't been the interest (by government agencies) in the .45. That said, I carry a 1911 most of the time, but I favor the .40 for capacity and quicker follow-ups. I like the 9mm, have a few pistols I could carry in that offering, but like to have the option to use something I consider better. Not bad, just not my cup of tea.

I like the 10mm. I'm looking at building one on a 1911 platform. I'm not sure that the average troop can utilize it effectively though. A little too harsh for smaller, weaker hands? Sorry, I'm not overly politically correct.

A lot of the foreign countries use 9mm weapons also, so ammo is standard. Plus the 9mm pistols hold more in the clip. .45 cal. had great knock down power, but unfortunantlly accuracy was up to the shooter.