A lot of good opinions based on good data and personal experience. I too was in the Marine Corps during the transition from the 1911 to the M9. I do agree that the Beretta is more accurate and easier for someone who doesn't practice a lot to hit with. I do believe that a hit with a sub-par round beats a miss with anything. That is a debate that will never be totally settled. Both sides have real merits. I carry an M9 every time I leave home station. I qualify expert with it and am comfortable with it. It does beat the crap out of the old snub nose 38s we used to carry as aircrew. However when it came time to vote with my wallet I didn't go with the Beretta or even the 9mm. I have 2 1911s, a stainless springfield full sized and a colt commander. I actually considered a 9mm for the wife until she outshot me the first time she picked up my 1911. That put a quick end to that issue. I do know that the army is at present seeking a new sidearm. Word is that it will be a 45 but not a 1911 design. Supposedly it will be a double action like the Beretta. The last couple of yrs in real world use have again raised the argument of the inadaquacy of the 9mm. A lot of the special ops folks have already made the switch. The Marine Corps for example has purchased Kimber 45s for their special ops guys. As for accuracy it really is an apples and oranges arguement. The old 1911s were built during WWII on a rush production schedule. Current production stuff is every bit as accurate as the M9. Also the much maligned firing pin stop in the series 80 colts and the new Kimbers cured the drop/discharge issue. I will have to go with the opinion of a few police officers I used to go to the range with. For the house, a 12 or 20 guage short barreled pump is pretty hard to beat. Just my 2 cents worth on the question.
Norm
Norm