But the point is they said no to all the striker guns and went back to one with a safety and external hammer hence saying no to a simple design and going back to a more complicated but proven design.

Maybe they will go back to the M-14

They never had a striker fire gun. They had a POS Beretta. Manipulation is similar but the 1911 is a far superior system. Especially the one they went to.

I think if they had trainers that were familiar with the M&P or the Glock they would have gone that route. of course the miloitary has a thing about external safeties.

I agree with MB and other militaries have used and have chosen striker fired guns.
The CIA says there official side arm is glock but I bet they use others to.

And the Military had several striker guns they liked in testing a few years ago but could not get funds approved to change systems.

Definitely not trying to get in an argument, the downfall of the Internet is no emotion is transmitted.
Here is the wiki from the 2005 JCP trials that brought us many of the the great "tactical" pistols we have today most of which were and are striker fired.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Combat_Pistol

The sad part is politics plays a large part in weapons systems selection.

LOL no arguements. Simply conversation. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Yep no interesting in fighting just exchanging information and ideas

Greaser, WAY back in the '80s I think it was, or maybe even in the late '70s someone did make a magnetic ring safety device for I think it was S&W revolvers. I think that even some gun companies played around with them and they just didn't pan out for the reasons MB stated.

I think that it was either Jerry Ahern or Massad Ayoob that did a quite extensive review or reviews on it in one of the better known Gun mags.

I had forgotten about the ring safety K and N frame revolvers.