In The Thin Red Line, there’s a scene where a private shows off an officer’s pistol he has stolen, thinking it will help his odds of survival in combat. But I recall a Time-Life book on WWII, with a picture of a G.I. posing in front of all the standard equipment the Army has issued him, including a pistol.
If they were not issued pistols, why not?
If you keep your rifle in good shape, a pistol is unnecessary weight that could be better spent on more ammo. Also, a pistol is expensive item that would only be used in an emergency. Better to keep the rifle working and not have to keep two different ammo types and maintain two weapons.
Pistols are expensive, they add to the supply burden, they add to the load-out and they’re just not that great in most military combat situations, mostly due to their short range.
Armies issue rifles and submachineguns because they’re effective weapons. Adding a pistol and ammo to a rifleman’s load means taking something else off - rifle ammo or squad equipment or just extra rations, all of which add more to his fighting power than the pistol.
Pistols are issued as a last resort to people who go into combat with other duties than that of actually fighting - officers (who are supposed to read maps and talk on radios), pilots (who are not at all supposed to be on the ground), tankers etc. Even artillerymen tend to be issued a carbine or other long weapon.
Enlisted soldiers who were likely to be in combat but were unable to carry a rifle due to space or weight were usually issued a pistol. Later in the war, they might get an M3 “grease gun” SMG or M1 Carbine instead, as pistols were pretty useless in most combat circumstances. IIRC enlisted men likely to be issued pistols included many NCOs, tank crewmen, MPs, radio operators, machine gunners, and various other specialists. Cavalrymen were also issued pistols (yes the US had cavalry in WW2, and after - I have a reference book with a picture of a unit of US occupation troops in Germany in 1946 which includes a mounted cavalry troop).
I was issued a pistol in the 1990s as an enlisted sailor. I didn’t keep it all the time, of course, but I had to wear it during quarterdeck watches and keep it ready in a security alert.
Guard details would be an example of where you’d see an enlisted man carrying a pistol.
In the British Army only officers were issued pistols and I’m pretty sure things haven’t changed since the 60s when I served. Exceptions were Military Police and some guard duties.
During WWII (at least on the American side) things were a lot looser. GIs tried to acquire Thompsons when they could. Trading your rifle for something else wasn’t uncommon. Picking up a pistol when you could was normal. Having a different weapon when you were pulled off the line than when you went there was not a big deal.
Try that now and it will be your ass. There are plenty of jobs now in the military call for enlisted to carry a pistol. Some carry pistols only and some are dual carriers (pistol/rifle or machine gun).
Pistol=Officer=Love sent, courtsey a German/Italian/Japanese snoper.
Really? That surprises me. Are you sure they were actually cavalry, or maybe just MPs on horseback (as some urban police are to this day)?
I remember reading a book, way back in the dark ages, I think named The Pistol, that suggested that a pistol was much desired by enlisted men in the Pacific. Seems there was a common belief that a pistol could stop a charging Japanese soldier better and easier than a rifle. Regular enlisted troops were not issued a pistol and well, Bookkeeper says it better.
Refering to the troops on horseback - In WWII days, most of the the transport was still horse drawn. Maybe not the US but certainly most everybody else.
A pistol is next-to-useless in battle. The idea is to kill the enemy from as far away as possible. Letting him get to pistol range is contra-indicated. Plus, the overwhelming majority of people can’t hit the broad side of a barn with a pistol. The Garand was a much better weapon. Leave the pistols to the people who weren’t expected to fight, like officers.
Very true. If an engagement is still being fought when you’re down to pistol range, it’s probably not going according to anyone’s plan. The exception being the dirty business of house-to-house fighting, in which case an assault rifle or submachinegun will do everything the pistol does, only with better results.
One way to tell that the sh.t is really about to hit the fan is officers picking up long guns.
[With one good arm, Pryor grabbed his enemy by the hair. But the man’s weight, combined with the 80 pounds of Army gear that Pryor wore, caused the two to fall. They landed on Pryor’s left elbow, and the impact jammed his shoulder back into its socket.
Now he could fight with both hands. In a few desperate seconds, Pryor broke the man’s neck and finished him with a 9mm pistol.](http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-10-19-silver-star-cover_x.htm)
In a couple of minutes I couldn’t find the cite I was looking for about an incident that I know happened. I did find a few others.
As interesting and impressive as all of these stories were, none were relating to WWII enlisted…
They do show that, as stated above in various posts, the pistol is pretty much used only when original plans have gone poorly. Sure a pistol can be useful compared to nothing but nobody wants to get stuck in a firefight with a pistol if everyone else has assault rifles 
When I was in the Army at the tail-end of WWII, the only ones I knew that were regularly issued the .45 pistol were MPs. When I had an assignment one month of “chasing” prisoners who were out policing the grounds, landscaping, etc, we were issued a 12 ga. shotgun.
One time I had great duty of escorting a prisoner to Kansas on a train, and I was then issued a pistol, holster and web belt as well as a pair of handcuffs. Took the cuffs off once on the train and we played poker all the way.
All I know about it.
As I recall, various WW2 memoirs by enlisted men speak of picking up pistols from dead enemy soldiers whenever possible.
Don’t officers generally carry the same weapons as their men these days?
My stepfather was a sargeant in WWII and took his .45 with him when he left. At least that was his story. He could have picked it up off the battlefield or stolen it from the armory, for all I know.
Below a certain pay-grade, probably. But an officer’s job isn’t to be clearing houses. His job is to be watching and controlling the big picture. The higher your rank, the less business you have packing anything bigger than a pen.
How easy or hard was it for GIs to smuggle souvenir weapons back to the States? Could a soldier get away with reporting his M3 as “lost in combat” and bring it home?