B&T USW A1 Approved For Import Into The US

B&T USA has announced that the USW A1 is now blessed by the ATF for importation and sale in the United States. The tedious compliance process, required of all firearms entering US commerce, can take up to six months and includes a physical inspection of at least one sample firearm that is destroyed after the testing is concluded. That is probably the saddest part of this whole process.

The USW A1 is a semiautomatic DA/SA pistol outfitted with the much discussed and long awaited Aimpoint Nano. A second, striker-fired version is due out later this year. You know, after the US government cuts one up in the name of science.

Obviously, the folding stock can be added after following the ATF Form 1 application to make a Short Barreled Rifle (SBR)

A rough MSRP estimate places the USW around $2K-$2,500 USD.

In order to react to the quickly changing threats faced by police forces all over Europe, especially those threats presented by Islamic terrorist, law enforcement needs to quickly rethink its armament. The recent terroristic attacks have proven, today’s police side arms are not able to cope with an opponent armed with military assault rifles and bomb vests.

This is the main reason for the development of the Universal Service Weapon (USW). It was to designed to be a weapon which enables the first responder, thus the normal patrol officer, to intervene effectively in the event of a terrorist event. It is also a sidearm that is suitable for every kind of “normal” police work.
The USW will be available in two versions. One with a DA/SA trigger, available in Spring 2017 and one with a preset striker available Winter 2017.

B&T USW Features (EU version):

  • Calibre: 9 x 19 mm
  • System: Browning system
  • Operation: Semi automatic
  • Length min./max.: 255 mm / 470 mm
  • Width: 43 mm with closed stock
  • Height: 170 mm
  • Barrel Length: 110 mm
  • Weight: 980 g
  • Stock Pull: 360 mm
  • Primary Sighting System: Aimpoint NANO
  • Suppressor connector: M13.5×1 left
  • NAR Rails: 1
  • Magazines: 17, 19 and 30 rounds
  • Handling: Ambidextrous
  • Shoulder stock: Foldable
  • Also included: B&T APL Advanced Pistol Light, one each 17, 19 and 30 round magazine, duty holster, cleaning kit, sling, manual, case.



LE – Science – OSINT.
On a mission to make all of my guns as quiet as possible.
Twitter: @gunboxready
Instagram: @tfb_pete


  • Johnsmyname

    It looks like a Canik made love to a Glock and the offspring took too many vitamins. I can maybe see a European police market, but at $2,000-$2,500 US I can’t imagine them selling too many. The only people buying at that price are serious collectors and rich guys who’s honeymoon phase is over with their Roni.

    • Bradley

      Not that I would pay it, but you do understand you’re not just buying a pistol, right. Let’s say the aimpoint is $600, the light is $150, and the holster is $100. I’m making those numbers up, but they’re believable in my opinion. Subtract that from the lower end $2,000 and that leaves $1,150 for the firearm. Expensive but no more than a Kimber or any of the other mid-high end guns that sell well here.

      • Johnsmyname

        That is a very good point, I didn’t even think about the “extras”. That puts it in the Uzi Pro category.

  • Richard

    Interesting idea, I’d still feel very much under-gunned going up against a platoon of IS terrorists with it.

    Why not just arm the police with assault rifles? I was in Germany in December and they all seemed to have MP-5s or G36s anyway, no-one seemed to care.

    EU democracy being what it is, just go full police state and arm the police like light infantry, they’re not fooling anyone with this ‘unarmed/lightly armed’ police rubbish.

    • zellgato

      Can’t speak to the EU stuff, but in the US. the rules on the rifle carry and usage is pretty precise, but also very varied by state.
      Something along the lines of a pistol-sbr ish combo pack like this one sidesteps a lot of the weird rules issues. While they’ll still have long arms in the car typically. (Well I assume, the two states I’ve lived in most often in my adult life have had at least rifles. though Alaska had rifle, high caliber bolt action, and shotgun in all cars due to the weird wildlife stuff)

    • Joby

      Rifles suck to carry around all day all the time. This just goes in a holster like a normal pistol

    • Renato H M de Oliveira

      EU folks apparently are more afraid of policemen carrying rifles than to import illiterate male refugees if fighting age.
      Go figure.
      On a more serious note, I’ve talked to some Europeans, and EU people in general feel uneasy with heavily armed policemen. Even after the terrorist spree.

      • cmbv79

        The Portuguese GNR have HK MG4 and even M2 Browning. Unfortunately I’m afraid the normal street Guard only have Glock 19…

        • Renato H M de Oliveira

          EU Spec Ops usually are very well equipped, but street cops won’t carry more than a Glock.

      • USMC03Vet

        They suffer the same delusion that it will never happen to them, so their virtue signaling matters over others lives.

      • MeaCulpa

        Being European and all I’d say that some countries has pretty recent experiences with authoritarian regimes and that the people in those countries might dislike well armed policemen for that reason. But I’d imagine that the most common reason behind not arming every cop with an AR or SMG is that they get in the way conducting regular police buisness like checking driving licenses and bike lights, making visits to the elderly and doing paperwork.

        • Renato H M de Oliveira

          Being a Brazilian I know all too well what authoritarian regimes are.
          And I also know that “regular police business” as you mentioned are a thing of the past.
          If you don’t want your officers with rifles/SMGs on body 24/7, fine, but don’t deny them these weapons in a nearby car.

          • MeaCulpa

            Well Brazil has a murder rate that is some 30 times higher than some countries in Europe so the priorities are, and should be, different. Granted that immigration of some unsavoury people has brought a lot of problem and risks to Europe, it’s still nothing compared to the social, ecenomical and criminal problems that Brazilian police faces on a daily basis. Having a rifle in a nearby car might have some advantages in some situations, on the other hand comes the higher risk of a gun being stolen, added cost and training to name just a few. I’m not saying that I’m fine with people being killed by Jihadi pig *uc*ers but better armed police is not something that solves all problems and it has it own risks and costs.
            Having a libertarian leaning I do think that Randy Balko has written some worthwhile pieces on the issue of militarising the police.

        • neckbone

          Such a quaint village you live in where the policeman checks licenses, and bicycle lights, and also looks in on the elderly folks. May I ask what storybook village you call as home?

          • MeaCulpa

            It’s not a quaint village by any standards but cops do check licenses when they pull you over (as they do in most of the world), and they do hand out tickets to people without a bike light, and they do a bunch in check ins on elderly folks (also known as “grandma isn’t answering her phone , could you go see if the cat is eating her face?!”), sure they arrest drunk drivers and do a bunch of house calls when domestic abuse is suspected – neither of those activities are made easier by having an AR15 (on average). It is hardly the stuff of storybook villages but rather the mundane realities of police work.

          • jamezb

            It’s called “flyover country” by city dwellers, and yes, they check bike lights and check on old ladies. They have AR’s, but they keep them in the trunk, as not to freak out the 99.99999% percent of law abiding AND criminal elements they deal with, the vast majority of whom have plenty respect for their duty sidearm and do not require further intimidation.

          • Wow!

            Militarization of police is a non-issue that is only propagated by the left wing that wishes to have an anarchic society where no one can stop their corruption.The more equipment and options LE have, the more they can spend to be compliant to the criminals. People forget that just a few decades ago the standard response to a criminal turning away and running was to shoot them in the back (even if they did not display lethal threats). Police are the guys who are keeping a great majority of criminal networks in check.

            And that has no impact on citizen gun rights. Many officers are very much in support for citizens having the same equipment that officers have available to them. Why restrict weapons from anyone when everyone has utility for them?

          • neckbone

            Actually a few cops I know say their job is mostly bringing in revenue for the small town. It’s not so much as keeping you safe, but keeping their funding coming. And the so called war on drugs has gotten us nothing, but no knock warrants. Murder and crime rates are as low as they’ve been in 50 plus years. It’s come to where we need cops wearing cameras at all times. Just to keep them from being blamed by the black lives movement and the such. Plus the quality of the police officer himself has gone way down. Compared to 2 generations ago. The push for minority and women recruits has destroyed the idea of the best man for the job. Just like every other gov. mandated program in the past 50 years. We all know people who we think shouldn’t no way be a cop. Those numbers all add up to a huge problem. That’s why it’s prudent to only really count on yourself and immediate family in the house. We’re in the weeds now I guess

          • Wow!

            It is quite the opposite. The war on drugs has gotten us plenty of information that lead to investigations in solving many cold cases and preventing many other crimes from becoming unsolvable. Luckily, criminals tend to not stick to only one type of crime if they maintain their careers, so by going after drugs, we not only stop drug dealers/users but also other related crimes. You do not stop crime by ignoring it, you can only stop crime by pursuing all criminals, and over time the network in the big picture becomes apparent. If you ignore one type of criminal, you miss a big piece of that big picture which can affect the ability to investigate other crimes. All crime must be taken seriously. The law is not an option.

            Cops have actually wanted cameras issued by their department for some time, but it was too expensive until recently. Many times it comes to “he said/she said” but with a camera, we can expose a criminal’s lies more easily which is great in court.

            I would say the quality of officers have actually gone up, we get a lot more money allocated to training than we did before, and we have a lot more protective devices and communication systems that weren’t available pre 9/11. I agree though that PC with affirmative action hinders an LEA, but it hinders all parts of society, not just LE.

          • neckbone

            Most people believe the war on drugs is a huge failure. Sure hasn’t stopped drug use. But it did militarize the police in this country. The problem is the high number of crooked cops. Many people just don’t try list them anymore. And the civil asset forfeiture without conviction is not what a free society is about. I can’t even believe you say the war on drugs is good because it solved some cold cases. Some believe it’s a war on personal freedom. Where do you work officer?

          • Wow!

            You obviously didn’t read my comment. The war on drugs has been a huge success except by people who don’t know anything about law enforcement or those with an agenda. Again, you can’t stop all crime but you can’t stop any if you ignore it. Drugs are associated with all other kinds of crime. Law enforcement is not an option, you don’t get to just make up what you follow and don’t follow on a whim. That is anarchy.

            There are very few to no crooked cops. You watch too many crime dramas. There are so many civil cases running that next to no one wants to run the risk of being the “tall grass” cut down. Plus people who go into LE aren’t there to make money or whatever because there isn’t money to be made. If they wanted to do crime, they would go to other departments in a city.

            Asset forfeiture without conviction is allowed in the constitution. 4th amendment protects against UNREASONABLE search and seizure. You do not get to make the determination of reasonable or unreasonable. The courts do. Officers aren’t going to seize anything that the courts would deny as it would be counter productive for whatever case they are working on.

            Militarization of police is ironically in the citizens best interest. People forget that just a few decades ago if you resisted an officer in any way you got a stick or a bullet to the face or back. However, now with more equipment and tactics, we can be more tolerant with people. Without that “militarization” you abhor, you ironically would have a lot less leeway.

          • neckbone

            WOW! I can’t believe this. You forgot to put a sarcasm emoticon after that mess. Little to none are crooked. There are bad cops in every Dept.

          • Wow!

            Administrators maybe, but hardly officers. Unless what you mean by “crooked” is a cop using equal force against an non-compliant criminal.

            You already made the mistake on 4th amendment. I don’t think you understand what a crooked cop is.

          • neckbone

            Now your calling the left wing anarchists? Seems the left wants more government usually. We need to be more responsible for our own safety. We need criminals to fear that they might be next. But I agree we shouldn’t restrict really any firearms. Look who is committing the gun homocides. It’s a small subset of a certain race that commits over 51% of the gun murders.

          • Wow!

            The left wants lawlessness which means their factions are allowed to do crime, and government becomes their tool in order to attack those that oppose them. Democrats want to ignore the law but they want others who oppose them to follow it in a double standard.

      • Richard

        Probably because they don’t like being reminded of what their governments are doing to their countries.

        They’re confusing symptoms and causes – very common.

    • ProLiberty82

      Yeah I’d be more comfortable with the police carrying an SMG/carbine for the fact that it’s easier to aim, shoot and hit with than a pistol. If I needed the police to save me I’d like them to be confident in their ability to use their weapon so that they don’t hesitate at a crucial moment or end up missing and shooting me instead.

      The idea that the police is a “civilian force” is pure BS, they are employers of the same government as the military and bid their will only. If they start rounding up civilians does it really matter if they are dressed in black or green? In Norway we have a saying “Government is government”.

      The EU has become increasingly power hungry and antagonistic in matters of member-states (and those in the not in the union as well) democratic processes. It needs to go back to a simple trade union or I fear we will see what happen in Yugoslavia in the 90’s only on a bigger scale in the whole of Europe.

      • Stuki Moi

        For “first responders”, aka regular Joe beatcops; 99% of their job, even in Chicago (much less Zurich), does not require a gun at all. An MP5 slung over the shoulder is insanely awkward for getting cats out of trees, steadying a drunk about to fall into the road and such….

        A weapon which is only minimally less awkward when riding a bicycle on a crowded beach compared to a P229, but which can act like said Sig most of the time, while being 5 seconds or less away from a very effective 0-100m weapon, is a genuine improvement over what is currently available.

        The SWAT guys will have their undoubtedly more effective rifles anyway. But they tend to only get there, a few minutes after the bad guy has already shot himself. After finishing up shooting his victims.

        • Richard

          Keep the rifle in the car boot/attached to the center console then.

          This problem has been solved many, many times around the world already without the use of a pistol with a gumby stock on it.

          • Stuki Moi

            What good is a rifle in a car trunk going to do you, when you are bicycling down the beach, or foot patrolling a farmers’ market or a punk show at the Bataclan? Exactly the kind of places enterprising mass shooters will likely seek out.

            The problem may have been “solved” before, but an increase in the perceived importance of the problem, combined with more compact sighting systems, have opened up the possibility of hand guns being effective out to ranges where they could benefit from a butt stock.

            The proof will still be if the guns remain as useful in what will still remain their main role, handguns, as what cops are currently used to. But if (still a big if) they do, the added capability stemming from the stock, is a nice bonus.

          • jamezb

            And don’t forget, if that gun isn’t shouldered all the time, valuable seconds are wasted… hell just give them HUMVEES with M240’s on ring mounts…make sure they never take their finger off the trigger though, that 1/16 second c ould make akll the difference!!

            (the above is a sarcastic response to a paranoid who won’t be happy until the STASI take over)

      • neckbone

        Yeah give the cops more firepower, and restrict firearm ownership to keep the country safe. While millions of radical Muslims are flowing into the continent just looking for a job. Yeah that common sense alright.

        • Wow!

          Simple solution is to give cops AND citizens more firepower available. The only people who are against LE having modern options are those doing bad things who don’t want to be stopped by them. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

          • neckbone

            Sounds good.

          • neckbone

            No it’s not just the people doing bad things. It’s people like me who feel police have become mostly revenue generating agents. It’s a myth that cops keep you safe.

  • zellgato

    I’m not big on striker fired (not on a mechanical basis. Just on a personal taste. i’d alter my opinion had I frequent combat situations). But this is one I sure want, with all the bells and whistles eventually.

    • snmp

      B&T USW A is base of Kriss-Sphinx SPD (CZ75 clone) with an enclose hammer

      • zellgato

        That one looks fun on a bun

  • Bill Revoir

    It is a Sphinx SDP with a threaded barrel, and a folding stock. Funny, looks like B&T couldn’t finagle Halo night sights either, and went with an Aimpoint.

    • Sunshine_Shooter

      I would never choose night sights over an Aimpoint in the first place.

  • ProLiberty82

    I’m just really curious about the Aimpoint Nano, when will it be out for retail? It doesn’t even exist on Aimpoint’s own website, not one mention of it!

    If it’s lighter, has comparable battery life and don’t have that crazy colored lens I’d pick it up over the T2 Micro.

    • Eric B

      AFAIK it’s ONLY going to be sold via B&T.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        Incorrect. Aimpoint will sell them directly. The first parts will be bought by B&T.

    • Sunshine_Shooter

      From my understanding, the Aimpoint is under contract to supply B&T with Nanos and cannot sell them to anyone else until all the Nanos originally promised to B&T have been supplied.

      After that, I would assume there would be a huge media blitz and the Nanos would hit store shelves within weeks.

      My source (cannot remember for the life of me who) may be completely wrong, so don’t assume that I know what I’m talking about.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        Not exactly. B&T approached them asking for a smaller optic even if it was still under development. Aimpoint had one but wasn’t ready to release it. B&T liked it, was using it and debut time for the gun was coming up. So B&T released it much to the surprise of Aimpoint.

        It’s a real product, but the first ones were sold to B&T. Many people internal to Aimpoint haven’t even seen one yet, or first saw it at SHOT in B&T’s booth.

        • Tim Nickler

          Both the NANO, and the T1 were products that did not exist and were not in development until B&T asked for it..believe it or not. The T1 was developed for the MP9, and the Nano for the USW

          • That makes more sense. My comments were directed at the article mentioning the B&T import to the U.S. and then the quote on its benefits without explaining it was directed at the EU and other markets.

        • Sunshine_Shooter

          I like your version of the story better than mine.

      • Tim Nickler

        We are told Nanos will not be available soon separate from the USW.

    • MrBrassporkchop

      Prediction: After it drops people will start saying the T2 didn’t cut it for them and then exaggerate its negative properties. They’ll say something like “Well if this is for a REAL rifle and not some range toy…something you’ll trust your life with then you should get the Nano.”.

      If the nano has a shorter battery life then suddenly the T2 long battery life never really mattered to them after all. If longer then the T2 is outdated junk.

      If it’s even more waterproof suddenly rifles will be stored in water tanks all across internet forums for [insert some dumb reason here] and it shaves precious milliseconds incase a team of ninjas breaks in…again for reasons…

      Anything and everything will be said to justify buying it because it’s newer and costs more.

      • Ebby123

        *slow clap*

    • Tim Nickler

      It will be only available from B&T on the USW until next year at earliest

  • Harry’s Holsters

    If the US version is similarly priced and featured the gun is actually a fair price.

  • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

    Im not LE (though I do work closely with LE) and therefore not familiar with all the intricacies of the legally correct use of long guns for duty purposes, but I do not consider this even close to a replacement for a patrol rifle and would hesitate to carry one in place of a traditional pistol. The only advantage this has over a traditional pistol is the folding stock to get a more steady shot (which is a HUGE advantage), but it comes with some disadvantages.

    One, this thing is huge compared to a pistol. Sitting in your car with it on your hip or leg wont be fun. Moving through tight spaces wont either. Its also slightly heavier, but thats still adding weight to already heavy belts. Two, Id wager this is a bit slower to draw and fire than a traditional pistol (I think the red dot would help, but those are available on traditional pistols too). Three, youre still only getting pistol ballistics.

    Also, for less than the cost of one of these, you can get the traditional duty pistol of your choice and a CZ Scorpion. I know the scorpion is no Roller Delayed Blowback Masterpiece, but it still gets the job done, and if I was expecting trouble Id still rather have a Scorpion (of course SBR with stock; no problem if youre LE) than a B&T.

    • datimes

      You would be surprised how difficult it is to draw your handgun while seated in a vehicle from a retention holster. It takes practice.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        IWB baby.

      • LGonDISQUS

        Cupholder, brah. (Kidding, maybe?)

    • Tim Nickler

      It’s not huge at all…its nearly identical to the size of any full sized Glock, HK, FN, etc. pistol

  • TheNotoriousIUD

    Really? Terrorist hunting?
    Id say its more suited as a hybrid side arm with the folding stock adding range and accuracy. I’d feel a little naked with one of these against an automatic AK.

    • Twilight sparkle

      This type of firearm would make sense for the more recent attacks involving vehicles though. 9mm is pretty good at punching through glass

      • TheNotoriousIUD

        I suppose, still they should probably just invest in better handgun training.

        • Twilight sparkle

          I agree but police departments are never going to understand that range qualification twice a year isn’t training.

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            Its a joke.

          • jamezb

            I would wear a “TheNotoriousIUD” t-shirt.

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            I dont know what this means.

            Am I being insulted??

            If so dont tell me.

          • Snake

            Yep, all that range qualification proves is that they still know where the trigger is.

        • mazkact

          Could get the police officer in Irving,TX who put down the two Jihadist at the convention center with his duty pistol to teach His method. Advance and give steady careful aimed fire until threat is stopped.

          • Ranger Rick

            It was Garland, Texas?

          • mazkact

            You are correct Sir.Brain fart on my part

  • Cymond

    Neat, but for that price, how does it compare to tricking out your polymer pistol of choice?

    I know $2k is plenty to add a RMR to a Glock, pay the tax stamp, buy a stock, and still have funds left for other tune up work.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      RMR on an ordinary handgun reciprocates. This optic does not. The difference is night and day.

      The folding stock is a major feature here, not much of an option for the Glock.

      And the joke here really is that “funds left for other tune up work” and discussing price is that there are lots of people with 2k into their glocks already.

    • Mr Mxyzptlk

      Seeing as it includes the stock, red dot, weaponlight, mags and holster, it seems like a relatively fair price to me if it comes in at around $2000. Even if you can build up a Glock to a similar spec for less, it would still be an inferior weapon as the stock wouldn’t fold like this allowing it to go into a holster, and the sight wouldn’t be on a fixed bridge.

      • Flounder

        You and others are forgetting that there are optics rails that attach to the front pic rail on the frame of a handgun. These options are actually cheaper than a slide cut even from the factory.

        Although I kinda like the optic to reciprocate, because then I can use it as a charging handle for fun, or when one hand isn’t working.

        • Mr Mxyzptlk

          The problem with them is that they position the optic near the front of the gun which would make it much more difficult to make a holster that would work well. It also adds bulk to the front of the gun on the part where it would have to go into the holster, and any weapon light would also end up behind stepped away from the frame with the rail mount acting as a riser.

          As for where the RDS should be in the first place, I imagine that not being on the reciprocating slide would mean that the sight was under less stress so it would have a longer lifespan and not potentially loose zero, and it would also mean your sight picture isn’t moving around between shots allowing for faster follow ups. The sight bridge method also has a safety advantage, as due to the fact that a gun like this has a short stock your face is very close to the pistol, and without the bridge you might accidentally smack yourself in the face with the slide.

          • onederer

            I have an adapter that mounts on the gun’s bottom front rail, is easily removable, and is usable on any pistol that has a bottom front rail.

            I’m using a red dot optic with it. I also got a holster for the firearm/adapter. The firearm, never touches the holster. It’s the adapter that engages a groove in the holster, to open carry the hand gun. The adapter also has a short rail on the bottom of it, to mount other stuff.

            Nice setup, for someone who has tired eyes, and needs optics to use handguns.

    • USMC03Vet

      For internet e-peen.
      Check out my B&T, Bro. It’s rare, Bro.

    • John

      Other people on the net, including some interviewed by TFB, have said the B&T was meant for European cities and gun laws, where police are limited in their choice of on-duty weapons for specific situations.

      This doesn’t apply to the United States, where seemingly any deputy or beat cop can carry around a Smith and Wesson AR-15, a military surplus M-16, a military surplus M4, an FN SCAR-17, a FN P90 because they’re Stargate fans, a Kalashnikov-type rifle for giggles, a HK G36 for showing off, an HK MP5 they’ll never fire more than once or twice, one of those HK Uzi-types that fire the incredibly proprietary and costly 4.6mm round, and whatever shotgun they’ve got knocking around in the back of the stationhouse because, hey, gotta be well-rounded for when you need to door breach or shoot down enemy drones.

      This doesn’t include the two dozen types of official carry duty pistols they’re required to pick from, or the entire world of firearms they’re allowed to have as off-duty weapons in the event their main primary arsenal all magically manage to malfunctio at the same time. They also might need a grenade launcher because, I dunno, protesters sitting down in a group surrounded by equally heavily armed cops require that kind of firepower because they’re just that tactically deadly. Also Tasers and pepper spray.

      But sure. Let’s throw a B&T in the mix. It’ll round out the department’s armory very nicely.

      • TheQuickening

        Seems that you are pretty skeptical of the police having options in firearms. How do you feel about civilians having choices in how they’re armed?

        • MichaelZWilliamson

          Police are civilians.

          I feel citizens should be able to have any weapon they want, and those on duty should be restricted to a demonstrated need.

          • TheQuickening

            So if the police are policing the civilians who are armed with ‘any weapon they want’ that would indicate that the police should have parity in options, which, is never going to happen BTW as Barrett’s are expensive for mass issue.

          • MichaelZWilliamson

            When they’re off duty, certainly.

            On the job, they can comply with employer’s rules, like everyone else.

            They can drink off the job, too.

    • LGonDISQUS

      I know $2k is plenty to add a RMR to a Glock, pay the tax stamp, buy a stock, get a month’s worth of handies at the truck stop, and still have funds left for other tune up work.


  • Some Rabbit

    The only advantage this has over an ordinary pistol is the shoulder stock, that said, it’s hardly worth the price tag.

  • Joe Moore

    This actually makes a lot of sense, especially if the whole package in the duty holster isn’t too large; this has the potential to be an excellent duty weapon.

  • This is an interesting pistol, but the marketing that this is the ideal terrorist mitigation firearm is a bit much. A patrol rifle, carbine, or shotgun is better for meeting the threat from a long-gun totting terrorist or criminal.

    Something else to consider:
    B&T weight = 34.57 ounces B&T length = 10.04 inches
    Glock 17 = 25.04 ounces Glock 17 = 8.03 inches

    Add in the B&T costing 4-5x as much, (at least 2x as much if adding a stock and RMS to a Glock), and this just isn’t a cost-efficient purchase for law enforcement.

    • Tim Nickler

      The marketing as an “anti terrorist” pistol is from Switzerland and written for the European market. There are many markets in Europe where firearms let alone PDW/rifles are not carried by many LE, and training with pistols is as hit and miss as here.

  • snmp

    B&T USW is base on Shpinx SPD (Kriss)

  • Sunshine_Shooter

    If I was a cop, I’d be pinching my pennies to get one of these things (and trying my damnedest to convince my supervisor that I should be allowed to carry it on duty).

  • Maxpwr

    Adding a shoulder stock would be illegal without meeting 922R. Are they going to start producing parts in the US to meet 922R?

    • Flounder

      They will never import it as an SBR or probably with any stock of any kind. We might get a pistol variant but probably not.

      • Maxpwr

        Exactly. You can’t import SBRs for civilian sale and you can’t add the stock without making it 922R compliant. I’m all for big bulky pistols, but that’s all you can get legally. Hopefully Trump will overturn Bush’s import ban, but I don’t see it happening yet.

        • MichaelZWilliamson

          Wouldn’t NFA status negate any 922r issues? That’s the point of NFA.

    • MichaelZWilliamson

      What “new technology” does this offer? Ammo and mechanism invented in the 19th Century, materials invented in the 20th.

  • Timmybadshoes

    I’d rather them make a TP9 with a standard barrel.

  • Shut up and take my money!

  • Independent George

    I honestly don’t see the appeal on this.

    It’s basically a semi-auto pistol with a stock. It shoots a pistol round from a pistol length barrel, so it’s got none of the advantages of a SMG or a PDW, while being bulkier and heavier than a standard sidearm.

    The MP7 and P-90 fill the exact same niche while offering actual advantages.

    • issue is those are full auto which scare the liberals who say the police shouldn’t be militarized yet say us cops should be like euro cops.

  • jamezb

    I predict in 5 years you will find one of these attached to the leg of 2 out of three uniformed policemen.

  • supergun

    How is this pistol better than a good H&K USP 45 tactical or Sig Sauer P-226/P-220 in 9mm, 40cal, 45acp, 10mm.

  • Steven Sparks

    That’s the Goncz Hi Tech from the 80’s

  • Wow!

    Some of these people getting all scared that cops may be carrying a handgun with a stock are displaying symptoms identical to the gun control retards.

    “Oh no! That cop has a 10″ plastic extension on a handgun identical to what is already issued! Ban the plastic shoulder things that go up! For the children! Militarization and corporations and bankers are bad guys! Rioters didn’t do nuffing!”

  • MichaelZWilliamson

    So, it’s a plastic pistol with a stock, that costs 3-5X as much as other plastic pistols with stocks. Point?