History lesson

[drsmile]

Stumbled across interesting history today looking something up. Who knows exactly why the military does not use HP's or fragmentation ammo??? St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868 banned exploding projectiles of less than 400 grams. Hague Convention of 1899 expanded this law and stopped the use of all expanding projectiles. All NATO memebers are subject to this law.

LEO does not follow this law to reduce risk to bystanders for obvious reasons.

Who knew that these reasons were so old!

 

[loadnplenty]

FMJ's cause less damage to people and are not as likely to mame people like HP's, I took a SWAG at it guess we'll see

 

[jwhited]

Stumbled across interesting history today looking something up. Who knows exactly why the military does not use HP's or fragmentation ammo??? St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868 banned exploding projectiles of less than 400 grams. Hague Convention of 1899 expanded this law and stopped the use of all expanding projectiles. All NATO memebers are subject to this law.

LEO does not follow this law to reduce risk to bystanders for obvious reasons.

Who knew that these reasons were so old!

Yup, learned about this when I was in the Army.

 

[boneboy96]

Yeah, wouldn't want to mame and kill the enemy, it wouldn't be sporting.

 

[Sagan]

Yeah, wouldn't want to mame and kill the enemy, it wouldn't be sporting.

LOL. I have a buddy who was a tanker in Desert Storm. He liked to joke that they weren't supposed to shoot one of the guns (50 maybe?) at combatants. It should only be shot at equipment. At which point the CO mentioned that belt buckles and boots were technically equipment.

 

[bearpugh]

wouldn't want a messy war.

 

[Cruisers460]

Came a long way since they shot square bullets at Muslims! (That I did learn on here)

 

[oxbat]

The reason I've always heard is that a Hp takes 1 man out of the fight. A fmj wounds 1 man, takes 2 men to carry him off the field, that's 3 men off the field. That being said, you have to be fighting an enemy that won't shoot their own wounded in the head.

 

[jcountry]

This is a little off base, but something interesting;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_combatant

This is why "enemy combatants" can be held at Gitmo like they are. They were never a uniformed combatant of any state, so they were never entitled to any of the protections of the Geneva convention.

-Interesting little tidbit. (Not that I disagree with that position. I just think it is interesting how and where that status is applied.)

-Rules of war. Who knew?

 

[flyinbrass13]

Legal:

Legal:
[Broken External Image]:

Legal:

Legal:

Super duper illegal: