Why does the U.S. military insist on using FMJ ammo? I know it's because of the Hague Convention which says member countries can't use hollow-point ammunition. Seriously though, war is not meant to be "humane." In a war zone the object is to kill the other guy before he kills you. We use 5.56 rifle rounds and 9mm pistols. Neither are particularly good at taking down man-sized targets using FMJ rounds. It'd be a different story if they used large-caliber rifles and .45 pistols.
It's a stupid international rule (probably thought up by some non-combat bureacrats) that only serves to put U.S. troops at a disadvantage and probably gets our young men and women killed. I understand the need to have certain rules of engagement but I can't see any compelling reason for outlawing the use of hollowpoint / softpoint ammo.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This is a great link - Dan Spier of the "GunZone" (long time writer on all things gun): http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html
I always thought that ball ammunition was more to have an increased number of wounded that require far greater support (rescue, hospitalization, demoralization, etc...) than just outright killing 'em... I guess if you look at it that way, war is pretty suck.
Interesting note, however, is that the high vel. rifle rounds (starting with the 6.5x55 Swede) do a great job of splintering into tiny fragments inside of people anyway. And 5.56 is pretty fast due to the weights - Check out what happens in gelatin!! WOW!
I do agree that the Hague Peace Conventions were pretty dumb, tho...
Thanks for the link. I wonder if Iraq & Afghanistan are considered "counterterrorism" and thus exempted from Hague?
I've also heard that theory regarding ball ammo. The 5.45x39 Russian "poison bullet" comes to mind immediately. It's a theory I don't agree with but hey, I've never been to war or even served in the military.
I didn't know that 5.56 and other FMJ rifle rounds fragemented much. I learn something new everyday reading the blogs.
Post a Comment