FBI is switching back to 9mm handguns.
- Thread starter Dexter Morgan
- Start date
The Geneva Conventions - nor any of the other laws of war - say nothing about "not killing". Furthermore, our intention in the military is very much to kill the other guy, not injure. The crap about better to wound them than kill them is just that - crap.
I have seen a lot of military trials on weapons, ammunition, etc over the last 28 years. I have yet to see anything intended to make a weapons system or munitions LESS lethal - without exception, the intent is always the exact opposite. BTW, I would love to know how you make a .50 cal or the LAV's cannon an "injury weapon". How about our shotguns - why are we using buckshot if we're supposed to preferably be wounding them? Shouldn't we have #8's up the spout?
Death's don't strain resources? You think the dead are just discarded like toilet paper? Do you think your buddy getting killed affects you less emotionally than your buddy going back for treatment alive? Here's another thought: whose logistics get strained when we take that enemy position with all those wounded guys instead of a bunch of dead guys? We don't throw them back to the other side, ya know. We care for them, just like our own wounded - except with the addition of security pers.
This "better to wound than to kill" myth has been around for a long time. But it's still a myth.
Hague Convention of 1899, #4,3
Declaration concerning the Prohibition of the Use of Bullets which can Easily Expand or Change their Form inside the Human Body such as Bullets with a Hard Covering which does not Completely Cover the Core, or containing Indentations
This declaration states that, in any war between signatory powers, the parties will abstain from using "bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body." Ratified by all major powers, except the United States
I am surprised that no one posted this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tku8YI68-JA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tku8YI68-JA
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
That involves intellect.
Well, all kinds of reasons.
You can start out with various international treaties on how we will wage war. However, if you want to add to your confusion, some of our ammunition is hollowpoint - but it doesn't violate the laws of war because the hollowpoint is intended for precision accuracy and stability over long ranges, not designed with intent to expand.
Then you can consider that we aren't just using bullets to shoot deer, but to shoot through building walls, vehicles, heavy brush, etc. And a bullet tough enough to hit dirt, pavement, cement, etc and then keep on travelling around in the enemy's general vicinity at high rates of speed is met with general approval as well. Bullets hitting bad guys while bouncing around in "to whom it may concern" mode is not a bad thing. Penetration of cover is pretty important, which is why a lot of infantry guys get a giggle when they watch movies of gunfights with the combatants hiding behind walls in buildings and ducking out to shoot at each other...
Then you can think about the beating bullet noses take feeding through automatic weapons i.e. the C9 and C6.
Finally, the idea that FMJ just drills neat pinholes through people isn't based in any reality. You don't have to stumble very far searching the internet to find ongoing discussions (arguments?) over the effects of bullet yaw, tumble, etc once having hit somebody. Not a few ball rounds are designed at least partially with the intent they will become unstable once hitting somebody. That isn't as significant with pistol calibers, but we don't do much fighting in combat with pistols anymore, and a lot of those pistol calibers get fired out of submachine guns in bursts at the bad guys - usually by specially trained units at kissing close ranges.
As far as some police agencies opting to go back to the 9mm, I doubt that much is being lost or gained as far as performance in stopping a threat. A more controllable round (when the reality is that very few departments fund regular range sessions for their members and never have) may have been trialed and found to provide better scores during range testing. But as far as returning to the 9mm (or 38 Spl if you want to imagine further), the bullets available today are not the bullets law enforcement had available even 10 years ago, never mind 20 or 30 years. I believe it would be quite sensible for any department to be far more focused on what handgun/caliber would result in a higher percentage of effective center of mass hits for all members of their force, than joining the very popular internet sport of dropping your guts over what caliber is superior to what. You know... when you get tired of the "which oil is best for my motorcycle" and "30-06 versus .270" arguments. Okay, maybe I'm dating myself with that last example.
Rick, you must be a fan of Jack O'Connor and his tributes to the Winchester 270 to remember that debate.
Sorry for the thread drift, oh ya back to the Famous But Incompetent and what they are going to use...
Take Care
Bob
Sorry for the thread drift, oh ya back to the Famous But Incompetent and what they are going to use...
Take Care
Bob
- Location
- Fort St John B.C.
they can tell you what they want but when 9mm is 2/3's the cost of.40, half the cost of 357sig/45auto/10mm then cost is a big reason as well, sure thier duty ammo is still expensive but i bet they shoot on the magnitude of 10x more fmj the jhp.
when your ordering ammo by the 100's of thousand's of round the cost saved is huge.
when your ordering ammo by the 100's of thousand's of round the cost saved is huge.
Interestingly commonwealth snipers (Canadian, British) use 168 grain Boat Tail Hollow Point. Hollow points are used because of it's inherent accuracy over FMJ. US snipers however use FMJ in accordance with the Hague Convention.
The JHP ammo used is not considered to be a conventional Hp, in the regard that the small cavity and opening are features for improved ballistic performance not terminal performance.
TDC
I am not sure where you are getting your info from. The US does use OTM (open tip match) ammo for snipers and designated marksmen. Also most OTM does not expand at all, it sometimes fragments but usually nothing. The open tip is a result of manufacturing methods and the tip is really too small to allow anything inside to provide the forces necessary for expansion.
I could totally have been lead astray. I was told this by US soldiers in Masum Ghar afghanistan while making deals with ammo and rations and stuff. They wouldn't touch the BTHP and said that's why. I've also seen BTHP mangled on ranges, more so than 4B1T 7.62 fmj.
The US Army does use OTM and have been long before Canada.
I find interesting the jhp is less effective then a fmj ball round. According to the idea. If you think about it, it does make a lot of sense when you consider physics.
