5 ms·

Hollow points are against the Geneva convention. The round you linked is only for use in special circumstances to prevent over penetration, Things like terroris

Hollow points are against the Geneva convention. The round you linked is only for use in special circumstances to prevent over penetration, Things like terrorist hostage rescue. They won’t and can’t be legally used in general warfare. There was actually a big argument in the past over match grade rounds that have a dimpled front and a hollowed core, which keeps the weight toward the back of the round. They aren’t effective in hunting for the same reason they aren’t considered a hollow point by the military.

nordsieck 7y ago
> Hollow points are against the Geneva convention. The round you linked is only for use in special circumstances to prevent over penetration, Things like terrorist hostage rescue. They won’t and can’t be legally used in general warfare. You're wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow-point_bullet#Legality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow-point_bullet#Legality
- cullenking 7y ago
  Read the second paragraph of that section. And sorry, Hague convention not Geneva. Either way, only special circumstances aka special operations from my understanding, which is more like international policing than warfare.
  - masonic 7y ago
    The USA is not a signatory to that Hague convention. I don't know what the effect would be of USA participation in a NATO action using expanding small arms ammunition.
    - cullenking 7y ago
      yeah I am certainly not an expert and I don’t know why the us military hasn’t used them, but they haven’t, and still aren’t going to from what I can read. I found that rabbit hole while researching hunting ammo, not because I am a military scholar or anything. Seems kinda odd to me anyway, though I suppose limiting the damage a combatant receives while fighting isn’t a bad thing. Coming up with a stance makes you have to mentally address the concept of good vs bad guys, and I suppose I don’t see enemy fighters as bad people, just people fighting for differing ideals. That makes me tend to agree with rules that limit fatalities and excessive injury.
      - int_19h 7y ago
        The US military has authorized the use of hollow point rounds as needed. They just don't believe that it's necessary most of the time in combat. Which is entirely correct - modern FMJ rifle ammo achieves similar and better terminal ballistics via fragmentation, without sacrificing armor penetration or flight ballistics like hollowpoints. But for 9mm, the equation is different - hence why M1153 is a thing, and is issued broadly to military units.

nordsieck 7y ago

> Hollow points are against the Geneva convention. The round you linked is only for use in special circumstances to prevent over penetration, Things like terrorist hostage rescue. They won’t and can’t be legally used in general warfare. You're wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow-point_bullet#Legality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow-point_bullet#Legality

cullenking 7y ago
Read the second paragraph of that section. And sorry, Hague convention not Geneva. Either way, only special circumstances aka special operations from my understanding, which is more like international policing than warfare.
- masonic 7y ago
  The USA is not a signatory to that Hague convention. I don't know what the effect would be of USA participation in a NATO action using expanding small arms ammunition.
  - cullenking 7y ago
    yeah I am certainly not an expert and I don’t know why the us military hasn’t used them, but they haven’t, and still aren’t going to from what I can read. I found that rabbit hole while researching hunting ammo, not because I am a military scholar or anything. Seems kinda odd to me anyway, though I suppose limiting the damage a combatant receives while fighting isn’t a bad thing. Coming up with a stance makes you have to mentally address the concept of good vs bad guys, and I suppose I don’t see enemy fighters as bad people, just people fighting for differing ideals. That makes me tend to agree with rules that limit fatalities and excessive injury.
    - int_19h 7y ago
      The US military has authorized the use of hollow point rounds as needed. They just don't believe that it's necessary most of the time in combat. Which is entirely correct - modern FMJ rifle ammo achieves similar and better terminal ballistics via fragmentation, without sacrificing armor penetration or flight ballistics like hollowpoints. But for 9mm, the equation is different - hence why M1153 is a thing, and is issued broadly to military units.