RadekSkylark
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2016
- Messages
- 136
Hello, everyone!
I've been carrying wadcutters in my revolver as I'm from Europe and I'm not allowed to carry expanding (e.g. hollow point) bullets.
And although after purchasing my revolver years back I got told by the police (in just "words") that wadcutters are allowed to be carried, I'm now kind of starting to think about this subject again, as their prices have gone up to match the one for FMJ truncated cone type of rounds (so far they were around 15% cheaper).
This topic is not a question of which round/bullet is better for self-defense - a wadcutter or FMJ-TC, but rather about the Hague convention and "its ban" of "expanding and flattening" rounds. To be clear, I'm referring to the Hague convention cause in my local laws there is no explanation about what is considered an "expanding bullet" by the law, and as I understand many European countries have adopted this ruling by the Hague convention incorporated it into national laws. So, I presume, that this is the origin of the clause in my local law that prohibits the use of "expanding bullets" for self-defense.
As far as I understand, the Hague convention actually does not apply to police or armed citizens in regular situations - it applies only to "armed conflicts". So, if there would be no prohibition on "expanding bullets" in my local law, I'd ignore it completely. But because there is this clause, the statement in the clause from my local law may be a simplification of the clause by the Hague convention. So, I'm thinking to myself, if I would need to apply the Hague convention ruling regarding expanding bullets to self-defense situations would it also apply to wadcutters?
Below is a quote (as far as I know) from the Hauge convention:
"The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.” Declaration (IV,3) concerning Expanding Bullets. The Hague, 29 July 1899.
Although I know that wadcutters do not expand, at least nowhere near as much as hollow points do, they may be considered to "flatten easily in the human body". The example given is a "bullet with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core". Usual plain lead wadcutters, which is exactly what I've carried so far, of course, do not have any type of envelope or jacketing, so the example provided does not exactly match these wadcutter bullets. So one is left wondering, how can I know if these wadcutter bullets "flatten easily in the human body"?
First of all, by "flattening easily in human body" I presume they were thinking about bullets, that would noticeably increase in diameter after flattening in the human body, that is, in their own way "expand". Of course, ballistic gel is not a human body, but from what I've seen in ballistic gel tests I have not seen wadcutters flatten noticeably. Would they do so in a human body? I could only guess, as I don't think we have definite proof, do we?
So my question to everyone is this - would you argue that wadcutters are covered (under) the expanding bullets ban by the Hague convention or are they not?
On a practical note, I think if there will be enough information to suggest that they actually might be I'll probably stop carrying them, which would be a pity because I think they're the best choice from the point of terminal ballistics I can make in comparison to all other possibly over penetrating FMJ rounds.
I've been carrying wadcutters in my revolver as I'm from Europe and I'm not allowed to carry expanding (e.g. hollow point) bullets.
And although after purchasing my revolver years back I got told by the police (in just "words") that wadcutters are allowed to be carried, I'm now kind of starting to think about this subject again, as their prices have gone up to match the one for FMJ truncated cone type of rounds (so far they were around 15% cheaper).
This topic is not a question of which round/bullet is better for self-defense - a wadcutter or FMJ-TC, but rather about the Hague convention and "its ban" of "expanding and flattening" rounds. To be clear, I'm referring to the Hague convention cause in my local laws there is no explanation about what is considered an "expanding bullet" by the law, and as I understand many European countries have adopted this ruling by the Hague convention incorporated it into national laws. So, I presume, that this is the origin of the clause in my local law that prohibits the use of "expanding bullets" for self-defense.
As far as I understand, the Hague convention actually does not apply to police or armed citizens in regular situations - it applies only to "armed conflicts". So, if there would be no prohibition on "expanding bullets" in my local law, I'd ignore it completely. But because there is this clause, the statement in the clause from my local law may be a simplification of the clause by the Hague convention. So, I'm thinking to myself, if I would need to apply the Hague convention ruling regarding expanding bullets to self-defense situations would it also apply to wadcutters?
Below is a quote (as far as I know) from the Hauge convention:
"The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.” Declaration (IV,3) concerning Expanding Bullets. The Hague, 29 July 1899.
Although I know that wadcutters do not expand, at least nowhere near as much as hollow points do, they may be considered to "flatten easily in the human body". The example given is a "bullet with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core". Usual plain lead wadcutters, which is exactly what I've carried so far, of course, do not have any type of envelope or jacketing, so the example provided does not exactly match these wadcutter bullets. So one is left wondering, how can I know if these wadcutter bullets "flatten easily in the human body"?
First of all, by "flattening easily in human body" I presume they were thinking about bullets, that would noticeably increase in diameter after flattening in the human body, that is, in their own way "expand". Of course, ballistic gel is not a human body, but from what I've seen in ballistic gel tests I have not seen wadcutters flatten noticeably. Would they do so in a human body? I could only guess, as I don't think we have definite proof, do we?
So my question to everyone is this - would you argue that wadcutters are covered (under) the expanding bullets ban by the Hague convention or are they not?
On a practical note, I think if there will be enough information to suggest that they actually might be I'll probably stop carrying them, which would be a pity because I think they're the best choice from the point of terminal ballistics I can make in comparison to all other possibly over penetrating FMJ rounds.
