Hollow point ammunition was used to kill suspected suicide bomber.

Status
Not open for further replies.

jsalcedo

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Messages
3,683
The Brazilian man shot dead by police in the mistaken belief that he was a suicide bomber was killed with a type of bullet banned in warfare under international convention, The Daily Telegraph has learned.

The firing of hollow point ammunition into the head of Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, is believed to be the first use of the bullets by British police.


Hollow-point bullets: used at the discretion of police chiefs
It will re-ignite controversy around the shooting, at Stockwell Underground station, south London, on July 22.

Modern hollow point bullets are descendants of the expanding "dum dum" ammunition created by the British in an arsenal of the same name near Calcutta, in India, at the end of the 19th century and outlawed under the Hague Declaration of 1899.

The bullets, which expand and splinter on impact, were available to officers taking part in Operation Kratos, the national police drive against suspected suicide bombers which has been described as a "shoot to kill" policy.

Their issue was sanctioned after research suggested that they were an effective close-quarters ammunition for use against someone about to trigger a suicide bomb.

It is believed the decision was influenced by the tactics used by air marshals on passenger jets - where such bullets are designed to splinter in the body and not burst the fuselage. They have been assessed as posing less risk to people around the suicide bomber than conventional bullets but the effect on victims is devastating.


Jean Charles de Menezes
Like the overall Kratos policy, the decision to make dum dum-style bullets available was taken in secret. However, it is understood that the Home Office became aware three years ago that police were considering their use.

Negotiations on possible national guidance are understood to have been inconclusive and the choice of ammunition appears to be at the discretion of police chiefs, not the Home Secretary.

There is no legal prohibition on police use of such ammunition. The Home Office confirmed last night that "chief officers may use whatever ammunition they consider appropriate to meet their operational needs".

It is understood from security sources that hollow point bullets are still available as an option to police firearms teams in Kratos-type cases.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission is investigating the shooting during which seven bullets were fired into Mr de Menezes's head and one into his shoulder.

A number of officers, including members of the firearms and surveillance teams and the Scotland Yard commander who ran the operation, Cressida Dick, have been issued with notices that they are subject to inquiries by the IPCC.


http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/11/16/nmenez16.xml
 
Isnt it a bigger deal that they tackled an innocent man and then shot him in the head when he was completely subdued? You still die from a FMJ in the brain.

This seems like a typical cloud of hot air spewed by someone who knows nothing about firearms or terminal ballistics.
 
They fired seven bullets into his head after he was subdued?


That is an execution
 
" splinter in the body" ? No ,they are made to expand but hold together.
 
Anyone else find it amusing that it is perfectly acceptable to excecute law adibing legal residents right on the streets of your nation but you had better be sure to do it with FMJ?
 
They have been assessed as posing less risk to people around the suicide bomber than conventional bullets but the effect on victims is devastating.

LMAO, isn't 'devastating' what you WANT if you have to shoot somebody!?
 
It bothers me more that the author is trying to imply that the police were in the wrong, because they were using something banned under the Hauge Declaration.

A Declaration which does not pertain to police at all, but to militaries while fighting wars.
 
the effect on victims is devastating.
Well ... not always devastating, but that's the design goal.

What about the need to get a bomber to stop, and stop right now before they have an opportunity to detonate whatever twisted crap they're carrying do these journalists not understand?

-
 
The British general public have no functional knowledge when it comes to this subject. It makes sense that the media would capitalize on this in order to profit more from this man's death.
 
The British general public have no functional knowledge when it comes to this subject.

You might as well add "British media" at the same time. There is so much misinformation and disinformation in that article that it makes my head hurt. The whole concept of "research" seems to be missing here!

Gregg
 
It is believed the decision was influenced by the tactics used by air marshals on passenger jets - where such bullets are designed to splinter in the body and not burst the fuselage.

Not this crap again. The fuselage of a jet liner is so thin that it doesn't particularly matter what goes through it, it's gonna punch a hole. Fortunately that doesn't matter because the size of the hole compared to the volume of the plane is absolutely tiny. You'll start leaking air, but it won't cause some kind of catastrophic depressurization.
 
The Brazilian man shot dead by police in the mistaken belief that he was a suicide bomber was killed with a type of bullet banned in warfare under international convention, The Daily Telegraph has learned.


[Archie Bunker voice] Would they have been happier if they'd pushed him from a window? [/Archie Bunker voice].... :banghead:
 
With respect to the "expand and splinter" thing, combined with the comment about air marshals and such, I think they're just confusing/combining Frangible and Hollowpoint ammunition.

~GnSx
 
Why don't militaries use HPs and SPs? (Actually, many do, AFAIK.)

I mean, it's war. You can let loose on a group of lightly-armed soldiers with a full-auto grenade launcher, and that's okay. You can drop a daisy cutter into a camp, and that's no war crime.

But God forbid you should shoot a couple of common hunting rounds at an adversary that's actively trying to kill you.

It reminds me of a quote from Apocalypse Now: "We cut 'em in half with a machine gun and give 'em a Band-Aid. It was a lie. And the more I saw them, the more I hated lies."
 
Why does the UK media refer to hollowpoints as "Dum Dum"? Dumdum arsenal bullets were soft points, no?

They meant DumbDumb, and they were projecting.:)

Somehow niggling over the question of what kind of ammo was used when there are huge issues about survival in the face of extremists and also protecting civil liberties seems absurd in the extreme--and unfortunately, today, very British.
 
jsalcedo said:
They fired seven bullets into his head after he was subdued?

Yup. He was pinned to the ground by several officers and shot repeatedly in the head.

Counter-terrorism is a serious business, but this case inparticular shows us why police powers need to be kept in check even in times of increased danger.

If that guy had been a terrorist carrying a bomb, those officers would be heros.
 
Janitor said:
Well ... not always devastating, but that's the design goal.

What about the need to get a bomber to stop, and stop right now before they have an opportunity to detonate whatever twisted crap they're carrying do these journalists not understand?

-

Umm, that's when tazers and stun-guns work best. Especially when you are lieing on top of them. And if they are too far away to use a tazer, then for pete's sake use a rifle.
 
dasmi said:
ArmedBear,
Because of the Hague Convention of 1899.
I don't think the US ever signed it, by the way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Conventions_(1899_and_1907)

Pardon my phrasing. I knew the history; I just don't buy the current application of the Hague Convention. It makes no sense. Hell, in 1899, some militaries were still using single-shot breechloaders, though the big players were using bolt guns with a few extra shots in the magazine. Cavalry still meant horses and swords.

15 years later, warfare looked quite a bit different, of course. In WW I it was okay to gas people, spray them with machine guns, blast them with shrapnel, bomb them from planes (with no pilot parachutes, BTW), and crush them with tanks. But your rifle had to be loaded with Ball rounds.

It was and remains a very cynical nod to the Hague Convention, but it's lip service that kills our troops.
 
i think its hilarious that it had to be a 'secret' that they use ammunitation safer to innocent bystanders and more effective on their intended targets.
 
Sigh. It boggles my mind that ink was even wasted on this story.


GEE, IF ONLY THEY HAD HUMANELY SHOT THE GUY TO DEATH WITH FMJ TO THE HEAD INSTEAD OF DOING IT WITH CRUEL HOLLOWPOINTS!

:banghead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top