Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Should the rules of war change

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by duckfoot, Mar 15, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. duckfoot

    duckfoot member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    558
    Location:
    behind you, NC
    "The greatest gift that you can give a grunt in Iraq is a steel plated cup and 5.56 hollow points." This came from a old friend of mine that transferred from the west coast to north Carolina and says that for those that he fought with in the southern part of Iraq this statement would hold true. He was of the opinion that as soon as the posture of our military in Iraq changed from a advancing/capture one to a policing one that issuing hollow point ammo would have made a difference in dealing with bad guys intent of blowing his ba!!s off. But after getting a few in him some other things started coming out. Being a grunt platoon sergeant, his guys told him that if they didn't put 5 to 8 rounds into a BG that the BG was prone to pop off a few more rounds before kicking off. This also applied to the 9mm fmj also "I drilled him 3 times and that FU*%ER didn't realize it as he raised that AK47 at me." "Should have issued my guys either JHP's or M16's with barrels with a 1 in 14 twist rate."

    On the whole he was a bit grumpy about the situation of working with what he was issued. (remeber we were a bit loaded at this point)

    So, the question is:

    Should the rules of war apply to policing actions? and if not, should hollow point ammo be used?

    I'll hold my anwser off a bit.
     
  2. Mulliga

    Mulliga Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,251
    Location:
    Gainesville, Florida
    The war in Iraq, no matter what one thinks of it, was hardly a "police action." In my mind, police action is what happened in Haiti recently, not wars like Iraq or Korea (though in Iraq we overpowered the Iraqis so badly it's not even funny - better training, better equipment, better morale).

    The war still goes on to this day.

    Hollowpoint 5.56mm might not make too much difference at <100 yards, but JHP 9mm will obviously be a huge improvement. Time to rewrite "international law" once again. ;)
     
  3. Travis McGee

    Travis McGee Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,790
    Location:
    NE Florida
    The M-193 Nato standard 5.56mm ammo, when fired out of short fast twist barrels, has been notorious as a non-manstopper. Its reputation is that it leaves clean "ice pick" wounds. The old 55 grain ammo out of a longer slow twist barrel had far better terminal effects.

    One "field expedient" that helps stopping power, if not accuracy, is to clip the front tip off of some ammo, and load them every other round in your first magazine. The clipped bullets are unstable and will have better tumbling action when striking the enemy. I would not ask the JAGs for thier opinion on "field expedient" ammo improvements, I'd just do it.

    [​IMG]
     
  4. c_yeager

    c_yeager Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,479
    Location:
    Seattle
    Actually i bet those hollowpoints would be traded in by the troops the second the novelty factor wore off. Penetration has ALWAYS been key to ammunition development. Who cares how effective your bullet is if it cant even get to the guy your trying to shoot?

    Faced with a choice of a devistating bullet that will not even injure your target even 1% of the time and a bullet that is LESS devistating but WILL do significant damage to your target EVERY time which one do you pick?
     
  5. mondocomputerman

    mondocomputerman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    540
    Location:
    Kansas City
    I think all's fair in love and war. Give em' hollowpoints.
     
  6. OEF_VET

    OEF_VET Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,062
    Location:
    Murfreesboro, TN
    I'm of the opinion that hollowpoints should be legal. What's the humane difference between shooting someone with a FMJ round, versus a HP one? Sometimes rules need to be updated as the times and attitudes change. This war is a far cry different than the wars of the 19th century and earlier.

    Frank
     
  7. MrMurphy

    MrMurphy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    Messages:
    1,814
    Location:
    Texas
    The M855 is current issue and the one that does the "icepick" shots. The M193 was issue up till the 80s and was used in Vietnam. Out of 20" or even 16" barrel the M193 doesn't have much of a problem dropping people.
     
  8. TheLastBoyScout

    TheLastBoyScout Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    710
    Location:
    SE PA/ El Cid (SC)
    No changes in int'l law should be necessary in any case. IIRC, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the rest of the Axis of Evil never signed on to most of the applicable treaties, therefore the treaties don't apply to us when we fight them.
     
  9. duckfoot

    duckfoot member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    558
    Location:
    behind you, NC
    I'm with scout on this one. Also I a firm believer in using the right tool for the job, if not JHP then some good 55gr soft points or varmint tips out of a 1in10 twist 20" barrel.

    that's just my two cents

    Penetration is good, then again a .30 cal FMJ can do both jobs better then .22 cal rounds. Again the right tool for the job. I'm not saying that the US should switch to .30 cal ammo. The 5.56 can get the job done if loaded right, but why do we have the M14DM and the M240Gulf in the grunt line up. Because they are the right tools for the job sometimes.
     
  10. FNFiveSeven

    FNFiveSeven Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    538
    While I agree that HP's (hell, poisoned HP's for all I care) should be used in war, I am really getting tired of the military blaming their poor training and markesmanship on their gear/ammunition. It reminds me of the blame game the FBI played when they dropped the 9mm... only to adopt the 10mm... which was too much for their "elite" ranks... :rolleyes:

    If you hit someone in the right place with either 9mm or .223, they'll go down. However, if you graze them on the ouside of the waist with a .460 Weatherby, they're going to keep coming. IT"S NOT A PROBLEM WITH THE AMMUNITION YOU IDIOTS, the problem is WITH YOU! Get some training, hit 'em in the center of the chest or the head, and stop whining.

    "I drilled him 3 times and that FU*%ER didn't realize it as he raised that AK47 at me."

    The above statement is probably complete crap. This guy needs to be slapped in the face and instructed that hitting the BG right once is a lot more effective than missing him 3 times.

    "Should have issued my guys... M16's with barrels with a 1 in 14 twist rate."

    This statement is DEFINITELY crap. A 1/14 twist barrel stabilizes the 55 grain bullet so weakly that it tumbles mid-air in cold climates. The 62 grain bullet will tumble mid air in ALL climates with a 1/14 twist. Then again, based on the shooting abilities of his men, it probably wouldn't make a difference anyway. :rolleyes: The point here is, the rumor that a lower twist rate in the .223 somehow destabilizes the bullet enough to cause excessive "tumbling" and trauma to the target is one of the biggest loads of BS ever inflicted on the shooting public. Barrel twists are designed to stabilize bullets IN AIR, and human flesh is orders of magnitude denser than air. Even a 1/1 twist barrel wouldn't come close to stabilizing a bullet as it passes through a body... ALL BULLETS are unstable when passing through non-gaseous material above 2000 fps. All these military wanna-be physicists and weekend engineers need to stop inflicting their BS on the rest of us... I for one am tired of hearing it.
     
  11. fix

    fix Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,592
    Location:
    Wonderful Northeast Georgia
    :scrutiny:

    Mmmmmkay...
     
  12. entropy

    entropy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    4,263
    Location:
    G_d's Country, WI
    The Hague Accords and the Geneva Convention agreements are only valid if all governments involved are signatories. Since Saddam's regime and the current Iraqi govt. cannot have been signatories, there is no legal requirement for US troops to only use ball ammo. This holds true were the US battling most of the worlds armies, since very few of the present governments exsisted before 1905 and 1936, respectively. It certainly does not bind us when engaging terrorists and/or guerillas.
    In this day and age of napalm and CBU's, the point is moot, IMO.:evil:
     
  13. DMK

    DMK Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,797
    Location:
    Over the hills and far, far away
    IMO, the M193 would probably work a lot better than the M855 in the M16 A2, A3 and A4s especially now that DMRs with .308s are more widespread.

    I think the biggest problem they are having now is the little M4s with 14.5" barrels that are becoming in vogue.

    Wasn't there some kind of problem with M193 in the SAWs also?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page