Why Everyone Needs An AR-15

[HARK!]

Frankford Arsenal conducted an investigation of bullet configuration in 1963 in order to determine the best design for achieving aerodynamic stability with maximum lethality.

The study concluded that “taking into account the greater lethality of the improvements in accuracy and rate of fire in this weapon since overall squad kill potential

How does that fulfill you kinder gentler theory about the purpose of the FMJ?

Are you familiar with the purpose of the design of the M1911?

 

[ARBITER01]

I'm happy with my AK-47.

I recently purchased a Yugo M-76 that fires 8mm, so I have choices.

 

[JosephZ]

Did you read that?

Do you understand what it is talking about?

That is not a lead round nose bullet.

You are moving the goalposts. Below is your original comment.

It's my understanding that the military uses FMJ because that way the bullet will pass through an enemy soldier, and possibly wound one or two more enemies. It takes two to carry a wounded soldier off the field; so for every soldier that is wounded, three are taken off the field.

Another member resonded with "The military uses FMJ because it's against the Hague Convention to use expanding or dum-dum rounds in war."

To which you responded:

You've presented misinformation.

1.) The US abstained from signing that part of the agreement.
2.) There are many non expanding rounds, that are not FMJ.

I then responded with:

The US chose to use FMJ ammunition because of military alliances with nations that are signatories to the Hague Convention.

And your response:

Not according to the firearms, and military, historians, that I've spoken to. Do you have any credible proof of this, to back that assertion?

I then provided information that the firearms, military and historians that told you otherwise were incorrect:

Unnecessary Suffering. Antipersonnel weapons are designed to kill or disable enemy combatants and are lawful notwithstanding the death, pain, and suffering they inflict. Weapons that are designed to cause unnecessary suffering or superfluous injury are, however, prohibited because the degree of pain or injury, or the certainty of death, they produce is needlessly or clearly disproportionate to the military advantage to be gained by their use. Poisoned projectiles and dum-dum bullets fall into this category, because there is little military advantage to be gained by ensuring the death of wounded personnel through poisoning or the expanding effect of soft-nosed or unjacketed lead ammunition.

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA221855.pdf


In addition to the basic prohibition on unnecessary suffering contained in Art. 23e of the 1907 Hague IV, one other treaty is germane to this review. The Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets of 29 July 1899 prohibits the use in international armed conflict:

. . 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.""

The U.S. is not a party to this treaty, but U.S. officials over the years have taken the position that the armed forces of the U.S. will adhere to its terms to the extent that its application is consistent with the object and purpose of Art. 23e of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, quoted above.

 

[HARK!]

I'm happy with my AK-47.

AKs are nice. I don't want to get into an AK VS AR debate. Both are fine firearms. Both have advantages over the other.

 

[HARK!]

You are moving the goalposts.

No I'm not. The lead round nose bullet is not a FMJ; and it is not a hollow point.

The FMJ will pass through the target more readily than a lead round nose; but it was not the lead round nose that was banned at the Hague.

You seem to be missing that point. No pun intended.

 

[JosephZ]

No I'm not. The lead round nose bullet is not a FMJ; and it is not a hollow point.

I know this, but this is what you said:

It's my understanding that the military uses FMJ because that way the bullet will pass through an enemy soldier, and possibly wound one or two more enemies. It takes two to carry a wounded soldier off the field; so for every soldier that is wounded, three are taken off the field.

The above is not true. The reason is because it's against the Hague Convention to use expanding or dum-dum rounds in war.

 

[JosephZ]

Are you familiar with the purpose of the design of the M1911?

Yes, I qualified with and was issued one when I was in the Army. I'm also a missionary in Bangsamoro, so I'm very familiar with its history., but we were talking about FMJ ammunition and why the military uses it. I will add that the US military used FMJ rounds in the M1911 in modern times.

 

[HARK!]

designed to kill or disable enemy combatants and are lawful notwithstanding the death, pain, and suffering they inflict. Weapons that are designed to cause unnecessary suffering or superfluous injury

I want to pay close attention to the wording here, especially this: "designed to cause unnecessary suffering or superfluous injury"

What is is saying is that death might be the result of the bullet. Injury might be a result of the bullet; But death but death and unnecessary injury is not the objective. The objective is to take the enemy out of the battle alive, with the least amount of injury.

Hollow points are more deadly. They kill more easily; and they kill more quickly. When you're dead; you feel no suffering.

The objective is to wound, not kill...well except for these new policies under the Biden Administration.

 

[HARK!]

The above is not true. The reason is because it's against the Hague Convention to use expanding or dum-dum rounds in war.

Round nose are not dum dum rounds.

 

[HARK!]

Yes, I qualified with and was issued one when I was in the Army. I'm also a missionary in Bangsamoro, so I'm very familiar with its history., but we were talking about FMJ ammunition and why the military uses it. I will add that the US military used FMJ rounds in the M1911.

Good! Why don't you explain to the class why it was developed and why it was effective in its' intended purpose.

 

[JosephZ]

Round nose are not dum dum rounds.

I didn't say they were.

 

[HARK!]

I didn't say they were.

Then why do you bring up the dum dum round argument; when it only applies to dum dum rounds?

 

[HARK!]

I was in the Army.

Do you know which firearm that the Army found most effective during the Vietnam War?

I'll give you a hint. It had far more stopping power than the M1911; but it's projectiles did not come with a FMJ.

 

[JosephZ]

The objective is to wound, not kill.

The objective is to neutralize the enemy, and that requires a soldier to shoot to kill. Shooting at an enemy combatant with the intent to only wound can get yourself or members of your unit killed.

 

[JosephZ]

Then why do you bring up the dum dum round argument; when it only applies to dum dum rounds?

I didn't, that's how it's written in the Hague Convention.

 

[HARK!]

The objective is to neutralize the enemy, and that requires a soldier to shoot to kill. Shooting at an enemy combatant with the intent to only wound can get yourself or members of your unit killed.

FMJs are far less effective at killing than hollow points. Again, the dead feel no pain.

 

[HARK!]

I didn't, that's how it's written in the Hague Convention.

The Hague didn't say FMJ only; so the argument is somewhat irrelevant.

The most effective firearm used during the Vietnam war was not loaded with FMJs.

 

[JosephZ]

FMJs are far less effective at killing than hollow points.

This depends on who's doing the shooting and where the victim is hit.

 

[JosephZ]

The Hague didn't say FMJ only; so the argument is somewhat irrelevant.

It doesn't have to use the phrase FMJ, but the reason the US military uses FMJ ammunition is to comply with the Hague Convention.

 

[HARK!]

This depends on who's doing the shooting and where the victim is hit.

It has nothing to do with who is shooting. Where they are hit can make a difference; but in the end it comes down to only three factors.

1.) The mass of the object.
2.) The velocity of the object.

Factors 1, and 2, give us the kinetic energy of the object.

3.) How much of that kinetic energy is absorbed by the target.

FMJs pass through the target more easily than other rounds; so less of their kinetic energy is absorbed by the target.