Pretty much those dangerous rounds that are banned under the Geneva convetion or later treaties , those rounds that are dangerous, used by insurgents or illegial militant groups, rounds that were considered by government organizations and were then rejected due to their volatile nature, incredibly effective, and hard to counter rounds that were to destructive to issue to large scale military or para military forces.

Basiclly the things that no small arms experts wants to admit to.

(if I have broken any OPSEC regulation PM me, and it will be RESOLVED)

What do you mean exactly? Like dumdum rounds? I wonder often about the geneva convention in regard to this topic.

It´s prohibited in the Hague Convention of 1899, not the Geneva Convention. Projectiles that expand or flatten in the body are illegal in warfare.

Or causing unnecessary suffering etc. I mean its all a bit ridiculous isnt it? 5.56 is clearly intended to wound.

Originally Posted by 42RM

It´s prohibited in the Hague Convention of 1899, not the Geneva Convention. Projectiles that expand or flatten in the body are illegal in warfare.

I stand corrected, thank you for the information.

Also exploding rounds of ammunition to are banned for use against human beings.

We need to drop this whole crap and go to good expanding rounds and even some that go pop when they hit something. Nothing says drop your weapon and stop firing at my squad like the guy next to you having a 5.56x45mm hit him in the gut and then scream in pain as the round burns due to it being an incendiary. Also nothing says stop firing at my squad like a JDAM being dropped by God in a B-52 in high orbit.

A guy in my section was telling me at training on the weekend that he nearly got charged by his officer for throwing a trip flare at an enemy. It got me thinking about this, dam stupid rules aye.

Oh the possibilities for news media carnage if a journalist saw that one.

An interesting question would be how this impacts ammunition deployment.

I guess it makes some degree of tactical sense to use a cartridge designed to wound rather than kill.A dead soldier removes one man fron the enemy ranks.A wounded soldier removes him,1 or 2 of his buddies to move him to safety and a ties up a couple of riflemen to lay down covering fire for the move.It also ties up a medic to stabilize him,a radio operator and frequencies to call for a medivac,and the medivac vehicle is 1 more vehicle not being used as a weapons platform.That being said,NATO rally needs a better cartridge than 5.56x45mm.Its basically just a high powered .22.The M855 SS109 green tip round we've been using for a while now tends to just punch a narrow little through and through wound channel without tumbling inside the target.That tumbling action is the onlt thing that makes that round feasable as a military cartridge.I need point no further than the Blackhawk down incident to show the deficiencies of this round but I've also heard first hand accounts of the same thing happening in Iraq and Afghanistan.We clearly need something better and soon.We are basically snubbing our men and women in the miltary,who we send into harms way to protect our country and way of life.Sad.

The U.S Army Judge Advocate General's office ( the Army's lawyers) has ruled that expanding hollow point projectiles can be used against terrorists. They are classed as non-state actors who are not part of the armed forces of any recognized state. The Hague Convention therefore does not apply.They are essentially, criminals and it's okay to shoot them with the nasty bullets. That means that in Afghanistan it's okay and in Iraq - maybe, depends on who you are shooting. I suppose you will have to ask for I.D. before you shoot him. Although how a hollow point bullet is supposed to be worse than a cluster bomb is beyond me.