>expanding bullets are banned for warfare because they're

File: JUST.jpg (104KB, 532x532px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 532x532px

>>33134765
Holy shit

I have often wondered this myself.

Politicians are retarded, so it doesn't really surprise me. I want there to be some conspiracy but its just idiocy.

File: 1435337542695.jpg (62KB, 736x1041px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 736x1041px

>>33134765
i think the deal is they want to mitigate death, and non expanding bullets do not kill as often as expanding bullets.

A simple observation?

>>33134765
It's so the doctors don't have do dig fragments out

I think it's because the objective in war is to neutralize the threat. Neutralize meaning to simply make them incapable of fighting. Not necessarily kill them. That's just how I always thought of it.

>>33134886
Stop spouting this meme, its wrong, its asanine, and its considered torture to shoot someone without intent to kill.

Digging 47 lead fragments out of a sucking chest wound is horror, for everyone involved. You want the human dead. But you dont want them to die a slow agonizing death in war as he sits on bed slowly bleeding from the inside out. Remember that just because you want hem dead, doesnt meant their family and military wants them dead. Their doctors dont want them to die, we want them to die.

There is no casevac for a fucking deer. No 13 hour surgeries, you want it to die and there is nothing on the other end trying to save it, its a humane kill because it wont bleed for 13 hours if you dont instakill it. Vs hey you shot steve in the arm, steve needs medical assistance. But should be fine. Oh wait the bullet exploded leaving lead everywhere, oh look steve died on an operating table while out of a combat zone unarmed and unable to defend himself from the fucking septic shock.

File: 1487061698341.png (90KB, 383x505px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 383x505px

>>33134811

yeah

tfw some states ban ar-15 cuz muh super scary salt rifle
tfw my state bans ar-15 for deer hunting because small caliber

>>33134853
If you don't want to kill something then why are you shooting bullets at it?

File: IMG_8132.jpg (66KB, 768x768px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 768x768px

>>33135001
Because if a wounded soldier is out of the fight, and at least one or two other soldiers have to drop out of the fight to handle the wounded one, then now you have 3 less priorities to shoot first.

Expanding handgun ammunition is actually far less likely to KILL a human being. FMJ is much better for causing lethal wounds. Hollow points are better at putting things down faster.

Imagine being hit in the chest with a sledgehammer with a railroad spike on it that pent rates 6-8 inches into you.
Imagine being pierced with a tiny metal rod.

One will put you on your ass, the other will make you bleed to death much later.

When you shoot an attacker, you are not shooting to kill, you are shooting to stop.

>>33134811
Expanding bullets probably weren't well understood at the time, and misconceptions probably led them to believe the person shot suffered more while not being any more lethal than conventional bullets.

>>33135001
The geneva conventions or hauge ones which ever it is, is designed at lowering actual deaths in war.

They're not designed to give people the most "effective" methods of killing.

There are very real costs to both the victor and loser if the victor kills 50% of the losers fighting age men.

>>33134973
but don't modern FMJ fragment more than most hollow or soft point bullets?

I"m thinking of 303 brit and 5.56 in particular

>blowing someone's head up with a .50 cal is fine but using a toxin that kills them immediately isnt

>>33134973
And the cost of fixing the guy up is greater then the cost of digging a hole and folding a flag.

>>33134853
why would you want to mitigate death in war?

>>33135538
Wasn't there something about indiscriminate killing? You have to make sure that only your target dies and not some random bystander.

Bullet: Pew -> Thud
You either hit your target or you miss. That shot CAN hit a bystander but the chance is pretty low.

Toxin (most likely gaseous): release the gas!
You now have a deadly cloud moving about without having a way to control it.

It's the same reason why AP mines are banned. It's also the same reason why fragmentation bombs are "banned" (Come on USA and Russia, you don'T want those used against you. Do keep a stockpile in case the other one starts using them first [just like nukes] but don't use them like you'd do other toys).

>>33135088
Absolutely retarded

>>33135055
So is this REALLY true, or is this just fuddlore? I always got fed this line by my uncle and my father when I was underageb&, but nowadays I'm not sure if they had a clue what they were talking about.

>Warfare has rule
It is only there to weed out the ones who are retarded enough to follow them

>>33137906
Edgy.
Guess you'd really like to be gassed, then? Or shot by a bunch of people you thought were dead? Or just outright tortured in a prison camp for months on end?

>>33137936
People go war to win, limp dick, not cater to your liking

File: 4HgSpk3.jpg (230KB, 598x792px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 598x792px

>>33137961

>>33134765
Don't forget the military isn't allowed to use hollow points but all cops now carry hollow points.