Why does OTM not violate the Hague convention but JHP does?

File: when-youre-hiding-in-the-jungle-and-you-see-u-s-6242284.png (125KB, 500x524px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 500x524px

>>35098321
bump

>>35098321

hollow points aren't banned just for having a hole in the tip. It's all about how they expand, flatten or fragment.

otm
doesn't really expand, flatten or fragment any differently to fmj

>le jhp is banned may may

it's not banned at all and militaries dont use it because militaries assumed theyd be fighting people who wear armor and dont give enough of a shit to keep stocks of multiple types of rounds just in case they fight unarmored personnel since AP and normal ball ammo still hurt people just fine

>>35098613

The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard enve- lope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.” Declaration (IV,3) concerning Expanding Bullets. The Hague, 29 July 1899.

shut up bitch

>>35098613
It's banned by The Hague convention.

>>35098613

you think they were that concerned in 1899 about that?

>>35098321
US never signed the Hague convention

>>35098321
Why would the US care?

>>35098321
and what would you do if we did use it.
Have the UN send a strongly worded letter?

>>35098321
Ask JAG. Probably because it is words trickery "flattens" vs "fragmentation"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdbkvJznmwU

>>35098321
The Hague originally banned "Dum Dum" bullets, and by extension, any bullet designed to expand. JHP bullets are designed with a hollow point for expansion, so they are not supposed to be used by signatories of the Hague Convention. OTM bullets have a hollow pocket in the tip, but this design feature is about increased accuracy, not expansion. OTM bullets perform similar to FMJ bullets in gel

>>35098321
Because hollow points were a thing when convention set out to ban supposedly inhumane ammunition, by the time OTM became a thing i think everyone came to their senses and realized the futility of trying to make war more humane. Also, the Hague doesnt mean shit, it also bans incendiary and cluster munitions which the US uses all the time. Through vietnam we used napalm and white phosphorus, however we don't use those in the same capacity unlike some (ehem russia)

>>35098905
>>35098950

technically the US is bound by it's rules even though it's not a signatory.

although:

>>35098957

nobody cares.

>>35098974
>OTM bullets perform similar to FMJ bullets in gel
Mk318 doesn't. It expands and fragments failing over cannelure

>>35099004
I mean, what are the yuropoors going to do? Invade the country that's keeping Putin from going through them like shit through a goose?

>>35098960
i don't see how your video relates to the hauge and projectiles, but LMAO

>>35099013
Ooh, gnarly. I was unaware. The OTM bullets that I reload with are all civilian market and none of them have a cannelure for crimping. I suppose it would not matter if the MK318 expands, since the people we are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan are not uniformed enemy combatants, we don't have to follow any of those Hague rules as far as I know

>>35098960
So what the hell is this jewish sorcery? Why can they not flip a switch on the sabbath?

>>35099030
It is illustration of what sort of jumps through hoops excuses american lawyers could produce to justify legality of something.

>>35099043
Even more at small velocities it is partially fragments partially expands
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNekOq9CBQA.

>>35099049
Because it's work. Christfags are supposed to do this too, the traditionalist Jews just take it more seriously.

Moote point, not an argument

OTM's HP is an artifact of the production process, not a hollow point with the purpose of expansion.

File: 330px-Express_bullets_1870.gif (14KB, 330x121px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 330x121px

>ITT people who don't know what the hague is referring to.

>>35098652
well we abandoned the geneva convention when GWOT started, so why not the hague convention too, i guess

>>35098651
And guess who aren't contracting parties? That's right, countries that matter like the USA.

>>35099004
>I dont know how international treaties work: the post.