FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,561 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Didn't know where to put this, so I guess here works.


BREAKING: U.S. Army Switching to Hollow Point Ammunition - The Truth About Guns


BREAKING: U.S. Army Switching to Hollow Point Ammunition


Sources tell TTAG that the United States Army is switching from ball to hollow-point ammunition for its next generation handgun. The Army dropped the bombshell yesterday at the Modular Handgun System Industry Day in Picatinny, New Jersey. The event was held as part of the Army’s procurement process to replace the Beretta M9 handgun and the ammunition used for the gun. After making the announcement, an Army lawyer mounted the stage to mount a defense for the switch hollow-points . . .


The U.S. did not agree to a ban on expanding ammo by international treaty. And the the Army’s prepared to defend the decision in the court of international law and opinion. His core argument: countries that will denounce the use of hollow-point use the hollow points for their police forces.


The Army said it will rely on FBI data to evaluate bids for the new ammunition. It also said that it knows it will get heat for the move, but claimed the administration supported the change at the highest levels at the Department of Defense. In other words, this is as close to a done deal as it can get without a signed contract.


The question is: what about rifle ammo? We’re looking into it. Watch this space.

Interesting, as I did not expect this. Step in the right direction, especially if they choose to stick with 9mm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
You can't beat a 9mm with some CorBon hollow points for the combination of "knock down power" and magazine capacity. 9mm is supersonic fast and that speed is what translates to force on target.

You can't beat .45 auto for subsonic suppressed power on target. 9mm, .40 and most other pistol calibers become very anemic when loaded to subsonic velocities. Most .45 is loaded just below or just above the ~1050-1080 fps subsonic rule of thumb. It is what makes the Kriss Vector so awesome!

But for general issue, the 9mm verses .45 argument is pretty much the same old tired 5.56 verses .308 argument where for our average military troop the 5.56 is the better choice because it is easier to shoot accurately for people who can't shoot. Is lighter to carry more rounds and smaller to make logistics and resupply more efficient. Our troops do not fight alone, they are supported by others in their unit, other units, artillery, close air support, drone strikes, armor and mechanized vehicles and other fire support that doesn't come to mind at the moment. 5.56 is good enough for the average troop when the additional fire support is factored in. That does not make 5.56 a good choice for smaller groups who are not so well supported, which is why our Special Forces have precision bolt guns, Scar H's and other non-standard issue weapons at their disposal.

Which begs the question, why does the average supply sergeant, truck driver or aircraft mechanic need a .45 instead of a 9mm with some really good hollow point ammo? This makes no sense to me. It would make more sense to make the Scar H the standard issue rifle and replace all the M4's with it than to waste money on upgrading the standard issue side arm to .45 when hollow point 9mm is a better all around solution. Think about it, what is the percentage that the side arm is actually used to engage the enemy?

Now, if we are sticking with ball ammo, the .45 beats a 9mm every time and switching to .45 makes sense.

But hollow points level the playing field and if we switch to them then the .45 sidearm is a total waste of money in my not so humble opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,109 Posts
Interesting.

Thanks for posting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,429 Posts
I always thought hollow point/expanding projectiles were prohibited under the Geneva Convention, but evidently I thought wrong.

Still, terrorists don't follow the Geneva Convention - why should we when fighting them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,791 Posts
I always thought hollow point/expanding projectiles were prohibited under the Geneva Convention, but evidently I thought wrong.

Still, terrorists don't follow the Geneva Convention - why should we when fighting them?
I did too, apparently we never agreed to that requirement. I never understood the idea of 'nice' bullets, but I feel like this is going to have 'blow back' for our soldiers.

The U.S. did not agree to a ban on expanding ammo by international treaty. And the the Army’s prepared to defend the decision in the court of international law and opinion. His core argument: countries that will denounce the use of hollow-point use the hollow points for their police forces.

If aliens came to earth they would be amazed, people need to be killed by nice bullets, killing them with a bomb is cool, but not explosive bullets. Chemicals and poison gas are outlawed unless a person is sentenced to death. No wonder they stop by. :redface:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
I always thought hollow point/expanding projectiles were prohibited under the Geneva Convention, but evidently I thought wrong.

Still, terrorists don't follow the Geneva Convention - why should we when fighting them?
They are prohibited. OTM rifle rounds are an exception on a technicality. Will be interesting to see how it plays out with handgun ammunition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
I thought the army came to terms with Beretta and will be sticking with the Gen 3 M9.

In any event, shot placement is more important than a round's "knockdown power" which for common handgun rounds doesn't really exist. Being able to rapidly put four rounds into a fist-sized group will win more gunfights than standing back and shooting like Dirty Harry.

I've not touched the new M9, but it's available to civvies/LE and supposed to be quite good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,561 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I thought the army came to terms with Beretta and will be sticking with the Gen 3 M9.
Not sure where you got that idea. Beretta tried to appease the Army, and the Army pretty quickly told 'em to go pound sand, they weren't interested.

In any event, shot placement is more important than a round's "knockdown power" which for common handgun rounds doesn't really exist. Being able to rapidly put four rounds into a fist-sized group will win more gunfights than standing back and shooting like Dirty Harry.
Doing critical damage is the key, whether that is though hitting the vitals directly, or creating a larger wound that induces blood loss, shock, etc. Shot placement sounds all well and good, but it's really hard to guarantee perfect shot placement during combat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
I hope we use deforming rifle bullets as standard. We can 2000lb bomb on your house but can't use expanding rifle rounds?


Hauge Convention of 1899

Laws of War :
Declaration on the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body; July 29, 1899
The Undersigned, Plenipotentiaries of the Powers represented at the International Peace Conference at The Hague, duly authorized to that effect by their Governments,
Inspired by the sentiments which found expression in the Declaration of St. Petersburg of the 29th November (11th December), 1868,
Declare as follows:
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 envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions.
The present Declaration is only binding for the Contracting Powers in the case of a war between two or more of them.
It shall cease to be binding from the time when, in a war between the Contracting Parties, one of the belligerents is joined by a non-Contracting Power.
The present Declaration shall be ratified as soon as possible.
The ratification shall be deposited at The Hague.
A proces-verbal shall be drawn up on the receipt of each ratification, a copy of which, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to all the Contracting Powers.
The non-Signatory Powers may adhere to the present Declaration. For this purpose they must make their adhesion known to the Contracting Powers by means of a written notification addressed to the Netherlands Government, and by it communicated to all the other Contracting Powers.
In the event of one of the High Contracting Parties denouncing the present Declaration, such denunciation shall not take effect until a year after the notification made in writing to the Netherlands Government, and forthwith communicated by it to all the other Contracting Powers.
This denunciation shall only affect the notifying Power.
In faith of which the Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Declaration, and have affixed their seals thereto.
Done at The Hague the 29th July, 1899, in a single copy, which shall be kept in the archives of the Netherlands Government, and of which copies, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to the Contracting Powers.
[Signatures]
Source:
The Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907
A Series of Lectures Delivered before the Johns Hopkins University in the Year 1908
By James Brown Scott
Technical delegate of the United States to the Second Peace Conference at the Hague
In two Volumes
Volume II - Documents
Baltimore, MD : The Johns Hopkins Press, 1909.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,113 Posts
falcon03 correctly states, it is the Hague Convention not the commonly yet incorrectly referred to Geneva Convention and the US has never been signatory to the entire declaration. I personally think this is a grand idea and hope the Pentagon and DOJ legal eagles are prepared to answer to NATO and the UN, there will be legal challenges from both entities I'm certain. Ultimately we did not sign therefore we cannot be held subject to the components and instruments thereof, such is the reality of international law. I'd be interested in what cartridge, caliber and bullet they choose. At least pilots will be better protected in the future, they cost us an enormous amount of money in training yet are provided with a Sig Sauer M11-A1 loaded with 9mm 124gr round ball, yay! Gimme some more of that please! :icon_wtf:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Donnie

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,010 Posts
No, no, no,,,,,,,this will never fly. It goes against our progressive view of the "kinder killing projectile" that we switched to back in the 1980's. For humanity's sake, this madness has to be stopped immediately.

I will not tolerate a more lethal projectile. It is inhumane. They are lethal enough as it is and making them more deadlier is just a way for giant capitalistic conglomerates to make money off of the death of the less fortunate by allowing this killer projectile to be used. The Government should be ashamed of itself for allowing this. I am sure that there is a provision in Obamacare that outlaws this. You wait and see, the liberals and progressives will never allow this to happen. It is clearly a violation of the US Constitution on the use of cruel and unusual punishment. Surely the ACLU has filed suit already in support of the Taliban and ISIS and other terrorist around the world who should be incensed that the US Government is even considering this. Monsters!

What has this country come to????:p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,639 Posts
I was of the understanding that we, the U.S., only followed the 1899 Hague convention as a gentleman's agreement with other nations and just as Falcon already said, we never formally ratified it.
We continued this gentleman's agreement into the League of Nations years and then also into the UN years.

I believe the spirit of The Hague was to prevent unnecessary pain and suffering that expanding bullets were then thought to have caused, but hollow points properly placed kill very quickly with less pain and suffering. So The Hague is not entirely correct in its effort to ban expanding projectiles.

Then there are certain 5.56 NATO rounds that are ball round as per The Hague requirements. They pitch/yaw inside the target as part of its terminal ballistics and cause even more massive wounding.
They are completely legal as per strict wording of The Hague convention, but they b!tch slap the hell out of what the Hage Convention was trying to accomplish.

Damn, I didn't know hippie liberal morons existed in the 19th century
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
848 Posts
HSec has to justify the massive ammo purchase. I feel this is a smokescreen. I'd imagine if it was somehow adopted; training will use hollows and balls will be issued downrange. Penetration is the name of the game, not knockdown power. The soilders/marines and sailors need to quit *****ing and learn to shoot. I'll admit in 2000 an issued m9 from 80s- early 90s era was difficult to shoot because of slop(I had) in the barrel, but the principle was the same for a rifle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cap10 and SAVAGEJIM

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,561 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
HSec has to justify the massive ammo purchase. I feel this is a smokescreen. I'd imagine if it was somehow adopted; training will use hollows and balls will be issued downrange.
I doubt it. They've been issuing multiple rifle rounds for years, and the FMJ stuff gets used Stateside, and the "better" stuff is used downrange. Wouldn't be hard to see the same thing happening with pistol ammo.

Penetration is the name of the game, not knockdown power.
Penetration is fine, but you still need to damage something vital on the way though. JHPs and larger rounds help increase the odds that, that happens.

I've always felt the "shot placement" argument to be a cop out, and fundamentally flawed. When shooting another living, moving, thinking, and fighting human, they're not going to let you get the perfect shot. You have to take what you're given, and hope it pays off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
848 Posts
I doubt it. They've been issuing multiple rifle rounds for years, and the FMJ stuff gets used Stateside, and the "better" stuff is used downrange. Wouldn't be hard to see the same thing happening with pistol ammo.



Penetration is fine, but you still need to damage something vital on the way though. JHPs and larger rounds help increase the odds that, that happens.

I've always felt the "shot placement" argument to be a cop out, and fundamentally flawed. When shooting another living, moving, thinking, and fighting human, they're not going to let you get the perfect shot. You have to take what you're given, and hope it pays off.
Glad you brought this thread/subject up, your more more up to date on "things". Nothing really surprises me much these days.

I'd have to say that JHP do have better ballistics test results and prove time and time again a gel block with light or no armor will suffer shock trauma as the projectile creates its wound. Thats all good. The idea that a Hole is a hole but a bigger hole is the better hole, holds weight just as much as shot placement(USMC). CM on targets is the way I learned USMC and Army with little difference in application of proper shooting (except for check weld).

Problem I have with HPs is that I feel that balls tend to defeat light cover, and I'm just as skeptical about the introduction of the JHP round as serviceable ammo. It is a can of worms legally, but in DC with its catch me if you can attitude, Im not surprised. Because of the legality and the US military's previous stance on the matter, I have a hard time taking this one in. Another thought I had and it's far fetched: It may be the result of a few congressmen pressing the recent ammo acquisition and the only way to pass the buck is dumping it into the military hands so it doesnt look as if the ammo purchase's intent was to take it out of law abiding US Citizens hands.

HAHA yeah its a whole different game of dodgeball.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
I doubt it. They've been issuing multiple rifle rounds for years, and the FMJ stuff gets used Stateside, and the "better" stuff is used downrange. Wouldn't be hard to see the same thing happening with pistol ammo.



Penetration is fine, but you still need to damage something vital on the way though. JHPs and larger rounds help increase the odds that, that happens.

I've always felt the "shot placement" argument to be a cop out, and fundamentally flawed. When shooting another living, moving, thinking, and fighting human, they're not going to let you get the perfect shot. You have to take what you're given, and hope it pays off.

Wow. I dunno how I missed the news on Army snubbing Beretta on the M9A3, but that is fact. I heard good things about the gun. Now I'm curious to see what they'll be adopting.

I'm enjoying a bourbon, which makes me wiser. We shouldn't think too much about intent, skill, shot placement and mortality because there will always be "but not for" cases if you read enough. I've treated enough GSWs to know that people don't always intend to shoot poorly nor did they necessarily possess the skill to pull off the good shot that they did in placing a shot perfectly through someone's brain, SC or heart, and there will always be some dude, usually with a funny name like Clitus, Willie or Jimbub, who will survive a gun shot that goes through the cerebellum and both hemispheres with seemingly little long term disability. Now, again, as bourbon reminds us, much may depend on the pre-shooting cortical function of Clitus.

Joking aside, shot placement in light of the adrenaline dump of a life or death scenario is often as much luck as skill but case reports do show that police officers who were veterans of wars and saw a lot of combat are better able to control their adrenaline/emotions and shoot skillfully than officers who hadn't. Another point is that it's great to be able to put 5 quick shots in a fist-sized grouping, but in a shooting scenario, the opportunity to square up and place 5 quick shots rarely presents. Nonetheless, aside from those rare "but not for" cases, bullets through brains and hearts usually get the job done, whether by accident or intent.

One thing for sure. I'd rather treat GSWs than be a test dummy for them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
OT: Ironic they should announce this in New Jersey.. Isn't HP ammo pretty much illegal for self defense purposes there?
Wouldn't surprise me. States like NJ are why civilian-citizen LE refer to non-LE civilian-citizens as civilians- not a jab at the cops, but at the government. When a heavy-handed state takes away the natural rights of some citizens but leaves them for others, the conclusions drawn at the people level can be startling. NJ is a state where it is believed to be okay for an unarmed populace to be protected, patrolled and controlled by a select few who are armed and who use the possession vs. non-possession of a firearm as a means to exert authority.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
576 Posts
So...not sure why I haven't seen the reply yet...

The reason ball ammo is better against "armies" is way more sinister. More often than not, the ball ammo (with steel core penetrator) will continue right on through the enemy. The thought/theory, is that this enemy combatant (German / Viet Cong/ Russian, etc) will become a live casualty (injured), rather than KIA. As many of you know, a wounded Soldier requires at a minimum one , but more probably two Soldiers to evacuate them off the battle field / out of the line of fire. So in effect, by wounding one Soldier, you take three out of combat (at least temporarily). It's a great strategy.

The thing is...many states require soft point or hollow point ammo for hunting...why is that? Because it is more humane. When the LIBS wanted to ban the ammo with steel core penetrator due to "safety" for people...I just laughed. Steel core is the best to be hit with compared to SP or HP as it relates to surviving.

Anyway...just something to think about when considering the article. I guess we are backing away from our own doctrine...probably for good reason. I don't see Muslim terrorists evacuating their own to the "rear". F THEM...let them bleed out from fragmenting ammo.

On a side note...the new Joint Chief of Staff just stated Russia is the greatest threat to the U.S. I expect a return to US Soldiers defending the Fulda Gap :-D
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top