←back to thread

1061 points danso | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
082349872349872 ◴[] No.23347585[source]
One can also check easily-discoverable recent US military policy https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23347453 to discover that those who think these things through don't condone "looting ⊃ shooting".

Bonaparte was a fan of the "whiff of grape" https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_royaliste_du_13_v... but we all know how that ended.

replies(2): >>23353810 #>>23356356 #
meheleventyone ◴[] No.23353810[source]
Isn't it a long standing thing that the US Military use of force rules in warzones are generally more restrictive than the policies for use on their fellow citizens by police back home?
replies(4): >>23354313 #>>23354337 #>>23354810 #>>23354914 #
dmoy ◴[] No.23354337[source]
Yes

One obvious example of this is simply ammo. Military bullets don't expand as much as bullets available to cops or civilians. A military bullet is explicitly not allowed to be an expanding hollow point which really messes you up.

There are all sorts of international agreements on not using certain types of things in war - types of bullets are no exception.

replies(4): >>23354556 #>>23354605 #>>23354614 #>>23364027 #
remarkEon ◴[] No.23354614[source]
This comment is all sorts of wrong.

Military "bullets" (they're called rounds, actually) are designed to be optimized for performance in a warfare environment. That means accuracy, and range. A hollow point round is design to expand and be a stopping shot - with one round - and not continue to travel large distances, which puts other people at risk. Cops can carry those because if they're in a crowded environment firing a hollow point round at a threat means less risk to anyone else who isn't a threat.

>There are all sorts of international agreements on not using certain types of things in war - types of bullets are no exception.

Yeah no one will care about this once an actual near-peer war kicks off.

replies(1): >>23355048 #
1. dmoy ◴[] No.23355048[source]
A bullet is a bullet, a round refers to the whole package - bullet, powder, case, etc. I'm referring to just the bullet part.

You're probably right on overpenetration though.

> accuracy

For accuracy up to a few hundred rounds you likely want boat tail hollow point, not a steel penetrator. Just look at the loads for prs, cmp, etc. Military bullets are not made to be the most accurate.

> Yeah no one will care about this once an actual near-peer war kicks off.

Probably right, though restrictions on bullet types have been around for like over a hundred years, and most modern US bullets adhere to the spirit of that.

It's also worth pointing out that there are a whole bunch of those international agreements that the US hasn't signed. Cluster bombs, for example.

replies(1): >>23363152 #
2. dmoy ◴[] No.23363152[source]
few hundred yards, not rounds... also more like several hundred