www.whitepages.com  You can create an account with them and then choose to hide your white pages entry from the public, thanks yama

I always thought things like the Geneva Convention where you don't fire on medics or hospitals made war seem more like a game rather than a war. I think MASH got me thinking about this a long time ago. If you don't kill them outright, then give them time to recover so you can shoot at them again. MASH had lots of episodes about this and guys not wanting to go back after being patched up.

I read this while looking up terms like "JHP"

The Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III, prohibited the use in international warfare of bullets that easily expand or flatten in the body.[3] This is often incorrectly believed to be prohibited in the Geneva Conventions, but it significantly predates those conventions, and is in fact a continuance of the St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868, which banned exploding projectiles of less than 400 grams, as well as weapons designed to aggravate injured soldiers or make their death inevitable. NATO members do not use small arms ammunition that is prohibited by the Hague Convention.

I think that shows that our governments want war to be a game where they can shoot and know that the enemy will not be allowed to shoot stuff at them that would get them killed.

Am I alone in seeing that this seems a little odd?

Remember the Star Trek episode where people were chosen to go to execution buildings because the 2 governments were carrying out an electronic war. Kirk though that was cruel. The civilizations said it was more humane because real war would cause lots of damage. There was more to the story, but maybe it was a parody on the rules of engagement?

hmmm weird, b/c the m203 shoots 40mm grenades that weigh less than 400 grams. It's also important to note the year 1899... no one was using body armor back then. JHP will do more damage to an unprotected target, but for armored targets you need FMJ preferably armor piercing w/ a steel penetrator to even wound someone.

Quote from: adidasguy on May 13, 2013, 11:52:59 AM
I always thought things like the Geneva Convention where you don't fire on medics or hospitals made war seem more like a game rather than a war. I think MASH got me thinking about this a long time ago. If you don't kill them outright, then give them time to recover so you can shoot at them again. MASH had lots of episodes about this and guys not wanting to go back after being patched up.

I read this while looking up terms like "JHP"

The Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III, prohibited the use in international warfare of bullets that easily expand or flatten in the body.[3] This is often incorrectly believed to be prohibited in the Geneva Conventions, but it significantly predates those conventions, and is in fact a continuance of the St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868, which banned exploding projectiles of less than 400 grams, as well as weapons designed to aggravate injured soldiers or make their death inevitable. NATO members do not use small arms ammunition that is prohibited by the Hague Convention.

I think that shows that our governments want war to be a game where they can shoot and know that the enemy will not be allowed to shoot stuff at them that would get them killed.

Am I alone in seeing that this seems a little odd?

Remember the Star Trek episode where people were chosen to go to execution buildings because the 2 governments were carrying out an electronic war. Kirk though that was cruel. The civilizations said it was more humane because real war would cause lots of damage. There was more to the story, but maybe it was a parody on the rules of engagement?

IIRC the geneva convention applies to those wearing unifroms of a recognised army. plain clothes militas exempt? or overlooked?

Quote from: adidasguy on May 13, 2013, 11:52:59 AM

Am I alone in seeing that this seems a little odd?

Lets not even try even understand the point of most wars here - personally I would rather see the instigators / perpetrators / belligerents tossed into a pit to duke it out for everyones enjoyment... Push come to shove however...

JHPs are messy messy things, especially on soft squishy things like humans.  They kill by extreme trauma, and the fact is that while people who are exposed to the demoralising fact they have just lost a mate beside them by being ripped apart or losing a limb by a JHP, they are far more demoralised over time by being exposed to wounded mates who are also going to require a lot of resource to extract them from the area for medical treatment. 

You are better off tying up an enemies resources (assuming they care about their valuable trained soliers in limited war scenarios). In general everyone is going to get on with the task at hand if the person beside them has no chance of surviving. You don't want a motivated enemy concentraing on the task of getting you, you want them distracted. FMJs do a fantastic job of drilling nice neat little holes which guarantees that is going to happen.

The only time you don't want to wound is close quarters against well armed opponents. Hence Shotty guns with buckshot / solids. They only just weasel past the convention rules however...

Kyled25 is correct - Body armour is a little bit of an issue to JHPs and would not have been considered at the time of writing the convention. AP ammo (steel cored) was also available after 1860 but technically could also be used as it is non expanding.

Steel core projectiles are designed to injure (pass trough), not kill. An injured soldier cost more money to take care of. They will also likely never fight again. This is a more efficient way to end a war. Another plus is nobody wants to see injured soldiers. Like someone else said. It demoralizes the whole country. This creates position from within. Warfare is a crazy game.

Quote from: pliskin on May 13, 2013, 07:19:38 PM
Steel core projectiles are designed to injure (pass trough), not kill. An injured soldier cost more money to take care of. They will also likely never fight again. This is a more efficient way to end a war. Another plus is nobody wants to see injured soldiers. Like someone else said. It demoralizes the whole country. This creates position from within. Warfare is a crazy game.

Right, not to mention the NATO 5.56 round's civilian equivalent is considered a varmint hunting round 

Quote from: kyled25 on May 13, 2013, 11:15:42 PM

Right, not to mention the NATO 5.56 round's civilian equivalent is considered a varmint hunting round 

The 5.56 (.308) is a superb round for all sorts of critters - but you will notice most people use a soft nose to ensure good results occur..

There are some crazy varmit rounds out there these days...

i think you meant .223, .308 is a 7.62mm

Quote from: Kiwingenuity on May 14, 2013, 02:09:53 AM

Quote from: kyled25 on May 13, 2013, 11:15:42 PM

Right, not to mention the NATO 5.56 round's civilian equivalent is considered a varmint hunting round 

The 5.56 (.308) is a superb round for all sorts of critters - but you will notice most people use a soft nose to ensure good results occur..

There are some crazy varmit rounds out there these days...

thought the 5.56 was similar to a .223? weve got rifles that say. 5.56 but can fire .223 but not vice-versa
Short and sweet: the 5.56 and the .223 are the same bullet (.224 diameter) but the brass case and primer are different. The brass is thicker on the 5.56 and the primer is less sensitive. yes, the 5.56 is loaded to a slightly higher pressure, but not a significant one.
So, you can safely fire .223 in a 5.56 chamber.

As far as I am aware, the only difference between 223 and 556 is case pressure

Some cases are equal in thickness between 223 and 556

Some cases use hard primers for 223 and soft ones for 556

You'll know you have true 556 ammo because there will be a NATO stamp on the rim of the casing Looks like this:




That being said it is NOT RECOMMENDED to fire 556 in a gun chambered for 223 (especially bolt actions, even modern ones)

With THAT being said, I have a friend that fires nothing but milsurp 556 out of his Ruger MINI-14 from the 70's and has yet to have a problem (the gun is clearly marked "223")

OK. I'll ask the dumb question here.
If .223 and 5.56 are the same, where do those numbers come from? One metric and one English units or what?
What ammo is the same and what is different?
9mm .vs. 380 auto .vs. 38 special..... confusing.
What I have found is .22 LR is probably the cheapest you can get if you just want to plink around. As low as 11 cents each if you know where to look and can act within the next 10 minutes (really - you have to be fast - I see them sell out instantly)
I've seen lots of names for the same 9mm Luger round. I google and WIKI them in my idle time. All the other abbreviations like FMJ and so forth. Learning about them.

Until later, I'm enjoying the air guns.

.223 and 5.56 are indeed the same cartridge. Since NATO uses metric designations for its cartridges, it's 5.56mm x 45mm (bullet diameter by case length). The actual designation, long form, is 5.56x45mm NATO. In case you're wondering, the .223 came first and was selected for use by the military, which in turn made it 5.56x45mm and gave it its unique "5.56" properties.

Basically it's like taking a normal civilian vehicle like a truck and converting it for military use and giving it a different name.

The same thing applies to other items as well. .308 Winchester is another example. Its NATO brother is 7.62x51mm NATO. Took .308 and derived a new round for use in the military. Same thing otherwise. Don't know if it's true but supposedly .308 and 7.62x51mm have the opposite problem from 5.56 and .223, meaning the .308 is more powerful and should not be fired in guns chambered in 7.62x51mm. Just what I've heard.

Here's something that will blow you away...

9mm Luger is probably the most universal cartridge out there. 9mm Luger, 9mm Parabellum, 9x19, and 9mm all describe the exact same cartridge.

.380ACP is known in other parts of the worlds by different names. Some places it's 9mm Kurz (meaning 'short'), others it's 9x17, and even further still some places call it 9mm Short.

So you have .380ACP and 9mm Luger... 9x17 and 9x19. There's also one in the middle, and it's called 9x18 or 9mm Makarov (for a specific Russian pistol called a Makarov that somewhat resembles a Walther PPK).


Then you asked about .38 Special and .357 Magnum. Since the numbers don't look the same, one would be led to believe they're different size bullets. Everyone knows you can shoot a .38SPL out of a .357. That's because they are the -same- caliber. A .38SPL bullet is 0.357" in diameter. As is a .357. The only difference is the amount (and type) of powder behind it. A .357 Magnum case is a LITTLE bit longer. .38SPL came before .357 Magnum.

9mm Luger and 380 are also in the 0.35 family but they are 0.355 instead of .357. The only difference (in terms of bullet diameter) between 9mm Luger, .380, .357, and .38SPL is 0.002" - crazy huh? All the same bullet basically.

9mm Makarov isn't even in the same ballpark as the other two, though. It's .365"

Point I guess is you just have to systematically learn every cartridge and eventually it'll all make sense.

Quote from: Kijona on May 14, 2013, 06:38:16 PM


Point I guess is you just have to systematically learn every cartridge and eventually it'll all make sense.

yeah it's kind of dumb how their is different names for the same round, esp. 9mm b/c like you said it's a universal round used all around the world. Perhaps this is due to dozens of manufacturers making the exact same product? I don't know, I'm just speculating.

Another thing, especially with rifle shooting and obscure pistol rounds, always pick up and save the empty brass cartridges. I myself do not re-load, but I know a few people who do. The range charges you to be there, don't let them make even more money off you by collecting and selling your brass. Of course this doesn't apply if your shooting cheap steel cased ammo (steel  cannot be reloaded).

I like the Russian 5.45 rounds.  Similar to .223/5.56 but cheaper.

Quote from: Kijona on May 14, 2013, 03:01:09 PM
As far as I am aware, the only difference between 223 and 556 is case pressure

Some cases are equal in thickness between 223 and 556

Some cases use hard primers for 223 and soft ones for 556

You'll know you have true 556 ammo because there will be a NATO stamp on the rim of the casing Looks like this:




That being said it is NOT RECOMMENDED to fire 556 in a gun chambered for 223 (especially bolt actions, even modern ones)

With THAT being said, I have a friend that fires nothing but milsurp 556 out of his Ruger MINI-14 from the 70's and has yet to have a problem (the gun is clearly marked "223")

tried to chamber a 5.56 in a .223 it was VERY tight. otoh, a .223 in a 5.56 felt pretty much normal. a tad sloppy but bullet was chambered

Quote from: john on May 15, 2013, 09:27:26 AM
I like the Russian 5.45 rounds.  Similar to .223/5.56 but cheaper.

heck yeah, my friends are all pissed because I can still go anywhere and buy 7.62x39 ammo for my ak while their holding their "tacticool" ar's and making "pew-pew" noises 

BTW showcase underneath this is 60" long

Quote from: kyled25 on May 15, 2013, 05:54:40 AM

Quote from: Kijona on May 14, 2013, 06:38:16 PM


Point I guess is you just have to systematically learn every cartridge and eventually it'll all make sense.

yeah it's kind of dumb how their is different names for the same round, esp. 9mm b/c like you said it's a universal round used all around the world. Perhaps this is due to dozens of manufacturers making the exact same product? I don't know, I'm just speculating.

Another thing, especially with rifle shooting and obscure pistol rounds, always pick up and save the empty brass cartridges. I myself do not re-load, but I know a few people who do. The range charges you to be there, don't let them make even more money off you by collecting and selling your brass. Of course this doesn't apply if your shooting cheap steel cased ammo (steel  cannot be reloaded).

You know, I was thinking. Perhaps it's an attempt to differentiate. You know, to keep idiots from buying the wrong cartridge. 5.56 NATO looks a lot different. If it was .223 NATO, someone could possibly mistake it for .223 REM.

slight differences in .223 and 5.56 nato
http://thearmsguide.com/645/is-there-a-difference-between-223-and-5-56/