45 replies [Last post]
Offline
Location: Mobile County, Alabama
Joined: 09/09/2007
Posts: 310
Is there inherent accuracy?

There are a few reasons why FMJ bullets are used by 95% of combat troops. First they comply with the convetion with no gray areas to debate, second (and most important) they are the cheapest and easiest bullet to mass produce, and third, they are less likely to get deformed during combat which could cause a gun to jam.

Machine guns and battle rifles don't need the accuracy of BTHP match bullets so there's no point in wasting the money to supply them to anyone but snipers. Also, the fewer variations you have in the supply system, the less likely things are to screw up.

On a side note, the only enemy we have fought against who had signed the conventions was WW2 Germany.

Offline
Location: austin and amarillo texas
Joined: 07/21/2007
Posts: 195
Is there inherent accuracy?

I thought that we were still obliged to the Geneva convention regardless of the other team's relation to the convention.

The theory on solid bullets is that they are ample enough to take soldiers out of combat, and that neutralizing them is just as effecient as killing them. Thus, fewer dead soldiers, and more injured soldiers. Makes since at first glance, but the hypocrisy of war rules like that one is beyond mind boggling. Brick Wall,) Brick Wall,) Brick Wall,)

Offline
Location: Misouri
Joined: 11/30/2005
Posts: 365
Is there inherent accuracy?
JCalhoun wrote:
There are a few reasons why FMJ bullets are used by 95% of combat troops. First they comply with the convetion with no gray areas to debate, second (and most important) they are the cheapest and easiest bullet to mass produce, and third, they are less likely to get deformed during combat which could cause a gun to jam.

Machine guns and battle rifles don't need the accuracy of BTHP match bullets so there's no point in wasting the money to supply them to anyone but snipers. Also, the fewer variations you have in the supply system, the less likely things are to screw up.

On a side note, the only enemy we have fought against who had signed the conventions was WW2 Germany.

yup, yup and yup

Don Fischer's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Antelope, Ore
Joined: 03/24/2005
Posts: 3183
Is there inherent accuracy?

Ain't war great. We got rules about how we kill people but the other guy's do what they want! Makes perfect sense to me! Laugh

Location: Choudrant, Louisiana
Joined: 07/07/2007
Posts: 28
Is there inherent accuracy?

It seems funny to me that a soldier can shoot an enemy soldier with a machine gun that fires at a rate of 600 rounds are more a minute but the same soldier can't use a shotgun because it puts 12 to 15 pellets in the air at one time. Just absurd IMO.

Don Fischer's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Antelope, Ore
Joined: 03/24/2005
Posts: 3183
Is there inherent accuracy?

Welcome to the site. I don't know that the shotgun rule is true. Seem's a buddy of mine told me his favorite weapon on point was a shotgun. Maybe he ment he'd rather have had a shotgun.

It is unuasul tho that you can't hit the enemy with a 55gr soft point 5.56 so the answer to that is a Daisy Cutter" Laugh

Offline
Location: Mobile County, Alabama
Joined: 09/09/2007
Posts: 310
Is there inherent accuracy?

Shotguns are legal.

Location: Choudrant, Louisiana
Joined: 07/07/2007
Posts: 28
Is there inherent accuracy?

I know that after WW1, the role of the shotgun was greatly reduced. Whether this was part of the Geneva Convention or just U.S. military policy, I don't know. Their use is still allowed, but under certain restrictions. I am not sure what situations are allow their use. I think their use was restricted because of their ability to injure more people than the intended victim. I do remember watching a show on the history channel that discussed this but cannot remember everything about the show.
I just recently saw a new fully auto shotgun that is being developed for our military. This weapon will be very destructive.

bitmasher's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2002
Posts: 2973
Is there inherent accuracy?

Yes there is inherent accuracy; however it takes some fine shooters and equipment to be able to discern the difference. In other words, everything else being equal, cartridge accuracy differences are measured in small fractions of a MOA.

WesternHunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2006
Posts: 2368
Is there inherent accuracy?

I think certain cartridges get the reputaion for inherent accuracy over others because there are certain cartridges that get used my the masses. Examples of cartridges that seem to get the most praise and hype are .30-06 sprgfld, .308 win, .223 rem, .45 ACP, 9x19mm. Why? Because these are cartridges that have been used extensively by many shooters that have been properly trained and who have current or prior military service. I think that there is a huge number of cartridges that were never adopted nor tested by any military yet are still extreamly accurate in capable hands.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like

ThreadThread StarterRepliesLast Updated
Accuracy - what's most important?bitmasher1512/11/2010 18:28 pm
Best Accuracy Aidrost495210/31/2004 17:49 pm
Accuracy and # of ReloadsFrontiersman609/10/2006 12:22 pm
Best Accuracy aid since the bipod!huntwise410/04/2004 14:59 pm
pyrodex loads versus accuracy crowsfoot109/10/2010 12:51 pm