Posted on Jul 9, 2015
"BREAKING: U.S. Army Switching to Hollow Point Ammunition"
49.2K
69
36
14
14
0
Published by: thetruthaboutguns.com
--
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.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/07/robert-farago/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.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/07/robert-farago/breaking-u-s-army-switching-to-hollow-point-ammunition/
Army
Weapons
Ammo
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 16
4
4
0
I though Ball was the only "legal" ammo for war use.
You don't really want to kill someone, right?
You want to wound them, which drags down resources.
You don't really want to kill someone, right?
You want to wound them, which drags down resources.
(4)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
The goal is incapacitation. Death is merely a permanent form of it. You don't want to wound because a) wounded man is still in the fight b) if the enemy has no resources to spend, he will simply abandon the wounded for YOU to take care of (which then expends OUR resources) and 3) that makes the assumption that the enemy actually cares about their wounded.
(3)
(0)
SGT Justin Singleton
LTC Paul Labrador is correct—incapacitation is the goal—and I like his three points. Well said.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
Wasn't the use of hollow point projectiles, or "To employ arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering" banned by the Hague?
SECTION II HOSTILITIES
CHAPTER I Means of Injuring the Enemy, Sieges, and bombardments
Artical 23
SECTION II HOSTILITIES
CHAPTER I Means of Injuring the Enemy, Sieges, and bombardments
Artical 23
(3)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Apparently the article stated the US never agreed to all the terms of the Hague Convention. This was actually new information to me. If so, I'm shocked we haven't made the switch decades ago. In any case, it's about time. We could really use help upgrading 9mm FMJ to something better....+p HP! Love it.
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
We never signed, but hold ourselves to the standard anyways because we are the "good guys"....
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
2
2
0
Still won't make a damn bit of difference if you don't TRAIN THEM TO HIT THE FREAKING TARGET.
Most of the guys I knew that carried pistols only fired 40 rounds a year, excellent pilots, but needed a "pinch hitter" at the range. Give 'em a .22 and keep the same budget for ammo... hitting someone in the face with a .22 will do more damage than missing them with a Desert Eagle .44.
Most of the guys I knew that carried pistols only fired 40 rounds a year, excellent pilots, but needed a "pinch hitter" at the range. Give 'em a .22 and keep the same budget for ammo... hitting someone in the face with a .22 will do more damage than missing them with a Desert Eagle .44.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Maybe the Pentagon is finally realizing that the 9mm and 5.56mm rounds SUCK for combat purposes. They don't dump energy anywhere quick enough when they hit the target necessitating multiple hits to actually stop a target. Switching to hollow points might just be a lower cost alternative to retooling the entire US Military in an effort to get the weapons more effective.
(2)
(0)
SPC Eric Cunningham
It's actually part of the search for a new handgun - including opening up the field to new calibers and +P ammunition compatible designs
(1)
(0)
SFC Joseph Bosley
Hope they figure it out the right way this time. Actually having ammo that will bring down a target on a single shot would be nice for a change.
(1)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
Actually there are tons of studies that show that 5.56mm is extremely effective for combat purposes; as well as many that show that 9mm ball is just as effective as .38, .40, and .45 ball ammunition. That's the reason why we never switched from 5.56mm after all those news articles about its supposed ineffectiveness and why many LEOs are switching back to 9mm.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Interesting. The military has always used JHPs for MPs, and SoF always had access to them legally (counter-terror is considered law enforecement not land warfare). Quite frankly, we've been finding ways to skirt the Hague for years anyways. It will be interesting to see if a) this is true and b) if rifle ammo is also up for change. JHPs and expanding ammo is a interesting quandry. Expanding ammo will give 5.56mm a significant inrease in lethality. However, JHPs do worse than FMJ against barriers (such as light cover and body armor). Do we trade off the increased lethality with poorer barrier penetration? Incidentally, all copper JHP hog hunting ammo (Hog Hammer TSX and Hornady GMX) provide good penetration to pierce thick hides and muscle but also deliver sufficeintly lethal wounds even in 5.56mm.
(2)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Rifle ammo is a "weird duck" since ballistically the end is more important than the front in many regards. We had a situation where some knuckle-head was trying to classify some of our sniper ammo as "hollow point" because of the way it was manufactured (it was "stretched" over the tail of the back end, creating a hollowed tip [non-expanding]).
But when dealing with 5.56, what are we really going to gain? It's the tumble we want. I can see some argument as we jump past 7mm~ but at that point we're back into the barrier penetration issue you mention.
But when dealing with 5.56, what are we really going to gain? It's the tumble we want. I can see some argument as we jump past 7mm~ but at that point we're back into the barrier penetration issue you mention.
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
The majority of damage from rifle ammo comes from the increased imapct velocities. Tumbling increases wound profiles, becuse if the round doesn't tumble (or tumbles after it leaves the body) you get the dreaded "ice-pick" effect (even with the bgger cavitation of tissue). What we gain with JHPs in assault rifle calibers is the wounding effect becomes more consistent. 5.56mm is NASTY when it peforms like it should (massive cavitation, tumble with early fragmentation causing massive tissue desctruction). But to act that way, it needs to operate within a very specific envelope (FPS greater than 2500). The reason why troops like the Mk 262 and Mk 318 rounds so much is that they act more consistent at lower velocities. But again, in genereal JHPs don't perform as well at barrier penetration.
(2)
(0)
SPC Eric Cunningham
You can get excellent barrier penetration for whatever a pistol round is actually expected to go through out of a JHP - if it's constructed well. Granted, ammo costs will go up significantly (I assume ball will be used for practice to keep costs down). AP rifle ammo will never be HP and frankly 5.56 barrier penetration sucks anyway.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
I could've sworn that hollow-points are against the Law of Armed Conflict. I do remember once a verified Marine friend of mine told me that they were authorized to use hollow points at one point during his deployment. I'm not sure if he was telling the truth.
Can any Marine chime in on this?
Can any Marine chime in on this?
(2)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
Soft point or ammo purposely desinged to expand or deform is forbidden by the Hague. However, the catch is that a) the US never formally signed it, but abides by it b) only is bidning between nations who are signatories and c) does not applly to law enforcement.
Insurgency and counter-terror ops (as once explained to me) are technically considered "law enforcement" ops not military. Further, ISIS , Taliaban, Al Qaeda never signed the Hague treaties.
Insurgency and counter-terror ops (as once explained to me) are technically considered "law enforcement" ops not military. Further, ISIS , Taliaban, Al Qaeda never signed the Hague treaties.
(3)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
LTC Paul Labrador To expand, the second the US (or any other non-signatory) enters a "conflict" it gives anyone else in said conflict the ability to use hollow points, even if they are signatories.
It's sort of a "gentleman's agreement" more than anything else that we don't use them, as opposed to any kind of actual rule.
It's sort of a "gentleman's agreement" more than anything else that we don't use them, as opposed to any kind of actual rule.
(4)
(0)
1
1
0
So the AF has been using hollow-points for stateside bases since '02ish. It is not approved for deployments because it is not a NATO approved round.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
MP's and SOCOM have been using hollow points for quite a while now, but I think arming the whole US military with this type of ammo won't do anything. So few troops are actually issued pistols that it won't really affect the force. Hollow point rifle ammo is a whole 'nuther story.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
To everyone saying that JHP bullets will only be used by police forces assigned to US bases, I didn't see that in the quoted article. All I saw was this statement: "His core argument: countries that will denounce the use of hollow-point use the hollow points for their police forces." All that statement tells me is police forces use hollow point rounds so why can't the Army?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google