Full Metal Jacket bullets and the Hague Conference

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Dave King, Mar 30, 2004.

Help Support Long Range Hunting by donating:

  1. Dave King

    Dave King Well-Known Member

    May 3, 2001
    Here are a few tidbits I dug up regarding the often confusing issue of the Geneva Convention, Hague Convention/Conference and the use of expanding bullets in war. Not to be taken as immediate truth but just more info... Ever wnder why Sierra sticks by their claim that the MatchKing should not be used for hunting... "not designed for expansion"?

    "Full metal jacket bullet
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

    A full metal jacket bullet (or FMJ) is a bullet that is encased in a copper-coated steel or gilding metal jacket, designed to stop the bullet from fragmenting within its target. The jacket prevents deformation of the bullet in the barrel or feed mechanism, from dirt overpressures or damage outside the gun. This reduces misfires. The jacket also prevents fragmentation, and the coating helps prevent damage to the gun barrel.

    FMJ ammunition was introduced for ostensibly humanitarian reasons, as the Hague Convention of 1899 prohibits the use of expanding or fragmenting bullets in warfare. (It is commonly but incorrectly stated that this prohibition is in the Geneva Conventions.)

    They have the advantage in warfare that they often injure their target rather than kill outright, creating a casualty that needs to be cared for, rather than a corpse. In this way, FMJ bullets can be more effective at consuming an enemy's resources than fragmenting bullets, yet the outcome of the victim is usually the same, death (or at least long-term removal from the field of battle, which is close to equivalent in military terms). Furthermore, because the bullet does not expand, FMJ bullets are much more effective at armor-piercing than hollow point bullets."


    "Apparently from the actual text of The Hague Conference...

    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."

    Some apparent modifications:

    "Hague Convention IV of 1907, Article 23(e)


    Art. 23.
    In addition to the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially forbidden -

    To employ poison or poisoned weapons;

    To kill or wound treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army;

    To kill or wound an enemy who, having laid down his arms, or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion;

    To declare that no quarter will be given;

    To employ arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering;

    To make improper use of a flag of truce, of the national flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy, as well as the distinctive badges of the Geneva Convention;

    To destroy or seize the enemy's property, unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;

    To declare abolished, suspended, or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party. A belligerent is likewise forbidden to compel the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war."

    And just a little more about the latest development(s) (not verified):

    "...for many years U.S. Military snipers went afield with M-118 ammo, a 7.62 X 51mm 173-grain solid-tipped boat tail round manufactured to much closer tolerances than M-80 "ball."

    This practice began to change subsequent to a 23 September 1985 opinion issued by the Judge Advocate General, authored by W. Hays Parks², Chief of the JAG's International Law Branch, for the signature of Major Hugh R. Overholt, which stated:

    "...expanding point ammunition is legally permissible in counterterrorist operations not involving the engagement of the armed forces of another State."

    On 12 October 1990, another Memorandum of Law from Parks at the request of the Commander of the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) and coordinated with the Department of State, Army General Counsel, as well as the Offices of the Judge Advocates General of the Navy and Air Force, concluded that:

    "The purpose of the 7.62mm "open-tip" MatchKing bullet is to provide maximum accuracy at very long range. ... Bullet fragmentation is not a design characteristic, however, nor a purpose for use of the MatchKing by United States Army snipers. Wounds caused by MatchKing ammunition are similar to those caused by a fully jacketed military ball bullet, which is legal under the law of war, when compared at the same ranges and under the same conditions.

    (The Sierra #2200 BTHP) not only meets, but exceeds, the law of war obligations of the United States for use in combat."
    Whether it is the overall excellence of the

    Sierra MatchKing, or its virtual endorsement within the upper echelons of the military, the #2200 boat tail hollow point was the round of preference for snipers and .30 caliber High Power competitors alike. Aside from Federal, Remington and Samson (IMI) both load it in their commercially available "match" rounds, while Winchester uses it in their Ranger line of law enforcement ammunition.

    In 1993, another Parks-authored opinion cleared the way for the U.S. Special Operations Command to procure a Winchester 230-grain JHP ("Black Talon," yet!) for issue with its H&K-manufactured Mk 23 Mod 0 pistol."

    And finally, apparently the original text of the matchKing for Military Snipers:


    SUBJECT: Sniper Use of Open-Tip Ammunition

    1. Summary.

    This memorandum considers whether United States Army Snipers may employ match-grade, "open-tip" ammunition in combat or other special missions. It concludes that such ammunition does not violate the law of war obligations of the United States, and may be employed in peacetime or wartime missions of the Army.

    2. Background.

    For more than a decade two bullets have been available for use by the United States Army Marksmanship Unit in match competition in its 7.62mm rifles. The M118 is a 173-grain match grade full metal jacket boat tail, ogival spitzer tip bullet, while the M852 is the Sierra MatchKing 168-grain match grade boat tail, ogival spitzer tip bullet with an open tip. Although the accuracy of the M118 has been reasonably good, though at times erratic, independent bullet comparisons by the Army, Marine Corps, and National Guard marksmanship training units have established unequivocally the superior accuracy of the M852. Army tests noted a 36% improvement in accuracy with the M852 at 300 meters, and a 32% improvement at 600 yds; Marine Corps figures were twenty-eight percent accuracy improvement at 300 m, and 20% at 600yds. The National Guard determined that the M852 provided better bullet groups at 200 and 600 yards under all conditions than did the M118. (citation omitted.)

    The 168-grain MatchKing was designed in the late 1950's for 300 m. shooting in international rifle matches. In its competitive debut, it was used by the 1st place winner at the 1959 Pan American Games. In the same caliber but in its various bullet lengths, the MatchKing has set a number of international records.
    To a range of 600 m., the superiority of the accuracy of the M852 cannot be matched, and led to the decision by U.S. military marksmanship training units to use the M852 in competition.

    A 1980 opinion of this office concluded that use of the M852 in match competition would not violate law of war obligations of the United States. (citation omitted) Further tests and actual competition over the past decade have confirmed the superiority of the M852 over the M118 and other match grade bullets. For example, at the national matches held at Camp Perry, OH in 1983, a new Wimbledon record of 2--015 X's was set using the 168-gr. MatchKing. This level of performance lead to the question of whether the M852 could be used by military snipers in peacetime or wartime missions of the Army.

    During the period in which this review was conducted, the 180-gr. MatchKing (for which there is no military designation) also was tested with a view to increased accuracy over the M852 at very long ranges. Because two bullet weights were under consideration, the term "MatchKing" will be used hereinafter to refer to the generic design rather than to a bullet of a particular weight. The fundamental question to be addressed by this review is whether an open-tip bullet of MatchKing design may be used in combat.

    3. Legal Factors.

    The principal provision relating to the legality of weapons is contained in Art. 23e of the Annex to Hague Convention IV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land of 18 October 1907, which prohibits the employment of "arms, projectiles, or material of a nature to cause superfluous injury". In some law of war treatises, the term "unnecessary suffering" is used rather than "superfluous injury." The terms are regarded as synonymous. To emphasize this, Art. 35, para. 2 of the 1977 Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, states in part that "It is prohibited to employ weapons [and] projectiles . . . of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering." Although the U.S. has made the formal decision that for military, political, and humanitarian reasons it will not become a party to Protocol I, U.S. officials have taken the position that the language of Art. 35(2) of Protocol I as quoted is a codification of customary international law, and therefore binding upon all nations.

    The terms "unnecessary suffering" and "superfluous injury" have not been formally defined within international law. In determining whether a weapon or projectile causes unnecessary suffering, a balancing test is applied between the force dictated by military necessity to achieve a legitimate objective vis-à-vis suffering that may be considered superfluous to achievement of that intended objective.
    The test is not easily applied. For this reason, the degree of "superfluous" injury must be clearly disproportionate to the intended objectives for development and employment of the weapon, that is, it must outweigh substantially the military necessity for the weapon system or projectile.

    The fact that a weapon causes suffering does not lead to the conclusion that the weapon causes unnecessary suffering, or is illegal per se. Military necessity dictates that weapons of war lead to death, injury, and destruction; the act of combatants killing or wounding enemy combatants in combat is a legitimate act under the law of war. In this regard, there is an incongruity in the law of war in that while it is legally permissible to kill an enemy combatant, incapacitation must not result inevitably in unnecessary suffering. What is prohibited is the design (or modification) and employment of a weapon for the purpose of increasing or causing suffering beyond that required by military necessity. In conducting the balancing test necessary to determine a weapon's legality, the effects of a weapon cannot be viewed in isolation. They must be examined against comparable weapons in use on the modern battlefield, and the military necessity for the weapon or projectile under consideration.

    In addition to the basic prohibition on unnecessary suffering contained in Art. 23e of the 1907 Hague IV, one other treaty is germane to this review. The Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets of 29 July 1899 prohibits the use in international armed conflict:

    ". . . 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 U.S. is not a party to this treaty, but U.S. officials over the years have taken the position that the armed forces of the U.S. will adhere to its terms to the extent that its application is consistent with the object and purpose of Art. 23e of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, quoted above.

    It is within the context of these two treaties that questions regarding the legality of the employment of the MatchKing "open tip" bullet must be considered.

    4. Bullet Description.

    As previously described, the MatchKing is a boat tail, ogival spitzer tip bullet with open tip. The "open tip" is a shallow aperture (approximately the diameter of the wire in a standard size straight pin or paper clip) in the nose of the bullet.
    While sometimes described as a "hollow point," this is a mischaracterization in law of war terms. Generally a "hollow point" bullet is thought of in terms of its ability to expand on impact with soft tissue. Physical examination of the MatchKing "open tip" bullet reveals that its opening is extremely small in comparison to the aperture in comparable hollow point hunting bullets; for example, the 165-grain GameKing is a true hollow point boat tail bullet with an aperture substantially greater than the MatchKing, and skiving (serrations cut into the jacket) to insure expansion. In the MatchKing, the open tip is closed as much as possible to provide better aerodynamics, and contains no skiving. The lead core of the MatchKing bullet is entirely covered by the bullet jacket. While the GameKing bullet is designed to bring the ballistic advantages of a match bullet to long range hunting, the manufacturer expressly recommends against the use of the MatchKing for hunting game of any size because it does not have the expansion characteristics of a hunting bullet.

    The purpose of the small, shallow aperture in the MatchKing is to provide a bullet design offering maximum accuracy at very long ranges, rolling the jacket of the bullet around its core from base to tip; standard military bullets and other match bullets roll the jacket around its core from tip to base, leaving an exposed lead core at its base. Design purpose of the MatchKing was not to produce a bullet that would expand or flatten easily on impact with the human body, or otherwise cause wounds greater than those caused by standard military small arms ammunition.

    5. MatchKing performance.

    Other than its superior long range marksmanship capabilities, the MatchKing was examined with regard to its performance on impact with the human body or in artificial material that approximates human soft tissue. It was determined that the bullet will break up or fragment in some cases at some point following entry into soft tissue. Whether fragmentation occurs will depend upon a myriad of variables, to include range to the target, velocity at the time of impact, degree of yaw of the bullet at the point of impact, or the distance traveled point-first within the body before yaw is induced. The MatchKing has not been designed to yaw intentionally or to break up on impact. These characteristics are common to all military rifle bullets. There was little discernible difference in bullet fragmentation between the MatchKing and other military small arms bullets, with some military ball ammunition of foreign manufacture tending to fragment sooner in human tissue or to a greater degree, resulting in wounds that would be more severe than those caused by the MatchKing. [FNaaa1]

    Because of concern over the potential mischaracterization of the M852 as a "hollow point" bullet that might violate the purpose and intent of the 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets, some M852 MatchKing bullets were modified to close the aperture. The "closed tip" MatchKing did not measure up to the accuracy of the "open tip" MatchKing.

    Other match grade bullets were tested. While some could approach the accuracy standards of the MatchKing in some lots, quality control was uneven, leading to erratic results.
    No other match grade bullet consistently could meet the accuracy of the open-tip bullet.

    6. Law of War Application.

    From both a legal and medical standpoint, the lethality or incapacitation effects of a particular small-caliber projectile must be measured against comparable projectiles in service. In the military small arms field, "small caliber" generally includes all rifle projectiles up to and including .60 caliber (15mm). For the purposes of this review, however, comparison will be limited to small-caliber ammunition in the range of 5.45mm to 7.62mm, that is, that currently in use in assaultor sniper rifles by the military services of most nations.

    Wound ballistic research over the past fifteen years has determined that the prohibition contained in the 1899 Hague Declaration is of minimal to no value, inasmuch as virtually all jacketed military bullets employed since 1899 with pointed ogival spitzer tip shape have a tendency to fragment on impact with soft tissue, harder organs, bone or the clothing and/or equipment worn by the individual soldier.

    The pointed ogival spitzer tip, shared by all modern military bullets, reflects the balancing by nations of the criteria of military necessity and unnecessary suffering: its streamlined shape decreases air drag, allowing the bullet to retain velocity better for improved long-range performance; a modern military 7.62mm bullet will lose only about one-third of its muzzle velocity over 500 yards, while the same weight bullet with a round-nose shape will lose more than one-half of its velocity over the same distance. Yet the pointed ogival spitzer tip shape also leads to greater bullet breakup, and potentially greater injury to the soldier by such a bullet vis-à-vis a round-nose full- metal jacketed bullet. (See Dr. M. L. Fackler, "Wounding Patterns for Military Rifle Bullets," International Defense Review, January 1989, pp. 56-64, at 63.)

    Weighing the increased performance of the pointed ogival spitzer tip bullet against the increased injury its breakup may bring, the nations of the world-- through almost a century of practice--have concluded that the need for the former outweighs concern for the latter, and does not result in unnecessary suffering as prohibited by the 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets or article 23e of the 1907 Hague Convention IV. The 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets remains valid for expression of the principle that a nation may not employ a bullet that expands easily on impact for the purpose of unnecessarily aggravating the wound inflicted upon an enemy soldier.
    Such a bullet also would be prohibited by article 23e of the 1907 Hague IV, however. Another concept fundamental to the law of war is the principle of discrimination, that is, utilization of means or methods that distinguish to the extent possible legitimate targets, such as enemy soldiers, from noncombatants, whether enemy wounded and sick, medical personnel, or innocent civilians. The highly trained military sniper with his special rifle and match grade ammunition epitomizes the principle of discrimination. In combat, most targets are covered or obscured, move unpredictably, and as a consequence are exposed to hostile fire for limited periods of time. When coupled with the level of marksmanship training provided the average soldier and the stress of combat, a soldier's aiming errors are large and hit probability is correspondingly low. While the M16A2 rifle currently used by the United States Army and Marine Corps is capable of acceptable accuracy out to six hundred meters, the probability of an average soldier hitting an enemy soldier at three hundred meters is ten percent.

    Statistics from past wars suggest that this probability figure may be optimistic. In Would War II, the United States and its allies expended 25,000 rounds of ammunition to kill a single enemy soldier. In the Korean War, the ammunition expenditure had increased four-fold to 100,000 rounds per soldier; in the Vietnam War, that figure had doubled to 200,000 rounds of ammunition for the death of a single enemy soldier. The risk to noncombatants is apparent.

    In contrast, United States Army and Marine Corps snipers in the Vietnam War expended 1.3 rounds of ammunition for each claimed and verified kill, at an average range of six hundred yards, or almost twice the three hundred meters cited above for combat engagements by the average soldier. Some verified kills were at ranges in excess of 1000 yards. This represents discrimination and military efficiency of the highest order, as well as minimization of risk to noncombatants. Utilization of a bullet that increases accuracy, such as the MatchKing, would further diminish the risk to noncombatants.

    7. Conclusion.

    The purpose of the 7.62mm "open-tip" MatchKing bullet is to provide maximum accuracy at very long range. Like most 5.56mm and 7.62mm military ball bullets, it may fragment upon striking its target, although the probability of its fragmentation is not as great as some military ball bullets currently in use by some nations. Bullet fragmentation is not a design characteristic, however, nor a purpose for use of the MatchKing by United State Army snipers. Wounds caused by MatchKing ammunition are similar to those caused by a fully jacketed military ball bullet, which is legal underthe law of war, when compared at the same ranges and under the same conditions. The military necessity for its use-- its ability to offer maximum accuracy at very long ranges--is complemented by the high degree of discriminate fire it offers in the hands of a trained sniper. It not only meets, but exceeds, the law of war obligations of the United States for use in combat.

    This opinion has been coordinated with the Department of State, Army General Counsel, and the Offices of the Judge Advocates General of the Navy and Air Force, who concur with its contents and conclusions.

    An opinion that reaches the same conclusion has been issued simultaneously for the Navy and Marine Corps by The Judge Advocate General of the Navy.

    FNa1. The M118 bullet is loaded into a 7.62mm (caliber .308) cartridge. In its original loading in the earlier .30-06 cartridge, it was the M72.

    FNaa1. While this review is written in the context of the M852 Sierra MatchKing 168-grain "open-tip" bullet and a 180-grain version, the MatchKing bullet (and similar bullets of other manufacturers) is also produced in other bullet weights of 7.62mm rifles (.308, .30-06, or .300 Winchester Magnum).

    FNaaa1. For example, 7.62mm bullets manufactured to NATO military specifications and used by the Federal Republic of Germany have a substantially greater tendency to fragment in soft tissue than do the U.S. M80 7.62mm ammunition made to the same specifications, the M118, or the M852 MatchKing. None fragment as quickly or easily upon entry into soft tissue as the 5.56mm ammunition manufactured to NATO standards and issued to its forces by the Government of Sweden. Its early fragmentation leads to far more severe wounds than any bullet manufactured to military specifications and utilized by the U.S. military during the past quarter century (whether the M80 7.62mm, the M16A1, M193 or M16A2 5.56mm) or the opentip MatchKing bullet under consideration."

    [ 03-30-2004: Message edited by: Dave King ]
  2. 1894

    1894 Well-Known Member

    Jan 8, 2004
    Soldiers tend to shoot snipers but on the odd occasion they do capture them, I for one, would not want to be caught in possession of matchkings or similar hollow points.

    While we're at it I cannot believe how vertical and tall some of these 'tactical' pistol grips'butts are. I know they aid accuracy but again I would not be wanting to adopt such a high and more vulnerable position on the battlefield. The old Enfield L42 of the British Army that I trained on might not have been so long range but by the time you'd dug the butt in (no real pistol grip) the forend was about a fists height off the ground and profile much reduced and the individual much safer from detection or small arms fire/shrapnel
  3. BountyHunter

    BountyHunter Well-Known Member

    Jun 13, 2007

    There is no prohibition as pointed out for "fragmenting" bullets. In fact almost all military bullets are designed to do that now. That is part of the problem in OIF 1 and 2 now with the bullets for the 5.56 not fragmenting and 'stopping" the individual.
    Hence the push for the 6.8 for SOF and other alternatives.

    USASOC put the first legal team together in the early 80s just to do research and give opinions and guidance on exactly the types of issues such as the early opinion on match ammo for snipers in the SOF community. We did lot of work with anti drug task forces etc and other unusual operations. Also several opinions issued that "terrorists" are not covered under any convention or rules. "So shoot what you brought applies."


    [ 04-02-2004: Message edited by: BountyHunter ]
  4. Dave King

    Dave King Well-Known Member

    May 3, 2001

    Yeah, I read about the "terrorist" deal, no national ties so no "rules of engagement", shoot them with whatever, seem fitting too!
  5. Varmint Hunter

    Varmint Hunter Well-Known Member

    Dec 26, 2001
    They're shooting our guys with RPG's, so I couldn't care less what we use to return fire.

    How about some spent uranium core bullets fired from a few of our vintage Warthogs. That aught to teach em' a lesson. [​IMG]

  6. MachV

    MachV Well-Known Member

    May 31, 2001
    This is harsh and unpleasant bisiness and will require a very harsh and unpleseant man.I realize this ia a quote from a movie but it fits the war on terrorism quite well.
    No problem fill the cavity with bacon & let it be known!Bury the enemy with hogs!Let Ala sort them out!!!