Why Cant the Military Use Hollow Points: An Analysis

Introduction

Often, we wonder why the military is restricted from using hollow point ammunition when police and civilians can do so with relative freedom. This article delves into the reasons behind this policy discrepancy, highlighting the historical context, legal constraints, and practical considerations.

Understanding Hollow Points

Hollow point bullets, also known as ballistic expansion bullets, are designed to expand upon impact, causing a larger wound and typically leading to quicker incapacitation. While hollow points are generally preferred by law enforcement and civilian shooters for their ability to more gently incapacitate the target, they are less commonly used in military contexts.

Shrapnel and FMJ Bullets

The military often relies on full metal jacket (FMJ) bullets, which are solid and designed to penetrate armor. Contrary to popular belief, 5.56 and 223 rounds, despite their hollow point design, often break up upon impact, meeting the criteria of FMJ bullets. These rounds can be more effective in creating larger and deeper wounds, which facilitates quicker incapacitation.

Shrapnel, another tool utilized by the military, can cause significant and often fatal injuries. However, the use of hollow points is much more strictly regulated and is not widely employed in military operations.

The Law of Land Warfare and Treaties

The Law of Land Warfare and various international treaties mandate that certain types of ammunition, such as hollow points, should not be used by the military. These agreements are part of the rules of engagement that countries sign, and they aim to ensure a more humane approach to combat.

While some may argue that the Geneva and Hague Conventions are the primary reason for this policy, it is important to note that many countries, including the United States, have not ratified or signed these agreements. The real reasons for the military's aversion to hollow points lie in their practicality and effectiveness on the battlefield.

Accuracy and Performance

FMJ bullets are more accurate and less likely to deviate when hitting obstacles like trees, walls, or other defensive structures. They also have better penetration, which is crucial in scenarios where quick decisive action is required. In contrast, hollow points may expand prematurely and lose their effectiveness, leading to reduced accuracy and penetration.

In a battlefield setting, where targets are often much farther away and may be hiding behind various obstructions, the reliability and effectiveness of FMJ bullets are paramount. They are more suited to the environment where the military operates.

Conclusion

In summary, while hollow points are widely used by police and civilians for their perceived gentler incapacitation, their use in military operations is restricted due to a combination of practical considerations, legal constraints, and the need for greater accuracy and penetration. The military's preference for FMJ rounds underscores their priorities in terms of mission success and combat effectiveness.