allthegearandnoidea Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 (edited) There is an article in todays Telegraph about the guy arrested for selling guns and 'assasin kits' but the thing that caught my eye was when they said that hollow point or 'dum dum' bullets were illegal under the Hague convention. My understanding is that dum dum is a slang term used for all expanding ammo and that it is illegal to use expanding ammo for use in warfare but covered under section 5 of the firearms act and it is actually illegal to shoot deer without using expanding ammo. As murder is illegal with either a FMJ or expanding bullet I'm not sure why they brought it up, but I'm guessung lack of knowledge on the subject. As I have expanding ammmo on my FAC (after getting it back correct finally) I know it is not illegal but is there a difference between dum dums and 'normal' expanding ammo? Edit: here's the link to the article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/621...son-Bourne.html Edited September 22, 2009 by allthegearandnoidea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 It is a simple case that the media are (often willfully where a good story is concerned) clueless about guns/shooting etc, and is nothing new. You are correct that expanding bullets are illegal for use in warfare, but not for fieldsports/domestic counterterrorism etc etc etc. ZB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexr Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Surely what this means is that it is illegal to shoot humans with expanding amunition. Strange that hay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Dum Dum is the same as expanding and yes they are illegal. However, we have licences to hold them on, so we are exempt. So strictly speaking the Telegraph is correct, as it is an offence to be in possession of expanding bullet heads without a licence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I didn't really read your post properly, so excuse the awful reply! basically there are stupid stories about ammunition and guns being banned. The current favorite is the .50BMG being banned under the Geneva convention, as the shockwave of the bullet has enough energy to rip flesh from human skin if it passes close enough without hitting. I've never heard such utter bull! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apache Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I suppose this begs the question; is it more illegal to shoot someone with expanding ammo from your illegal handgun than with none expanding ammo........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthegearandnoidea Posted September 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I am tempted to write to the Telegraph about this as it does give the wrong information, however, I am not an expert by any means so I will have a think about it at work tomorrow and might post a draft letter that you can all comment on before I send it off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libs Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I am tempted to write to the Telegraph about this as it does give the wrong information, however, I am not an expert by any means so I will have a think about it at work tomorrow and might post a draft letter that you can all comment on before I send it off. Don't waste your time.. It will end up in the bin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthegearandnoidea Posted September 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Your probably right. If I'm really bored at work I will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Don't waste your time.. It will end up in the bin. Yeah. Any letters that aren't signed Viscount or Lord, just get discarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancs Lad Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Gents. The use of Dum Dums, Expanding Ammo is in regards to the Geneva Conventions regarding modern conflict. I remember being in the forces watching training videos for POW processing, Handling Civillians oh and not messing around with 9mm Rounds with your bayonette cutting nasty notches in them. Expanding ammo, in the forms of ballistic tips, hollow points, soft points etc etc is allowed when using against game and vermin. Im just trying to figure out if ****** are included in this statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackbart Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Don't waste your time.. It will end up in the bin. I wrote to a paper last year complaining about a load of bullox they wrote about kids with guns blah blah blah.It was aimed at legally held gun owners but said tosh about "running round the streets with guns" I said something like the person who wrote it obviously knows nothing about licensing and the such and was deliberately misleading the public. To my amazement 2 days later there was a half page apology explaining they had got it wrong and should not have confused legit shotgun holders with criminals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badshot Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Gents. The use of Dum Dums, Expanding Ammo is in regards to the Geneva Conventions regarding modern conflict. I remember being in the forces watching training videos for POW processing, Handling Civillians oh and not messing around with 9mm Rounds with your bayonette cutting nasty notches in them. Expanding ammo, in the forms of ballistic tips, hollow points, soft points etc etc is allowed when using against game and vermin. Im just trying to figure out if ****** are included in this statement. It would be nice. They certainly act like vermin. The only trouble is I would definitely be pushing it with the hmr, really would need a centre fire I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Surely what this means is that it is illegal to shoot humans with expanding amunition. Strange that hay No - they are only illegal for use in international armed conflict by the armed services of countries who are signatories to the Geneva Convention. They are perfectly legal for official domestic use against humans. ZB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shot shot Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 No - they are only illegal for use in international armed conflict by the armed services of countries who are signatories to the Geneva convention. They are perfectly legal for domestic use against humans. ZB or special forces Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HW682 Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Just as an aside...I think I read that "Dum Dum" comes from the name of an Indian arsenal /ammo factory or similar where the British Army first used them. Here it is......Wiki Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 And my fact for the day is that the 5.56x45 was chosen as the standard issue round, as it's designed to injure, not kill, which takes 3 people off the battlefield, not 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leaseone Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I thought a proper Dum Dum was when you (not me) cut a cross in the head of the round so that it expanded better on impact as some soldiers did to rubber bullets years ago (not me) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 And my fact for the day is that the 5.56x45 was chosen as the standard issue round, as it's designed to injure, not kill, which takes 3 people off the battlefield, not 1. + its lighter so you can carry more, trucks can also carry more to the front line and they cost less.......or you get more for your money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lloyd90 Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I thought a proper Dum Dum was when you (not me) cut a cross in the head of the round so that it expanded better on impact as some soldiers did to rubber bullets years ago (not me) That is something alot of soldiers did not just with rubber rounds but also full metal jackets. My neighbour was in the army during the 60/70's or something like that, not sure exactly. He told me a story of when he was guarding a post office when the standard issue weapon for that was a shotgun Anyways he said they used there knives to cut an X into the tips of every 2nd FMJ's in the mag so they would expand like a soft point. Better knock down power Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 And my fact for the day is that the 5.56x45 was chosen as the standard issue round, as it's designed to injure, not kill, which takes 3 people off the battlefield, not 1. That 'fact' is repeated more times than any other, mainly on the Internet , but I am sure someone will be along soon with the real reason for the switch from 7.62 to 5.56. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunderbuss Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 And my fact for the day is that the 5.56x45 was chosen as the standard issue round, as it's designed to injure, not kill, which takes 3 people off the battlefield, not 1. Urban myth I'm afraid. It was chosen because the round it replaced (7.62 x 51mm) was deemed to be "too powerful" and because it allowed lighter rifles and more rounds to be carried for the same all up weight. Whilst the 5.56 might be more inclined to injure than kill, than the 7.62 this is not because it was designed that way, but simply because it has a lot less muzzle energy (I canae change the laws of physics cap'n). In fact, bullet designers try hard to enhance terminally ballistics, within the letter (if not the spirit) of the Hague convention, by selecting a design which will become unstable and yaw (tumble) in any medium denser than air. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 (edited) That 'fact' is repeated more times than any other, mainly on the Internet , but I am sure someone will be along soon with the real reason for the switch from 7.62 to 5.56. I was actually told by my boss who served in the marines. So I sort of took his word for gospel (and found it rather interesting!) Edited September 22, 2009 by harfordwmj Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Look up Are you sure he was in the marines? He may try and impress young boys with his soldier stories, I would keep a close eye on him if I was you... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Look up Are you sure he was in the marines? I heard him on the phone to them trying to return all his kit. However if i've understood you correctly, you can look people up? As there is another person I do need to look up. Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.