[QUOTE=Pygmy Rugger]
Bear_Nenno, can you (or somebody else familiar) educate me on this specific point about the GC? I, while not being in the armed forces, have also heard about the GC designating weapons that could be used against infantry, and weapons that were designed to disable equipment, and you couldn’t use certain weapons solely to kill humans. Turns out I was misinformed, but can you elaborate on the Straignt Dope?
[/QUOTE]
Generally speaking, the Geneva Conventions had nothing to do with ammunition or weapons. It had to do with things like treatment of POWs and wounded, civilians on the battlefield, Combatants vs noncombatants, Red Crosses and engagement of medical personnel, and I think stuff about religious personnel as well. Basically it was who can you shoot, and when. It wasn’t what can you shoot them with.
The Hague conventions, much much earlier did deal with ammunition and munitions. But it still did not mention large bullets or machine guns. I always here the “Can’t use an M60 or M240B on a person” or the “Cant use a .50 cal on a person, only the equipment. But you can shoot the equipment the person is wearing and it will go right through and the person is only collateral damage” :rolleyes:
But the Hague convention doesn’t say anything even close. It made illegal the use of expanding hollowpoint and other bullets that are designed to flatten and the practice of dropping bombs from balloons. Nothing at all about the size of the bullet.