so i have heard some amazing stories about how it is "illegal" for a soldier to even shoot another human with the weapon (that they must say "oh, i didnt mean to, i was aiming for his backpack ((just for technicality reasons))), i have heard of how they can pierce tanks with depleted uranium rounds and everything inside the tank is sucked out the exit hole of the bullet, i have heard stories talking about how the bullets of these weapons can just fly near you and rip you limbs off, and i've heard about the bodies of men hit with one explode into gore. what is and what isnt true of these weapons. someone slice through the BS for me here and give me the low down.

The myth you're referring to is the .50 cal "can only be used on equipment". This myth was actually so prolific it was taught in basic in both the Army and Marine Corps for several years. And John Kerry helped perpetuate this myth in testifying before Congress that "the only weapon we were given (on the swift boat) was a .50 cal, which was illegal to use against troops...which is a Geneva Convention violation..."
And for several years troops claimed to be "aiming for their belt buckle, that's military equipment" and other "technicality" crap.

The origins of this myth go back to the Korean War when we had 105mm recoilless rifles. The 105 had a .50 cal spotting rifle used to "ping" the target (armored vehicles usually), then the gunner would fire the 105. Only, troops found that this .50 cal also made a hell of a sniper weapon and would often use it to pick off enemy troops. This gave the weapon's position away and the Koreans (and Chinese) would immediately open fire on it. To stop this from happening, some enterprising SNCO (rumor is it was a USMC Gunny) told the men "not to use the .50 cal on troops in the open.." and as the Geneva Conventions wasn't even dry yet at this time, he added for extra umph "...it's against the Geneva Conventions." And it snowballed from there, eventually being taught in Basic and Boot Camp for several generations of Soldiers and Marines. Some Soldiers and Marines (and apparently Sailors like John Kerry) still believe this myth.

Truth is all of the US weapons systems go through a "Geneva Conventions Test". Every US weapon system has passed the test before being fielded and can be used (as it was designed) on any target on the battlefield. If you modify the weapon (i.e. make a NATO round a hollow point), then you're in violation of the GC. One of the main criteria is the weapon system can not be designed to cause undo suffering or specifically designed to maim vice kill. Making a weapon system requiring a closed coffin is not on the list.

You're confusing the .50 cal with anti-tank rockets (in at least the case with a light armored vehicle), so no, they don't do all of these things. And, have never seen a body "explode into gore". They do some powerful damage, one body I recovered took a single round to the top of the head that exited out his leg. Felt like it broke every bone in his body on the way through.

sniper video

I know its poor quality, but this is only due to the range involved with this shot. This video should give you enough of an answer to see that one does not want to be on the business end of a .50 cal.

Do they even issue hand held .5 cal rifles in the military to anyone other than a hand full of snipers. It is a very effective weapon and should be much more widley issued or POW's should be allowed on the field to give our troops a chance to survive in case they have to shoot someone though a wall with a thermal scope.

There is indeed footage of snipers operating in Afghanistan firing M82A1 Barrett .50 Caliber Sniper rifles into human targets. The range is estimated at no more than 450m-600m in any case. The bodies do indeed blow apart at that range. A .50cal M2 HB will blow someone to pieces at close ranges as well. The Barrett is not practical at close range, as bullets point both ways. You sacrifice distance and safety from your target by firing that close. The overpressure of the round exiting the barrel and muzzle brake generates an obscuration dust cloud around the firer. IDing the shooter's position. The max effective range is close to two miles, there is little need to get close to kill the enemy these days. Privately owned weapons on the battlefield is also another case of someone not knowing what they are talking about. Full metal jacket tungsten carbide rounds aka The Green Tip, Armor Piercing Incinderary Tracer rounds, etc. are not available to the public and would destroy the common personal weapons of any civilian. Also, thermal scopes are impractical and not used. GLIDs are used by spotters, but only have a 2 hour running time because of the power consumption. There is little to no use for thermal sighting systems in a practical sniper employment. That violates the principle of light and lethal. GLIDs and its batteries, UAS-11s are heavy, bulky, and not effective. Snipers fire once, then displace. Thats why it is one shot, one kill.

The .50 Browning Cartridge is legal to use against Ground Troops, always has been. The M107 is a good Rifle but could stand some improvements;

Better Optical suite than the typical Leopold M3

Steel face for the plastic buffer(gets all beat to hell)

M122 Tripod adapter for use in enduring ECP/TCP's as an Precision anti-VBIED weapon.

M1913 rails on sides of upper reciever unit

quote:

Originally posted by thegunny:
sniper video

I know its poor quality, but this is only due to the range involved with this shot. This video should give you enough of an answer to see that one does not want to be on the business end of a .50 cal.

May each and every insurgent wind up like that.
.50 cal? Nice demo, but they're rodent varmints not insurgents. And not Afghanistan.

It's a hunting video from a varmint hunting guide group. Click on the rock chucks scene~~.

http://www.rmvh.com/Scenes.htm

This message has been edited. Last edited by: PT,

one question, you brought up the use of hollowpoint rounds, correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't that under the hague convention, not the geneva convention?

Future weapons the barret M82 with the new 419 barret .5 round, that round and gun could cold bore a 2,500 yard shot.

Thing is, future weapons tends to exxagerate the capabilities of almost everything it shows, this makes sense as this allows them to be given access to a lot of stuff, but it also tends to inflate how powerful our weapons are.

Yes, this is very much true, using a .50cal on a person is not only wrong but not even humane.
But recenly the have came out with the Barett M107, this is a highlt accurate Military .50cal sniper rifle, with up to 1 mile distance, also SEMI-AUTO, and still can keep its accuracy!
There are some exceptions to shooting people with the .50cal im not sure what they are but i will post if i come across them.

Wait what? Why is it wrong and inhumane? How is it any worse than throwing a white phospherous grenade at them or dropping a 500 lb bomb on them, or most of all, shooting them with a small gun that will kill them more slowly? Could you please explain you logic in this one?

quote:

Originally posted by Hyperion:
Wait what? Why is it wrong and inhumane? How is it any worse than throwing a white phospherous grenade at them or dropping a 500 lb bomb on them, or most of all, shooting them with a small gun that will kill them more slowly? Could you please explain you logic in this one?

Well i see where your coming from, but i personaly wouldn't shoot someone with a .50cal its a huge weapon, why not have a lower cal.?...but if it comes to life or death i would definitly shoot them.
I love the .50 cal too.

But i'm just saying we throw MUCH MUCH bigger weapons at them like 105mm HE artillery shells and larges bombs, so I was just wondering why this weapon is so special

quote:

Originally posted by Hyperion:
But i'm just saying we throw MUCH MUCH bigger weapons at them like 105mm HE artillery shells and larges bombs, so I was just wondering why this weapon is so special

Its a weapon Of the future that we have today. Just google for videos of it. Its amazing. A semi-auto sniper that can keep its accuracy while shooting like that is awesome.

I think that XM-109 is one of the greatest sniper rifles (if not THE greatest). I would love to use that. Think what that thing could do to human !

hmmm, seems to be a perfectly good waste of 25mm ammo to use it on a person. Much rather use it for its intended purpose and thats stopping vehicles.

Agreed gunny, that's vast overkill. It's much much more efficiently used breaking howitzers, landed aircraft, and lightly and unarmored vehicles.

As if you would really know.

Harry, once again, another unwarrented insult, once more and I will contact a mod or admin about your completely unwarrented insults.