[tanknetter]

But my point is, we can frag em, blow em all to hell with missiles and plethora of other means of blowing the enemy to bits but we can't use a hollow point bullet?

I understand now. The issue is international laws and treaties (like the Geneva Conventions) that the US is a signatory to. I don't know the rationales behind what's permissable and what isn't, let alone being of the ability to render a judgement. But at face value, you make a really good point. My guess would be that a hollow-tip round can be seen as having the intended purpose of wounding/killing through maiming ... rather than a clean kill. But that's just a guess, and if it is true I don't know how relevant it is to this day and age.

I do believe that the article states that the hollow-tip in the formerly-banned sniper round is to improve accuracy, rather than inflict greater damage on the target. So the difference seems to lie in intentended purpose/outcome rather than actual results.

[Fido969]

My guess would be that a hollow-tip round can be seen as having the intended purpose of wounding/killing through maiming ... rather than a clean kill. But that's just a guess, and if it is true I don't know how relevant it is to this day and age.

Full metal jacket round is designed to wound - it is designed to go right through. It is considered humane to take your enemy out of the fight by wounding, rather than killing.

For the same reason - FMJ bullets are not permitted to be used for hunting in many areas - the object of hunting is to kill, rather than wound.

Commanders figured out later it was better to wound the enemy, rather than kill him - a dead solder is 1 person out of the fight, but a wounded soldier takes 2 or three fellows to take care of him. So, by wounding one enemy soldier, you would take several enemy out of the fight.

That's the old "conventional" wisdom, anyway.