Dark Viper

http://www.steyr-aug.com/amr.htm

Look at the round compared to a 7.62mm NATO!

__________________
|TG-33rd|Dark_Viper

munchkin

That's surprisingly disturbing. I remember someone once told me that you don't need to hit a person with a shot from the M95 to kill them - you just need to get near them, and they die of internal trauma. If that's true, using that kinda round would be brutal.

__________________

JMJ

I've been near a .50 sniper rifle as it went off, I don't see how this could happen. The worst place to be is to the sides of the muzzle when it fires, the concussion from the muzzle break is absolutely horrible, but it's not going to kill you.

Mateo

I'd settle for this:

http://www.steyr-aug.com/24inchbarrel.htm

At least then you might be able to get some work done in close range.

xTYBALTx

It is against international treaties to use any rifle larger than 7.62mm on humans. Obviously no one obeys this law, but it's technically true.

__________________
Current good song: Justice - Stress

HellRazor61

You are correct!! The Geneva Convention Treaty expressly prohibits the use of rifle rounds larger than .30cal on soft targets. The large calibur weapons are for use only upon enemy equipment. However, this can be manipulated to say that an enemies shirt is equipment or helmet and so on.

__________________



Operation Iraqi Freedom Vet "101st Airborne Division(AirAssault)"

InfernoBLT11

Well, the treaty only covers Military operation. So, as a law enforcement agency, you could make whatever kind of caliber you wish. The convention's reason is that there is a difference when soldiers who are fighting for their countries and criminals (that included our good friend Osama's goons) who have no regard for moral value. I think the Barret made it through production stage due to a loop hole that allow you to use machine gun bullets of 12.7mm. And you guys can see, a majority of police's sniper rifles have weirdo bullet size.

HellRazor61

Actually the m95 was allowed due to its clasification. It is not a sniper rifle but rather its classification is anti-material rifle. Meaning for use on equipment. The 12.7mm or likewise the US .50cal are prohibited for direct use on humans. However, they can be used on equipment such as a shirt or belt buckle even dogtags.

__________________



Operation Iraqi Freedom Vet "101st Airborne Division(AirAssault)"

jepzilla

So if someone's shooting at you with a barret, strip naked and charge them with your bare hands?

HellRazor61

LOL!! in that case I would just aim for your personel equipment that will be flopping in the breeze! :P

__________________



Operation Iraqi Freedom Vet "101st Airborne Division(AirAssault)"

Dark Viper

Thanks Jep, for turning my thread into a topic about naken men. lol

__________________
|TG-33rd|Dark_Viper

xTYBALTx

I had always thought no one complained about the "violation" that .50's use constitute for two reasons: the first being that the .50's which are deployed are there for anti-material uses; if someone's life is on the line, it's unreasonable to expect them not to use every means at their disposal. The second was that this rule is unenforceable; is someone going to complain that their son was gunned down by a .50? They would have prefferred him killed with a .30?

I have never heard of classifying clothing as "material." Where did you hear that?

__________________
Current good song: Justice - Stress

Lt.Snow

Thats nothing, there is a 25mm rifle out there, I will look up some info on it, but that would be sweet.


EDIT:www.smallarmsreview.com/pdf/payload.pdf

HellRazor61

Basically what I am saying is what we were told by our superiors. Firing a .50cal MG at infantry was against the Geneva convention given that large calibur weapons are used only for destruction of enemy equipment. We were then instructed that anything other than flesh and bone on the enemy is considered equipment and is a fair target. Therefore, if you miss your target then the actual striking of the enemy is accidental and not intentional making it acceptable. Therefore, if asked why did you shoot the enemy soldier with the .50cal your response would be "well I was shooting at his rifle". The only time that fire from large calibur weapons intended solely on killing humans is when it is the only means of self defense.

Basically it is stated in Article 35 & 36of the Geneva Convention which states this:

Article 35.-Basic rules
1. In any armed conflict, the right of the Parties to the conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited.
2. It is prohibited to employ weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.

3. It is prohibited to employ methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment.

Article 36.-New weapons
In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, a High Contracting Party is under an obligation to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by this Protocol or by any other rule of international law applicable to the High Contracting Party.

After which created ''Rules of international law applicable in armed conflict"
Which goes into detail stating that weapons such as the .50cal or 12.7mm or so on are prohibited for use in such a way as their only intent is the death of humans. Read it yourself if you like but it is really long and im not going to post it all on here

__________________



Operation Iraqi Freedom Vet "101st Airborne Division(AirAssault)"

xTYBALTx

That's funny! It would be quite a novel courtroom strategy.

__________________
Current good song: Justice - Stress