|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
U.S. Military Makes Monumental Shift To Hollowpoint Pistol Ammunition
Submitted by:
Anonymous
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In a significant doctrinal shift, the U.S. military is relegating full metal jacketed (FMJ) pistol bullets to a training role, and will be adopting modern hollowpoint designs similar to those used by most domestic law enforcement agencies and citizens who carry handguns for self-defense.
The stunning announcement was made at the U.S Army’s Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey yesterday during the military’s two-day “industry day” for the Modular Handgun System (MHS), which will conclude today.
SUBMITTER'S COMMENT: It's ironic that the announcement was made in a state which prohibits the possession of hollowpoint ammunition outside the home. |
| Comment by:
jac
(7/10/2015)
|
As a former soldier, Artillery, US Army, I don't think this change is well thought out.
It will open the door for our enemies to use hollow point rounds against our soldiers, resulting in more deaths instead of survivable wounds.
Furthermore, a wounded enemy is better than a dead enemy because it ties up more manpower than a dead soldier. Stretcher bearers, corpsmen, doctors, and other resources. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
