The Geneva convention is strange. I was a combat medic, I was allowed to carry a weapon for personal protection, but "technically" not engage an enemy unless I or who I was treating was under threat. Also it's a war crime to target medics, but in Iraq and Afghanistan we were often targeted.
Through out the history of modern warfare medics were targeted, sad to say. But if you want to stall an advance if the medic is dead who is going to advance, knowing the guy that would risk his life to save you was gone.
@thomasohanlon1060 you're correct brother... if "doc" is dead it's difficult for the rest of the infantry to go on. I'll say though if you are a good "doc" those other grunts will protect you at all costs... which I respected, but also kind had a dislike for at the same time. Didn't want them risking their life for mine!
@@elusive1003 it goes without saying if you want to be dead in a hurry, hurt Doc or just come close to hurting, you will die slow but fast. But all I was talking about is this has been illegal from the Geneva Convention of 1864. It is actually an interesting document.
As a Marine "Regimental Surgeon" I qualified as a sharpshooter with the .45 and .38 caliber pistol but you're right: I wasn't supposed to use that skill except as you said.
@@thomasohanlon1060 Slight correction: The total ban on exploding bullets didn't really come into effect, apparently until 2013, with the final ratification by all parties of "the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or Have Indiscriminate Effects (known as the Convention on Conventional Weapons), in Geneva on 10 October 1980 , and its Additional Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons, adopted in Vienna on 13 October 1995. These treaties, however, adopted language much older: "Explosive projectiles that weigh less than four hundred grams (fourteen ounces), as established by the 1868 St. Petersburg Declaration Renouncing the Use, in Time of War, of Certain Explosive Projectiles". I have a Model 1870 Springfield rifle which is very similar to the Model 1863 that would have been in use in 1864. It shoots solid lead bullets. I'm not sure hollow points had been invented at that time.
We have a 20mm and a 30mm armor piercing, exploding round. Totally legal to use. You have seen the A-10 using it. That round explodes after it gets through the armor and inside a tank or armored vehicle.
@@captin3149 Also the fact that diameter isn't the key factor here, its overall projectile mass. The 20mm cannon round used by planes (and whatever else actually uses that caliber these days) has a much longer projectile than the XM29's. Because its totally legal to vaporize someone. But only removing a single arm or leg is considered maiming and is thus, illegal.
@@captin3149The M-4 carbine can have a 40mm grenade launcher...this is no different, and they are simply grenades moron..the 5.56mm ammo comes out of a different barrel...no different than our current grenade launcher, just more precise.
Yhe US is not a signatory nation of rhe 1899 Hague Convention (specifically section three govering ammunition) - its amazing how many videomakers dont acknowledge (or even know this).
When I was in the Army, we had the M203. The M203 was a 40mm grenade launcher that was mounted to our M16A1 rifle. I don't see the difference. As far as the Geneva convention is concerned.
Projectile weight, the 40 mm is above the minimum weight the 25 is below, it so the 40 mm is considered ordinance and thus leagel the 25 is a bullet and thus illegal. (Edit )And technically speaking this isn't the Geneva Convention, it's the Hague convention. Contrary to popular belief the Geneva Convention doesn't cover actual combat it covers the treatment of prisoners and the treatment of civilians in war all weapons treaties are separate.
@@phillipmorel5116 Yeah, a lot of folks confuse all of these kinds of laws/rules as being part of the Geneva Convention(s), when many of them are really part of the Laws of Armed Combat (LOAC) or other such guidelines that have been created over the years. But the average person doesn't even know about those, and the Geneva Convention(s) are just what everyone has heard of.
@@secretsquirrelgames geneva conventions are the really simplified versions, theres so many things added on in later years that convelude the combat. if those were deleted, the us military would wipe a battlefield in minutes, regardless of circumstance or terrain.
The 1911 A1 handgun was used for many years. However, some soldiers would cut a cross in the head of the bullet so that on impact it might blow apart in a body making a larger wound. Then there was the short lived M1 A1 rifle. The original M1 rifle was a standard World War 2 weapon. The improvement was a clip that could be slapped into the bottom of the receiver.
A couple points of clarification, to clear up any misconceptions, on the M1 Garand & M1A1, if I may. M1. Correct as far as the US service rifle in WW2. Chambered for the .30-06 Springfield cartridge that was loaded via an 8 round en bloc "clip". The M1A1 is a folding stock carbine version of the 30 M1 Carbine developed for airborne troops and chambered for the .30 caliber cartridge, much smaller than the .03-06. This did not replace the M1. The full stock version was fielded in conjunction with the M1, primarily for rear echelon troops as it was lighter & easier to carry. Like the M1 it was semi-auto. A later version, M2, was select fire, capable of full auto. The M14, 7.62 x 51mm NATO, replaced the M1 Garand. This is a select fire rifle, capable of full auto. It's loaded via a detachable box MAGAZINE, not a 'clip'. Modern firearms, that don't have an internal fixed magazine loaded from above via an open bolt, use detachable box magazines not 'clips'. The M16 replaced the M14. The readily available civilian version of the M14 is the Springfield Armory M1A, semi-auto only. A fine rifle that I happen to own. Civilian ownership of an M14 is subject to NFA & GCA 1968 rules covering full auto capable firearms.
Cutting crosses into bullets is Movie BS it does not cause them to blow apart and if it was done it would have been done to lead bullets (still wouldn’t blow apart tho) which are much softer then the FMJ bullets that would have been issued in WW1 and later.
These were meant to be air-bursting grenades. TH-cam "Mk 44S Bushmaster II cannon live firing 30mm Mk 310 Programmable Air Burst Munition". Same idea, but better implemented on the Bushmaster.
The Hague Conventions were signed international treaties that outlined some things as war crimes, exploding bullets, poison gas in artillery shells, etc. in ww1 the Germans thought they found a work around by deploying poison gas from canisters on the ground…. The British did not see it this way and retaliated with gas in artillery shells. So all forms of gas attacks were outlawed in the Geneva Conventions. Along with some cross sections of bayonet (designed to wound in ways that are almost impossible to treat) and rules on treatment of captured soldiers and civilians
The reason exploding bullets are banned (as are bullets that intentionally deform when hitting the target) is that they create much more devastating wounds whereas jacketed or solid bullets just make mainly straight through holes. The point here is to put the enemy out of action without maiming them and or unnecessarily killing them. One can argue with this philosophy in war, but it is what it is. Also note that explosive bullets weren't really banned by international agreement until 2013 when the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or Have Indiscriminate Effects (known as the Convention on Conventional Weapons), in Geneva on 10 October 1980, and its Additional Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons, adopted in Vienna on 13 October 1995 were ratified by all parties. These documents, however, adopted language dating back to 1868 language: "Explosive projectiles that weigh less than four hundred grams (fourteen ounces), as established by the 1868 St. Petersburg Declaration Renouncing the Use, in Time of War, of Certain Explosive Projectiles" were banned.
The jacketed 5.56 mm bullets tumble and break at the cannelure, which creates devastating wounds. Any bullet that is long, and rear heavy, will tumble in flesh and just as devastating as any hollow point bullet.
The exploding bullet argument is so stupid because it explodes outside of the human body like a frag grenade, exploding bullets explode in the human body. The ammo is grenades that explodes mid-air. It's a grenade.
The Hague Accords and the Geneva conventions are what you're thinking of for written lists of war crimes. There's a lot beyond them - but they're good starting points. Firearms haven't advanced enough to justify upgrading the rifle - when it's in the same caliber. That's why the M16/m4 and AK still see frontline service. You'd be talking at most a 10% improvement (most likely 5% or less) in performance of a new rifle vs replacing millions of firearms and probably a billion rounds of ammunition. The new Sig Spear rifle (xm-7) and the new MG 338 machine gun in 338 norma magnum have come out due to the increased accuracy as well as body armor. The XM 7 and the XM 250 (replaces the M249 SAW) in 6.8x51 have a pressure rating of 80,000 PSI - 15,000 more then the current M855A1 ammunition for the M4. The MG 338 was developed to have something more effective then 7.62 NATO but more portable then a 50 caliber machine gun with more penetration then the 6.8x51 at longer ranges. The XM-7 and XM-250 are in troop trials the MG 338 is in testing and evaluation.
Abraham Lincoln actually mandated the Lieber Code of 1863 (not 1868) which were rules of war for the Union Army to follow during the US Civil War and one of them was to outlaw "exploding bullets". At the time, they were using .68 and .57 caliber bullets that were large enough to have explosives in them if they wanted. It was a gentleman's agreement for both sides of the US Civil War to follow the same rules of war because if one side stopped following the rules, no one would and they would look bad to the public. Rebels have to rebel, but there are limits. :) The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 dictated what kinds of weapons civilized militaries should use in time of war. The Geneva Conventions were held between 1864 and 1949, they determined how prisoners and wounded would be treated and gave the Red Cross access to prisoners and wounded. Not every country agreed to sign either treaty, but as a requirement for various partnerships and alliances, most European countries follow them, even if their enemies don't. The US didn't sign any of them, but they follow them. Various rebel groups the US has gone to war with completely ignore the rules we force ourselves to follow. Funny thing, the Fat Electrician talks about the US using shotguns in another video which the Germans claimed was a war crime, but the Germans using poisonous gas was A-OK. I guess it was better for someone to get stabbed with a bayonet and die the next day vs getting a load of buckshot to die immediately? There are legal loopholes. "Dum Dum" bullets are named specifically in the Hague treaties. At a certain time, British soldiers were carving "X"s" into their bullets to make impromptu hollowpoints out of them. The bullets were solid lead at the time, the rifles used blackpowder which isn't as powerful as smokeless powder, they were powerful, but not as powerful as modern rifles. They were using them against rebelling Indians in Dum Dum, India. "Normal" wounds would go through an arm, while a "DumDum" bullet would rip the arm off. When smokeless powder replaced blackpowder, the bullets had to have a copper jacket, which made the bullet solid and more "humane" because they were less likely to fragment (explode) on impact and blow your arm off, theoretically (physics is still going to physics). Hunting rounds use soft tip ammo or hollowpoints to deliver massive shock to the target to kill them quickly and humanely, the bullet practically turns inside out because there's no structure keeping it in one piece compared to military full metal jacket ammo. Some time later, when the 5.56 round was introduced, the bullets were smaller and lighter, going significantly faster. Even though they were full metal jacket, the lead core is fully enclosed in a copper shell, when a small, fast bullet hits a person, the bullet fragments. There's nothing to stop fragmentation, it's the laws of physics. Just like a big heavy car hitting a brick wall at 50 mph versus a small car hitting a brick wall at 80 mph, the car and wall explode from kinetic energy. The Russians took it a step further. They went from their .30 caliber (7.62x39) round to a 5.45mmx39 round, a much smaller bullet going much faster except they designed their bullet with a cavity inside the tip. It wasn't an exposed hollowpoint or lead core, but it acts like a hollowpoint when it hits a target, guaranteeing it will fragment, but it's completely legal because the tip is fully enclosed, looking like a regular full metal jacket. Now there's a sniper round that the US and other countries use called the Sierra MatchKing (the brand name) Open Tipped Match (OTM, the bullet style) that's super accurate. Technically it's a hollowpoint, but the US JAG (Judge Adjutant General, the military's lawyers in front of the World Court) argued that it's not a hollowpoint because it wasn't designed for expansion like a "real" hollowpoint, so it's completely legal to use in combat. If they had bumped the X-29 a few more mm to 30mm which would have increased the weight, it would have counted as a munition and not a bullet. Small arms are basically repeating themselves at this point. The general designs are the same the only difference is the manufacturing tolerances and materials are getting better and the electronics are getting smaller and more efficient. The next step are gauss rifles which use electromagnets to accelerate a projectile. Right now they cost thousands, only fire so many shots before you have to swap out batteries, and they're about as powerful as a .22 rifle. But they're more quiet than most suppressed guns and have no muzzle flash.
Obviously, we need a civilian version of this thing. For hunting squirrels. In general, the thing that makes a war crime a war crime, is when it's nasty for no good reason, i.e., when it doesn't confer enough of a strategic or tactical advantage, to justify how terrible it is. So for example chemical weapons are a war crime because the wind is notoriously unpredictable, so you can't really control whether the mustard gas is going to hurt the enemy soldiers, your own soldiers, or nearby civilians. Blowing up non-combatant hospital ships is a war crime, because those soldiers were already out of action anyway, the advantage you gain by killing them is negligible, and all it really does is waste ordnance and make people hate you. Exploding bullets are a war crime because, at the time when they were invented, they were a logistical nightmare to manage, and they didn't increase lethality to any significant extent (generally, the bullet either hit something vital or it didn't, and the wound either turned septic or it didn't); they just made surviving a gunshot wound more painful. And so on. Logically speaking, the smart grenade launcher probably *shouldn't* be a war crime (because it does confer a significant tactical advantage), but it's hard to get these things reclassified when they have such a well-established history. Sixty thousand years from now when our descendants are using antimatter-based ordnance in space wars, they're going to have to find a way to pad the anti-matter projectiles with enough extra mass to avoid them being classified as bullets. Nuclear weapons aren't a war crime because when they were invented, they conferred an obvious strategic advantage.
Not the squirrels! Target practice on any "dog" smaller than the average size cat. Really liked your comment. But I've always thought the term "war crimes" was an oxymoron. War is not civil. Why should it matter how you kill the enemy? Wouldn't the worst, most despicable way deter the enemy from wanting to fight? I suppose it could infuriate them to want to fight more, idk. But I think Vlad the Impaler deterred the mongols from conquering his area. Probably gonna eat crow for that comment, but I am curious what others think about that viewpoint.
I love the fact he talks about how the M4/M16 can already do short or long combat, but conveniently doesn't say that you could swap the XM8 barrels on the battlefield. Something that can not be done with the M4/M16 platforms even off the field, because they aren't made to be able to swap barrels at all.
17:14 Nuclear weapons are actually banned as well. While they are considered illegal and banned, nations kind of overlook that particular rule and consider them to be a weapon of last resort. The problem being that nations know that if they use their nuclear weapons, the clear response by the attacked nation is to use the same force in kind. This concept is appropriately named M.A.D., otherwise known as Mutually Assured Destruction. In so many words, this basically just means that I will hurt you just as bad if not worse than you hurt me, but what's the point if were both dead. This concept was established long before any actual rules were put in writing, and even then they are more of a formality than actual rules being followed. And when it comes to unstable or hostile powers obtaining nuclear weaponry, the Nuclear powers that be try to stop them as much as possible because usually in those cases, unlike the relationships between existing nuclear powers, those bad actors ABSOLUTELY CAN and WILL martyr themselves to take out an enemy and do not care or follow international wartime laws. This is especially evident and relevant in today's day and age when you hear about chemical weapon attacks. Chemical weapons have been been considered war-crimes for decades now. With all that being said, there are 3 irrefutable rules that come with war-crime laws. They are; 1) It's not a war crime if it's the first time 2) Wartime law is more like guidelines than actual rules and realistically no one is stopping you from disobeying those laws & 3) HOWEVER, failing to abide by or outright ignoring wartime laws and committing war crimes is the number one fastest way to get jumped and completely annihilated by the international community at large.
Warcrimes are interesting, alot of it is about not harming soldiers in a way that is harder to medically treat (thus no explosives that detonate inside people) and a great example is the ban of triangle shaped bayonets on rifles, because a triangle shaped stab wound is much harder to treat than one from a normal blade.
i remember when i was being trained on the M2 that they told us we technically weren't allowed to use it on personnel, so when you are seemingly using it on personnel your response was that you were aiming for the equipment the guy was carrying and not himself.... haha
No reason it can't be used on personal..baloney..the .50 cal sniper rifle uses the same Browning Machine Gun round. There is a special rounnd that has a smalll explosive charge, with zirconium to inhance the incidiary effect.
@psych77777 I have no doubt you were told that. Thank you for your service by the way! I was just pointing out that there was no reason for them to tell you that. This guy is do damn annoying, and stupid. This is a grenade launcher, designed for air burst..it is not an exploding bullet. It was scrapped.
You probably won’t get this but I’ll try. When you come to the states, look and see if there are any Pow Wows taking place in that time frame. You won’t be disappointed if you go to one! Once in a lifetime experience!! Have a fantastic trip and safe travels!!
I'm late to the the video but I remember about 20 years ago when they were working on this weapon. It was "the weapon of the future". But many people kind of knew it wouldn't work for the reasons he mentioned.
There is an entire Revised "Law of War Manual"! Its easily found online but its a long read to be fair! Just keep in mind that so many do not follow it or just try to find their way around it!
Not sure what the rule says technically. But when I was in we were told you can't shoot personnel (people) with a 50 cal. Only Equipment. cars, trucks , planes ect. But then they said your helmet, pack, boots. even your belt buckle are considered equipment.
You need to take a look at Brandon Herrera’s AK 50 video he’s one of the guys that might be supplying some of the full auto weapons if it’s down in Texas.
XM stands for Experimental Model....that doesnt necessarily mean this particular model will be a new military rifle. This prototype might go through several modifications before it is fielded by the Dept of Defense to the services. The next generation of service rifles could end up being M-29 A 4 , for example, which "A" would stand for the first modification series, 4th produced prototype after 4 modifications. I hope this helps you understand better how the US military names its weapons wither weird looking numbers.
Hey guys I wanted to tell yall. You should go to the Red River rivalry. It is a week long fair and you and the kids would love it. And it is the only game that is half one teams fans. Other half texas. Split right down the 50 yard line.
There is nothing illegal W Grenades that are tad smaller...nor really for exploding bullets for which US has been improving on since.pre'97.... May be some arcane deal written somewhere but my unit has tested 3 separate versions since 98. Nothing wrong w a round exploding over an enemy hold down in a trench and estimating range.to pop over their butts taking em outs the fight. The explosive concerned are grenade damage type....which we still have grenades being fired in 40mm doing the damage written against..... So much for cruel and unusual weapon systems!!
A lot of war crimes when it comes weapons is how it kills. A very generalized look at it would be if it gives a quick clean kill its okay, if it causes unnecessary injuries and doesn't kill fast, its bad. Like several gases were banned because they don't kill, they disable soldiers by fucking their nervous system. Which effects them for the rest of their life assuming they make it home.
I'm reminded of a line from a movie in which the protagonist says to a government official, ''Why don't you do what you do best, take something simple and complicate it!''
@@LemonjellowThose are expanding hollow point. Bulllets, not exploding bullets. These are grenades,, nott bullets. Bullets are considered to be .50 inch and undeer...50 cal...everything llarger is considered a grenade or a cannon shell, which all explode, unless solid armor piercing round. Even the 50 cal has a round that has a small charge and zirconium as a incidiarry element..none of you morons have any idea what you are talking about.
@@Sulser753a Grenade can produce multiple wounds but an exploding bullet would create wounds that have multiple wound channels making it harder for a soldier to get medical field attention and survive, and cause more extreme suffering. That's why they have banned hollowpoint and Frangible bullets, and any explosive under 2" in war, because they break apart inside the body and cause multiple wound channels that are hard to get bleeding to stop. Kind of ironic being as it's war and they're killing each other, but it's to be a bit more humane and have it be objects that make wounds that are easier to survive, or ones that kill instantly to keep suffering down.
@@Sulser753 it's still a part of the Hague Convention of 1899 and the Saint Petersburg Declaration of 1868 that bans exploding projectiles of less than 400 grams and weapons designed to aggravate injured soldiers so that they aren't tortured by their injuries and have a chance at surviving being wounded.
Marine Corp at least in the 90s was notorious for being stingy with batteries I knew buddies that had family send them batteries for their gear because they could never get them through channels.
This video is full of inaccuracies. The XM-29 program was halted in 2004. So this is not America's future weapon. Research and development on airburst rifles was started way back in the 90s. And the Hague Treaty actually has a size limitation that defines what is and isn't okay for airburst ammo. It is generally accepted that above 400 grams (roughly 37mm) is completely fine for airburst. We already use fragmentation grenades which do exactly what an airburst round would do. And there really isn't an actual international law banning them. It's just sort of an understanding. The US government has placed its own restrictions on its military and could just lift them at will. In terms of international war rules, a lot of it is "de jure" meaning it doesn't actually exist as written and agreed to by signature law... it is just accepted and practiced by everyone. In this respect the US has respected and adhered to these accepted principles despite not being a signatory to them. The XM-29 program lead to numerous spin offs. The XM-29 had issues. It was too large, hard to use, heavy, and others. There are now under dev and testing other platforms at are more specialized versions of the XM-29. There is an airburst gun that essentially fires programmable grenades as propellantless rockets. They can set the distance for it to fragment so that it just clears whatever enemy is hiding behind and explodes, making them extremely accurate and limited in harm. The MP7 was a spin off of the XM-29 program as well and is in use.
17:14 yup, since then most countries that have nukes have signed pacts agreeing not to use them. And I don’t know if you all would learn about this. But most of the scientists who developed nukes didn’t think they should be used. After the first test the US almost had tons of the scientists and engineers working on the project quit because of how devastating of a weapon they were creating. Also part of the reason the US hasn’t evolved past the M-16 platform is because of how refined the firearm is. It can be stripped down and have full repairs done in a matter of minutes, is modular (like he said in his video) allowing the weapon to be outfitted dozens of different ways to fit just about any scenario you could find yourself in. While it is far from perfect. Its gotten super close though time and sheer training.
Yeah, there’s a lot of weird rules of war. Like medics can only use their weapon to defend themselves or their patients, they can’t fire the 1st shot. But they also are supposed to be immune to attack since it’s also a war crime to attack medical personnel, which is probably the most ignored rule there is. And hollow point ammunition is banned, despite it being more effective and less likely to cause collateral damage than traditional ammunition, because the expanding ammo of 150 years ago was considered unnecessarily cruel. Also, there are hundreds of different treaties and conventions but for most of them, if your nation didn’t sign it then you can claim to be exempt from following it.
Reasons for slow developments in firearms is the Geneva conventions but frankly most countries have at least one weapon or system that violates those conventions or guidelines. The other reason is physics... there are limits on ballistics based on mass and velocity of the bullet and the size of the cartridge. Also, Handheld or shouldered fired weapons can't be too heavy either. If it fires large rounds then one soldier cant carry as many.
The reason for slow development in firearms is that the most efficient designs have all ready been developed and have been in production for decades making them incredibly cheap compared to something that might be better but only marginally so and significantly more expensive. In short because of diminishing returns. If you look at what the US army is investigating for its future rifle programs it’s mostly in bullet manufacturing such as caseless or more advanced scopes with built-in rangefinders. Not the guns themselves
I love the reaction videos from England, Australia, and New Zealand. As an American with mostly British and Scottish heritage (which I believe those 2 are kind of the same thing) I can't help but to feel envious of people living in those countries. If my ancestors jumped on a different boat, I could live there. I get jealous, and I feel 'wow how lucky to live there, it's so exotic' then I realize that anywhere, that you don't live, is 'exotic' But even knowing that, something about being a kiwi or Aussie just seems cool
No it's not. I'm Irish scot English with a wee bit of Welsh. My family on my mother's side came over on the Mayflower. Everyone in my mother's side was in every war except viet Nam and korea..aged out..no more sons . I've been to Australia many times who is now my ex. Don't fantasize on that. It's very socialist backwards. It's Canada upside down and worse. It's a small isolated population with no sense of independence. They have no constitution. Don't buy the Kool-Aid
@@happyretireeshc enjoy your oligarchy and corporatocracy, shame you don't even have the magna carta anymore. next stop is dictatorship and it's not far off.
I remember this program all the way back in the early 00s. I thought the XM-29 looked pretty stupid, XM-8 less so but still stupid, and the XM-25 was badass. This really shows the incompetence of the Defense Industry as a whole, not just government bureaucracy. I don't even care about the "legality" of the mini smart grenades, it's not like anyone else follows the Rules of War anyway... good point about the ammunition & where the components come from though. I can't imagine having to try and explain how we spent millions if not billions of dollars over 30 years coming up with this next gen weapon and have fuck all to show for it.
If you end up going back to Texas you should try to Collab with Matt Carriker/ Demolition Ranch, He would be great for hosting and teaching how to use guns. If the NZ Family is looking for that kind of experience
If you can meet up with the Fat electrician 😜, please do a video with him. This would be epic! I'm glad you are coming back to the United States. You are a welcome addition to our American family. Safe travels please
American here I'm sure my canadian neighbors will agree with me it's never a war crime the first time and if it's just us two queue the doom music and sinister smiles 😂
I love your guys videos. Seen almost everyone. Just heads up the audio on the fat electrician side of this video is pretty bad. I don’t know if it’s TH-cam or it happened in editing but just thought I’d let you know. Have a good time in the US again :-)
The Geneva Convention (honestly the most boring Con of them and is competing for worst Con in the world along side Fire Fest and Dash Con) has a lot of arbitrary rules. The reason I call them arbitrary is that they're rules that apply to those who have agreed to them. So for instance Russia has not agreed to the Geneva Convention. North Korea also has not agreed to Geneva Con. So that ends up drawing a divide of situations like, "Well they're killing indiscriminately and using chemical weapons. Why can't we just use whatever?" And then the ones on the Geneva Con then condemn the ones breaking those clauses against a nation not subscribed to the Con. On the flip side, only general war crimes can be sentenced, but not really on the grounds of the Geneva Convention concerning the party not part of the Con. So it's a great idea on paper and in peace time, but in practice it gets REALLY messy. But some better known clauses of the Geneva Con are like don't use cluster munitions during war, you are not allowed to use anti-riot and crowd control tools in warfare (tear gas and such), do not shoot any one bearing the red cross as that is specifically reserved for medical personnel. Do not shoot medical personnel. Prisoners of war are to be treated humanely and with respect. Historical monuments and places of worship will not be damaged (that one I believe is a universally subscribed war crime.) Do not use bio/chemical/atomic weapons in escalation. The use of anti-personnel mines are prohibited. It's just more or less unfortunate that with not everyone on board with the Geneva Con, EVERYONE is generally looking for loopholes or have found one or a couple and are keeping them in their pocket just in case they might need to bend the rules.
You should watch the fat electricians " old 666", "war daddy", and " the unkillable tango mike mike" videos those are really good stories and crazy good. Honestly they should make movies of the
A couple things: 1. Don't stop the video when you see the merch ad pop up at the end of his video, he usually has a small outro after that which is usually humorous and telling you about something upcoming. 2. The list of items that you want to start with about the laws of war is called the Geneva Conventions, and it has major contributions to what constitutes a war crime from the US, Australia, and the Canadians, and they all refer to it, semi-jokingly, as the Geneva Checklist.
They have a Lazer gun. It's not a rifle.. it's kinda like a rocket launcher it's huge.. and it shoots massive lazers.. that looks kinda like flares.. but it's kinda like Lazer bullets..
A lot of the laws governing the types of weapons have to do with how humain they are that is why land mines now have a limited life once armed, cluster weapons flame throwers and such are highly fround opon and explodeing bulits are banned
Hardly matters. NASA won't get to Mars before Elon Musk and Space-X and he can show them how it's done there. (PS: Watch the last season of "For All Mankind")
They talk about the US sending Cluster Bombs to Ukraine being a war crime too, but the US never signed that treaty, so it actually isn't a war crime. :) Besides, Russia was already using them since the start of the war.
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
Yeah as soon as F.E. said (on the Unsubscribe Podcast) he was inviting "A New Zealand family" out with them I desperately hopped it was you all!
Ah yes I hopped aswell
I knew who it was as soon as Nic said it lol.
@@Pincushion45what is this?
We have some rabbits in the comment section?
Most certainly
Same :)
The Geneva convention is strange. I was a combat medic, I was allowed to carry a weapon for personal protection, but "technically" not engage an enemy unless I or who I was treating was under threat. Also it's a war crime to target medics, but in Iraq and Afghanistan we were often targeted.
Through out the history of modern warfare medics were targeted, sad to say. But if you want to stall an advance if the medic is dead who is going to advance, knowing the guy that would risk his life to save you was gone.
@thomasohanlon1060 you're correct brother... if "doc" is dead it's difficult for the rest of the infantry to go on. I'll say though if you are a good "doc" those other grunts will protect you at all costs... which I respected, but also kind had a dislike for at the same time. Didn't want them risking their life for mine!
@@elusive1003 it goes without saying if you want to be dead in a hurry, hurt Doc or just come close to hurting, you will die slow but fast.
But all I was talking about is this has been illegal from the Geneva Convention of 1864. It is actually an interesting document.
As a Marine "Regimental Surgeon" I qualified as a sharpshooter with the .45 and .38 caliber pistol but you're right: I wasn't supposed to use that skill except as you said.
@@thomasohanlon1060 Slight correction: The total ban on exploding bullets didn't really come into effect, apparently until 2013, with the final ratification by all parties of "the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or Have Indiscriminate Effects (known as the Convention on Conventional Weapons), in Geneva on 10 October 1980 , and its Additional Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons, adopted in Vienna on 13 October 1995. These treaties, however, adopted language much older: "Explosive projectiles that weigh less than four hundred grams (fourteen ounces), as established by the 1868 St. Petersburg Declaration Renouncing the Use, in Time of War, of Certain Explosive Projectiles".
I have a Model 1870 Springfield rifle which is very similar to the Model 1863 that would have been in use in 1864. It shoots solid lead bullets. I'm not sure hollow points had been invented at that time.
The U.S. is not a ratified signatory to the ammunition restrictions laid out in part four section 3 of the Hauge Convention of 1899.
I sincerely hope you guys can visit The Fat Electrician in Iowa when you visit on your RV trip. That would be an awesome crossover video!
They’re going through Iowa? That’s kind of out of the way from any of the main thoroughfares.
@@AKCFTW it will be in Texas. The fat electrician is also on the unsubscribe podcast and it would be down there with those guys
@@cbogoloYupp, Demo Matt said he’d be happy to have them out at the range. Which is where the range days happen.
Iowa? Yeah Buddy! Go Hawks!! 😁
@Nipper-ty9tk Iowa? It don't exist. There's only south Minnesota and North Missouri😂
I love how he says “it’s never a war crime the first time.”
M16’s have had 40mm grenade launchers mounted to them since the late 1960’s, I was issued one in desert storm.
We have a 20mm and a 30mm armor piercing, exploding round. Totally legal to use. You have seen the A-10 using it. That round explodes after it gets through the armor and inside a tank or armored vehicle.
It's vehicle mounted and not really able to be aimed at individual soldiers easily, so it evidently is counted as ordinance
@@captin3149 Also the fact that diameter isn't the key factor here, its overall projectile mass. The 20mm cannon round used by planes (and whatever else actually uses that caliber these days) has a much longer projectile than the XM29's. Because its totally legal to vaporize someone. But only removing a single arm or leg is considered maiming and is thus, illegal.
@@captin3149The M-4 carbine can have a 40mm grenade launcher...this is no different, and they are simply grenades moron..the 5.56mm ammo comes out of a different barrel...no different than our current grenade launcher, just more precise.
You want recommendations: One of my favorites from the F.E. is the one on the origins of the US Navy vs the Barbary pirates.
Yhe US is not a signatory nation of rhe 1899 Hague Convention (specifically section three govering ammunition) - its amazing how many videomakers dont acknowledge (or even know this).
When I was in the Army, we had the M203. The M203 was a 40mm grenade launcher that was mounted to our M16A1 rifle. I don't see the difference. As far as the Geneva convention is concerned.
Thank you for your service. I carried a blooper for a while.
Projectile weight, the 40 mm is above the minimum weight the 25 is below, it so the 40 mm is considered ordinance and thus leagel the 25 is a bullet and thus illegal.
(Edit )And technically speaking this isn't the Geneva Convention, it's the Hague convention. Contrary to popular belief the Geneva Convention doesn't cover actual combat it covers the treatment of prisoners and the treatment of civilians in war all weapons treaties are separate.
@@phillipmorel5116 Yeah, a lot of folks confuse all of these kinds of laws/rules as being part of the Geneva Convention(s), when many of them are really part of the Laws of Armed Combat (LOAC) or other such guidelines that have been created over the years. But the average person doesn't even know about those, and the Geneva Convention(s) are just what everyone has heard of.
the projectile was more than 14 ounces. so it doesnt qualify as an exploding bullet, it's a grenade, not a bullet.
@@secretsquirrelgames geneva conventions are the really simplified versions, theres so many things added on in later years that convelude the combat. if those were deleted, the us military would wipe a battlefield in minutes, regardless of circumstance or terrain.
The 1911 A1 handgun was used for many years. However, some soldiers would cut a cross in the head of the bullet so that on impact it might blow apart in a body making a larger wound. Then there was the short lived M1 A1 rifle. The original M1 rifle was a standard World War 2 weapon. The improvement was a clip that could be slapped into the bottom of the receiver.
A couple points of clarification, to clear up any misconceptions, on the M1 Garand & M1A1, if I may.
M1. Correct as far as the US service rifle in WW2. Chambered for the .30-06 Springfield cartridge that was loaded via an 8 round en bloc "clip".
The M1A1 is a folding stock carbine version of the 30 M1 Carbine developed for airborne troops and chambered for the .30 caliber cartridge, much smaller than the .03-06. This did not replace the M1. The full stock version was fielded in conjunction with the M1, primarily for rear echelon troops as it was lighter & easier to carry. Like the M1 it was semi-auto. A later version, M2, was select fire, capable of full auto.
The M14, 7.62 x 51mm NATO, replaced the M1 Garand. This is a select fire rifle, capable of full auto. It's loaded via a detachable box MAGAZINE, not a 'clip'. Modern firearms, that don't have an internal fixed magazine loaded from above via an open bolt, use detachable box magazines not 'clips'.
The M16 replaced the M14.
The readily available civilian version of the M14 is the Springfield Armory M1A, semi-auto only. A fine rifle that I happen to own. Civilian ownership of an M14 is subject to NFA & GCA 1968 rules covering full auto capable firearms.
Cutting crosses into bullets is Movie BS it does not cause them to blow apart and if it was done it would have been done to lead bullets (still wouldn’t blow apart tho) which are much softer then the FMJ bullets that would have been issued in WW1 and later.
This was a prototype that was abandoned over 20 years ago
I remember it was in Ghost Recon 2 😂
These were meant to be air-bursting grenades. TH-cam "Mk 44S Bushmaster II cannon live firing 30mm Mk 310 Programmable Air Burst Munition". Same idea, but better implemented on the Bushmaster.
It's like the gun from the 5th element
The Hague Conventions were signed international treaties that outlined some things as war crimes, exploding bullets, poison gas in artillery shells, etc. in ww1 the Germans thought they found a work around by deploying poison gas from canisters on the ground…. The British did not see it this way and retaliated with gas in artillery shells. So all forms of gas attacks were outlawed in the Geneva Conventions. Along with some cross sections of bayonet (designed to wound in ways that are almost impossible to treat) and rules on treatment of captured soldiers and civilians
The reason exploding bullets are banned (as are bullets that intentionally deform when hitting the target) is that they create much more devastating wounds whereas jacketed or solid bullets just make mainly straight through holes. The point here is to put the enemy out of action without maiming them and or unnecessarily killing them. One can argue with this philosophy in war, but it is what it is.
Also note that explosive bullets weren't really banned by international agreement until 2013 when the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or Have Indiscriminate Effects (known as the Convention on Conventional Weapons), in Geneva on 10 October 1980, and its Additional Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons, adopted in Vienna on 13 October 1995 were ratified by all parties. These documents, however, adopted language dating back to 1868 language: "Explosive projectiles that weigh less than four hundred grams (fourteen ounces), as established by the 1868 St. Petersburg Declaration Renouncing the Use, in Time of War, of Certain Explosive Projectiles" were banned.
The jacketed 5.56 mm bullets tumble and break at the cannelure, which creates devastating wounds. Any bullet that is long, and rear heavy, will tumble in flesh and just as devastating as any hollow point bullet.
That's going to be so very exciting! I can't wait to watch you on his show.
The exploding bullet argument is so stupid because it explodes outside of the human body like a frag grenade, exploding bullets explode in the human body. The ammo is grenades that explodes mid-air. It's a grenade.
The Hague Accords and the Geneva conventions are what you're thinking of for written lists of war crimes. There's a lot beyond them - but they're good starting points.
Firearms haven't advanced enough to justify upgrading the rifle - when it's in the same caliber. That's why the M16/m4 and AK still see frontline service. You'd be talking at most a 10% improvement (most likely 5% or less) in performance of a new rifle vs replacing millions of firearms and probably a billion rounds of ammunition.
The new Sig Spear rifle (xm-7) and the new MG 338 machine gun in 338 norma magnum have come out due to the increased accuracy as well as body armor. The XM 7 and the XM 250 (replaces the M249 SAW) in 6.8x51 have a pressure rating of 80,000 PSI - 15,000 more then the current M855A1 ammunition for the M4. The MG 338 was developed to have something more effective then 7.62 NATO but more portable then a 50 caliber machine gun with more penetration then the 6.8x51 at longer ranges. The XM-7 and XM-250 are in troop trials the MG 338 is in testing and evaluation.
Abraham Lincoln actually mandated the Lieber Code of 1863 (not 1868) which were rules of war for the Union Army to follow during the US Civil War and one of them was to outlaw "exploding bullets". At the time, they were using .68 and .57 caliber bullets that were large enough to have explosives in them if they wanted. It was a gentleman's agreement for both sides of the US Civil War to follow the same rules of war because if one side stopped following the rules, no one would and they would look bad to the public. Rebels have to rebel, but there are limits. :)
The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 dictated what kinds of weapons civilized militaries should use in time of war. The Geneva Conventions were held between 1864 and 1949, they determined how prisoners and wounded would be treated and gave the Red Cross access to prisoners and wounded. Not every country agreed to sign either treaty, but as a requirement for various partnerships and alliances, most European countries follow them, even if their enemies don't. The US didn't sign any of them, but they follow them. Various rebel groups the US has gone to war with completely ignore the rules we force ourselves to follow. Funny thing, the Fat Electrician talks about the US using shotguns in another video which the Germans claimed was a war crime, but the Germans using poisonous gas was A-OK. I guess it was better for someone to get stabbed with a bayonet and die the next day vs getting a load of buckshot to die immediately?
There are legal loopholes. "Dum Dum" bullets are named specifically in the Hague treaties. At a certain time, British soldiers were carving "X"s" into their bullets to make impromptu hollowpoints out of them. The bullets were solid lead at the time, the rifles used blackpowder which isn't as powerful as smokeless powder, they were powerful, but not as powerful as modern rifles. They were using them against rebelling Indians in Dum Dum, India. "Normal" wounds would go through an arm, while a "DumDum" bullet would rip the arm off. When smokeless powder replaced blackpowder, the bullets had to have a copper jacket, which made the bullet solid and more "humane" because they were less likely to fragment (explode) on impact and blow your arm off, theoretically (physics is still going to physics).
Hunting rounds use soft tip ammo or hollowpoints to deliver massive shock to the target to kill them quickly and humanely, the bullet practically turns inside out because there's no structure keeping it in one piece compared to military full metal jacket ammo. Some time later, when the 5.56 round was introduced, the bullets were smaller and lighter, going significantly faster. Even though they were full metal jacket, the lead core is fully enclosed in a copper shell, when a small, fast bullet hits a person, the bullet fragments. There's nothing to stop fragmentation, it's the laws of physics. Just like a big heavy car hitting a brick wall at 50 mph versus a small car hitting a brick wall at 80 mph, the car and wall explode from kinetic energy. The Russians took it a step further. They went from their .30 caliber (7.62x39) round to a 5.45mmx39 round, a much smaller bullet going much faster except they designed their bullet with a cavity inside the tip. It wasn't an exposed hollowpoint or lead core, but it acts like a hollowpoint when it hits a target, guaranteeing it will fragment, but it's completely legal because the tip is fully enclosed, looking like a regular full metal jacket. Now there's a sniper round that the US and other countries use called the Sierra MatchKing (the brand name) Open Tipped Match (OTM, the bullet style) that's super accurate. Technically it's a hollowpoint, but the US JAG (Judge Adjutant General, the military's lawyers in front of the World Court) argued that it's not a hollowpoint because it wasn't designed for expansion like a "real" hollowpoint, so it's completely legal to use in combat.
If they had bumped the X-29 a few more mm to 30mm which would have increased the weight, it would have counted as a munition and not a bullet.
Small arms are basically repeating themselves at this point. The general designs are the same the only difference is the manufacturing tolerances and materials are getting better and the electronics are getting smaller and more efficient.
The next step are gauss rifles which use electromagnets to accelerate a projectile. Right now they cost thousands, only fire so many shots before you have to swap out batteries, and they're about as powerful as a .22 rifle. But they're more quiet than most suppressed guns and have no muzzle flash.
Obviously, we need a civilian version of this thing. For hunting squirrels.
In general, the thing that makes a war crime a war crime, is when it's nasty for no good reason, i.e., when it doesn't confer enough of a strategic or tactical advantage, to justify how terrible it is. So for example chemical weapons are a war crime because the wind is notoriously unpredictable, so you can't really control whether the mustard gas is going to hurt the enemy soldiers, your own soldiers, or nearby civilians. Blowing up non-combatant hospital ships is a war crime, because those soldiers were already out of action anyway, the advantage you gain by killing them is negligible, and all it really does is waste ordnance and make people hate you. Exploding bullets are a war crime because, at the time when they were invented, they were a logistical nightmare to manage, and they didn't increase lethality to any significant extent (generally, the bullet either hit something vital or it didn't, and the wound either turned septic or it didn't); they just made surviving a gunshot wound more painful. And so on. Logically speaking, the smart grenade launcher probably *shouldn't* be a war crime (because it does confer a significant tactical advantage), but it's hard to get these things reclassified when they have such a well-established history. Sixty thousand years from now when our descendants are using antimatter-based ordnance in space wars, they're going to have to find a way to pad the anti-matter projectiles with enough extra mass to avoid them being classified as bullets.
Nuclear weapons aren't a war crime because when they were invented, they conferred an obvious strategic advantage.
Not the squirrels! Target practice on any "dog" smaller than the average size cat.
Really liked your comment. But I've always thought the term "war crimes" was an oxymoron. War is not civil. Why should it matter how you kill the enemy? Wouldn't the worst, most despicable way deter the enemy from wanting to fight? I suppose it could infuriate them to want to fight more, idk. But I think Vlad the Impaler deterred the mongols from conquering his area.
Probably gonna eat crow for that comment, but I am curious what others think about that viewpoint.
funny story, it is the starship trooper gun. most guns in scifi movies are from this program,
Wohoo more fat electrician plz ☺️
Nic let "the cat out of the bag" on his Usubscribe Podcast. HOO BOY are you in for a treat.
I love the fact he talks about how the M4/M16 can already do short or long combat, but conveniently doesn't say that you could swap the XM8 barrels on the battlefield. Something that can not be done with the M4/M16 platforms even off the field, because they aren't made to be able to swap barrels at all.
17:14 Nuclear weapons are actually banned as well. While they are considered illegal and banned, nations kind of overlook that particular rule and consider them to be a weapon of last resort. The problem being that nations know that if they use their nuclear weapons, the clear response by the attacked nation is to use the same force in kind. This concept is appropriately named M.A.D., otherwise known as Mutually Assured Destruction. In so many words, this basically just means that I will hurt you just as bad if not worse than you hurt me, but what's the point if were both dead. This concept was established long before any actual rules were put in writing, and even then they are more of a formality than actual rules being followed.
And when it comes to unstable or hostile powers obtaining nuclear weaponry, the Nuclear powers that be try to stop them as much as possible because usually in those cases, unlike the relationships between existing nuclear powers, those bad actors ABSOLUTELY CAN and WILL martyr themselves to take out an enemy and do not care or follow international wartime laws. This is especially evident and relevant in today's day and age when you hear about chemical weapon attacks. Chemical weapons have been been considered war-crimes for decades now.
With all that being said, there are 3 irrefutable rules that come with war-crime laws. They are;
1) It's not a war crime if it's the first time
2) Wartime law is more like guidelines than actual rules and realistically no one is stopping you from disobeying those laws
& 3) HOWEVER, failing to abide by or outright ignoring wartime laws and committing war crimes is the number one fastest way to get jumped and completely annihilated by the international community at large.
4. Whoever wins the war gets to decide how the law is applied and to who.
Warcrimes are interesting, alot of it is about not harming soldiers in a way that is harder to medically treat (thus no explosives that detonate inside people) and a great example is the ban of triangle shaped bayonets on rifles, because a triangle shaped stab wound is much harder to treat than one from a normal blade.
i remember when i was being trained on the M2 that they told us we technically weren't allowed to use it on personnel, so when you are seemingly using it on personnel your response was that you were aiming for the equipment the guy was carrying and not himself.... haha
No reason it can't be used on personal..baloney..the .50 cal sniper rifle uses the same Browning Machine Gun round. There is a special rounnd that has a smalll explosive charge, with zirconium to inhance the incidiary effect.
@@jeffwarren4938 i'm just saying what they told us at training. it gave us a good laugh. haha
@psych77777 I have no doubt you were told that. Thank you for your service by the way! I was just pointing out that there was no reason for them to tell you that. This guy is do damn annoying, and stupid. This is a grenade launcher, designed for air burst..it is not an exploding bullet. It was scrapped.
You probably won’t get this but I’ll try. When you come to the states, look and see if there are any Pow Wows taking place in that time frame. You won’t be disappointed if you go to one! Once in a lifetime experience!!
Have a fantastic trip and safe travels!!
I'm late to the the video but I remember about 20 years ago when they were working on this weapon. It was "the weapon of the future". But many people kind of knew it wouldn't work for the reasons he mentioned.
There is an entire Revised "Law of War Manual"! Its easily found online but its a long read to be fair! Just keep in mind that so many do not follow it or just try to find their way around it!
My favorite part is that the story concludes with an armory somewhere with a bunch of warcrime sticks just waiting on WWIII
A stupid comment...totally false too.
The FE is outstanding at his work. Thorough research and his edits are on point! 👏
Not sure what the rule says technically. But when I was in we were told you can't shoot personnel (people) with a 50 cal. Only Equipment. cars, trucks , planes ect. But then they said your helmet, pack, boots. even your belt buckle are considered equipment.
Sniper rifles use .50 cal...so bogus example!
Always enjoy FE! Check out his video the USS NO GO an island in Manilla bay during WW2,
Yo you guys are gonna meet up with the Electrician?! Awesome! Can’t wait for that lol
You need to take a look at Brandon Herrera’s AK 50 video he’s one of the guys that might be supplying some of the full auto weapons if it’s down in Texas.
His newest story is about the flying angels and it's AWESOME!!!!!
Tears
XM stands for Experimental Model....that doesnt necessarily mean this particular model will be a new military rifle.
This prototype might go through several modifications before it is fielded by the Dept of Defense to the services.
The next generation of service rifles could end up being M-29 A 4 , for example, which "A" would stand for the first modification series, 4th produced prototype after 4 modifications.
I hope this helps you understand better how the US military names its weapons wither weird looking numbers.
I would love a video of you guys going threw and breaking down the war crimes list but I don’t think TH-cam will
Hey guys I wanted to tell yall. You should go to the Red River rivalry. It is a week long fair and you and the kids would love it. And it is the only game that is half one teams fans. Other half texas. Split right down the 50 yard line.
There is nothing illegal W Grenades that are tad smaller...nor really for exploding bullets for which US has been improving on since.pre'97.... May be some arcane deal written somewhere but my unit has tested 3 separate versions since 98. Nothing wrong w a round exploding over an enemy hold down in a trench and estimating range.to pop over their butts taking em outs the fight.
The explosive concerned are grenade damage type....which we still have grenades being fired in 40mm doing the damage written against..... So much for cruel and unusual weapon systems!!
A lot of war crimes when it comes weapons is how it kills. A very generalized look at it would be if it gives a quick clean kill its okay, if it causes unnecessary injuries and doesn't kill fast, its bad. Like several gases were banned because they don't kill, they disable soldiers by fucking their nervous system. Which effects them for the rest of their life assuming they make it home.
Wait WHAT?!?! You’re hang out with the man himself?!?!?! That’s awesome!!!
I'm reminded of a line from a movie in which the protagonist says to a government official, ''Why don't you do what you do best, take something simple and complicate it!''
I never heard of exploding bullets being a war crime.
Neither had we!
@@yournewzealandfamily Section IV article 3 of the 1899 Hauge convention. Which the U.S. did not ratify that section.
@@LemonjellowThose are expanding hollow point. Bulllets, not exploding bullets. These are grenades,, nott bullets. Bullets are considered to be .50 inch and undeer...50 cal...everything llarger is considered a grenade or a cannon shell, which all explode, unless solid armor piercing round. Even the 50 cal has a round that has a small charge and zirconium as a incidiarry element..none of you morons have any idea what you are talking about.
We already have bullets that explode, for example some shotguns have small tnt loads in the shells that explode after impact
The rules for what a civilian can use and the rules for what you can use in war are different.
@@johnhoward7083 I dont think exploding bullets in war should be banned, not much diffrent than a grenade.
@@Sulser753a Grenade can produce multiple wounds but an exploding bullet would create wounds that have multiple wound channels making it harder for a soldier to get medical field attention and survive, and cause more extreme suffering. That's why they have banned hollowpoint and Frangible bullets, and any explosive under 2" in war, because they break apart inside the body and cause multiple wound channels that are hard to get bleeding to stop. Kind of ironic being as it's war and they're killing each other, but it's to be a bit more humane and have it be objects that make wounds that are easier to survive, or ones that kill instantly to keep suffering down.
@@kevinfleming9919 Pal thats the point of war to kill your enemy in any way possibly
@@Sulser753 it's still a part of the Hague Convention of 1899 and the Saint Petersburg Declaration of 1868 that bans exploding projectiles of less than 400 grams and weapons designed to aggravate injured soldiers so that they aren't tortured by their injuries and have a chance at surviving being wounded.
9:05 Yeah, solar panel backup power on optics is actually a thing now.
Marine Corp at least in the 90s was notorious for being stingy with batteries I knew buddies that had family send them batteries for their gear because they could never get them through channels.
TFE's "Origins of the U.S. Navy vs. the Barbary Pirates" should be the next one.
This video is full of inaccuracies. The XM-29 program was halted in 2004. So this is not America's future weapon. Research and development on airburst rifles was started way back in the 90s. And the Hague Treaty actually has a size limitation that defines what is and isn't okay for airburst ammo. It is generally accepted that above 400 grams (roughly 37mm) is completely fine for airburst. We already use fragmentation grenades which do exactly what an airburst round would do. And there really isn't an actual international law banning them. It's just sort of an understanding. The US government has placed its own restrictions on its military and could just lift them at will. In terms of international war rules, a lot of it is "de jure" meaning it doesn't actually exist as written and agreed to by signature law... it is just accepted and practiced by everyone. In this respect the US has respected and adhered to these accepted principles despite not being a signatory to them.
The XM-29 program lead to numerous spin offs. The XM-29 had issues. It was too large, hard to use, heavy, and others. There are now under dev and testing other platforms at are more specialized versions of the XM-29. There is an airburst gun that essentially fires programmable grenades as propellantless rockets. They can set the distance for it to fragment so that it just clears whatever enemy is hiding behind and explodes, making them extremely accurate and limited in harm. The MP7 was a spin off of the XM-29 program as well and is in use.
17:14 yup, since then most countries that have nukes have signed pacts agreeing not to use them. And I don’t know if you all would learn about this. But most of the scientists who developed nukes didn’t think they should be used. After the first test the US almost had tons of the scientists and engineers working on the project quit because of how devastating of a weapon they were creating.
Also part of the reason the US hasn’t evolved past the M-16 platform is because of how refined the firearm is. It can be stripped down and have full repairs done in a matter of minutes, is modular (like he said in his video) allowing the weapon to be outfitted dozens of different ways to fit just about any scenario you could find yourself in. While it is far from perfect. Its gotten super close though time and sheer training.
In several SF guys book, they all talk about loading new batteries in their night-vision ever mission and carrying extra batteries.
You will love his video on, “We did that!”
A funny one I always enjoy from him is the Origin of Toys for Tots. The end story is hilarious
Durning WWII, the Germans had an assault rifle with a bent Barrel that could shoot around the corners of buildings.
Yeah, there’s a lot of weird rules of war. Like medics can only use their weapon to defend themselves or their patients, they can’t fire the 1st shot. But they also are supposed to be immune to attack since it’s also a war crime to attack medical personnel, which is probably the most ignored rule there is. And hollow point ammunition is banned, despite it being more effective and less likely to cause collateral damage than traditional ammunition, because the expanding ammo of 150 years ago was considered unnecessarily cruel. Also, there are hundreds of different treaties and conventions but for most of them, if your nation didn’t sign it then you can claim to be exempt from following it.
Reasons for slow developments in firearms is the Geneva conventions but frankly most countries have at least one weapon or system that violates those conventions or guidelines. The other reason is physics... there are limits on ballistics based on mass and velocity of the bullet and the size of the cartridge. Also, Handheld or shouldered fired weapons can't be too heavy either. If it fires large rounds then one soldier cant carry as many.
The reason for slow development in firearms is that the most efficient designs have all ready been developed and have been in production for decades making them incredibly cheap compared to something that might be better but only marginally so and significantly more expensive. In short because of diminishing returns.
If you look at what the US army is investigating for its future rifle programs it’s mostly in bullet manufacturing such as caseless or more advanced scopes with built-in rangefinders. Not the guns themselves
Seriously, I had no idea! That's crazy.
I love the reaction videos from England, Australia, and New Zealand. As an American with mostly British and Scottish heritage (which I believe those 2 are kind of the same thing) I can't help but to feel envious of people living in those countries. If my ancestors jumped on a different boat, I could live there. I get jealous, and I feel 'wow how lucky to live there, it's so exotic' then I realize that anywhere, that you don't live, is 'exotic'
But even knowing that, something about being a kiwi or Aussie just seems cool
No it's not. I'm Irish scot English with a wee bit of Welsh. My family on my mother's side came over on the Mayflower. Everyone in my mother's side was in every war except viet Nam and korea..aged out..no more sons . I've been to Australia many times who is now my ex. Don't fantasize on that. It's very socialist backwards. It's Canada upside down and worse. It's a small isolated population with no sense of independence. They have no constitution. Don't buy the Kool-Aid
Why do you think they are off nuts on usa? Down there is not that great.
@@happyretireeshc enjoy your oligarchy and corporatocracy, shame you don't even have the magna carta anymore. next stop is dictatorship and it's not far off.
I remember this program all the way back in the early 00s. I thought the XM-29 looked pretty stupid, XM-8 less so but still stupid, and the XM-25 was badass. This really shows the incompetence of the Defense Industry as a whole, not just government bureaucracy. I don't even care about the "legality" of the mini smart grenades, it's not like anyone else follows the Rules of War anyway... good point about the ammunition & where the components come from though.
I can't imagine having to try and explain how we spent millions if not billions of dollars over 30 years coming up with this next gen weapon and have fuck all to show for it.
I bought one of his hoodies that says, it's never a war crime the first time.
I still think it is worth developing these weapons because our potential enemies may not follow the rules. If they dont, we shouldnt either.
If you end up going back to Texas you should try to Collab with Matt Carriker/ Demolition Ranch, He would be great for hosting and teaching how to use guns. If the NZ Family is looking for that kind of experience
When the nuke was dropped it was before the any rules were instated by the Geneva convention. It was a technicality the nuke was just a "bomb."
If you haven't seen his video titled "Winter soldier takes meth, becomes unkillable", put it on your list. Funny AF and just mind boggling.
If you can meet up with the Fat electrician 😜, please do a video with him. This would be epic! I'm glad you are coming back to the United States. You are a welcome addition to our American family. Safe travels please
You guys should watch Dunk Defying Spud Webb and Nate Robinson, it’s so good
You should react to his video on a Vietnam pilot next. It’s the one with “It’s a trap” on the thumbnail
i dont fully know war crimes i only know of 2-3 i never heard of exploding bullets or any mention but they have been used in ww2 as anti tank rounds
Now they have the .277 furry or 6.8x51 round
Modern ammo is actually designed to wound and not kill, the weapons ofww2 were much more deadly
American here I'm sure my canadian neighbors will agree with me it's never a war crime the first time and if it's just us two queue the doom music and sinister smiles 😂
Programmable ammo is nothing new. Ricochet Rabbit has had
smart bullets since the 1960's.
Im a occasional viewer. Im more hardcore than this channel but i wanted you two to know. Great channel.
Thankyou!!
I love your guys videos. Seen almost everyone. Just heads up the audio on the fat electrician side of this video is pretty bad. I don’t know if it’s TH-cam or it happened in editing but just thought I’d let you know. Have a good time in the US again :-)
Yeah it was just this video, we fixed the audio after this one. Thanks for the feedback!
“We should dig into war crimes” 🤣 first draft written by Canada 🤣😱
written for canada, not by canada. that was world war 1 and the take no prisoners policy.
@@blackberrythorns by them writing it I meant that it was all stuff that they had done.
Wait, so your telling me we cant have 10x24mm explosive tip, caseless, light armor-piercing rounds for our M41A pulse rifles? The future is ruined.
I think the Geneva convention should only apply to countries that signed it and follow it.
The Geneva Convention (honestly the most boring Con of them and is competing for worst Con in the world along side Fire Fest and Dash Con) has a lot of arbitrary rules. The reason I call them arbitrary is that they're rules that apply to those who have agreed to them. So for instance Russia has not agreed to the Geneva Convention. North Korea also has not agreed to Geneva Con. So that ends up drawing a divide of situations like, "Well they're killing indiscriminately and using chemical weapons. Why can't we just use whatever?" And then the ones on the Geneva Con then condemn the ones breaking those clauses against a nation not subscribed to the Con. On the flip side, only general war crimes can be sentenced, but not really on the grounds of the Geneva Convention concerning the party not part of the Con.
So it's a great idea on paper and in peace time, but in practice it gets REALLY messy. But some better known clauses of the Geneva Con are like don't use cluster munitions during war, you are not allowed to use anti-riot and crowd control tools in warfare (tear gas and such), do not shoot any one bearing the red cross as that is specifically reserved for medical personnel. Do not shoot medical personnel. Prisoners of war are to be treated humanely and with respect. Historical monuments and places of worship will not be damaged (that one I believe is a universally subscribed war crime.) Do not use bio/chemical/atomic weapons in escalation. The use of anti-personnel mines are prohibited. It's just more or less unfortunate that with not everyone on board with the Geneva Con, EVERYONE is generally looking for loopholes or have found one or a couple and are keeping them in their pocket just in case they might need to bend the rules.
The rules of war will be one of the things that will amaze aiens when we do meet them. 368 pages in the book "New Rules of War"
You should watch the fat electricians " old 666", "war daddy", and " the unkillable tango mike mike" videos those are really good stories and crazy good. Honestly they should make movies of the
Crimes depend on whomever makes the laws.
A couple things:
1. Don't stop the video when you see the merch ad pop up at the end of his video, he usually has a small outro after that which is usually humorous and telling you about something upcoming.
2. The list of items that you want to start with about the laws of war is called the Geneva Conventions, and it has major contributions to what constitutes a war crime from the US, Australia, and the Canadians, and they all refer to it, semi-jokingly, as the Geneva Checklist.
Y'all need to do videos on DemolitionRanch and Kentucky ballistics
They have a Lazer gun. It's not a rifle.. it's kinda like a rocket launcher it's huge.. and it shoots massive lazers.. that looks kinda like flares.. but it's kinda like Lazer bullets..
It is true that nukes basically make the Geneva convention pointless.
You need to watch his videos all the way through the credits
I'm just curious what's under the blanket! Pillows?? LOL✌🐢
A lot of the laws governing the types of weapons have to do with how humain they are that is why land mines now have a limited life once armed, cluster weapons flame throwers and such are highly fround opon and explodeing bulits are banned
Civilian version? Asking for a friend 😆
I’m an American but y’all need to look into Canada 😂😂 they invented the war crime…. Makes me proud 😂😂
Just googled it and yes, the use of nuclear bombs nowadays is considered a war crime!
None of the nuclear powers are signatories of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons
Meanwhile NASA is arguing about critical funding to find out what bathrooms the Astronauts will use on Mars.
Hardly matters. NASA won't get to Mars before Elon Musk and Space-X and he can show them how it's done there. (PS: Watch the last season of "For All Mankind")
They talk about the US sending Cluster Bombs to Ukraine being a war crime too, but the US never signed that treaty, so it actually isn't a war crime. :)
Besides, Russia was already using them since the start of the war.
I hope all 4 of you can visit a gun range when you visit the U.S (yes kids are absolutely allowed to shoot guns in a gun range!)
Crickets
Nick and Matt have already set up a range day for them from what I hear! Can't wait for them to get a taste of freedom haha.
Their reactions would be iconic.
Ground News is pretty good!
There are also like thousands of war crimes, people get tried for them semi often
It’s not a war crime the first time
It's only a war crime if you lose.
There are laws governing the use of nuclear weapons and when they can be used.