Thread: Some Steyrs coming up For Sale??

Originally Posted by gimp

[citation needed]

+ 1urban myth heaps of stories about that myth on the net. It was never the problem. More like pointing the thing in the right place ..
Have a look there s heaps of chat about that topic ..

Originally Posted by gimp

[citation needed]

Dont get it?

Originally Posted by R93

Dont get it?

Some kind of proof that it. Was desired as a wounder rather than lethal round ?? I think may be wrong but anyhow.

www.thebangswitch.com/the-poodle-killer-myth/.

Having a chat with some friends not long after buying a 223. I got interested when one told a tale that was it was an intentional wounder

Yeah, no idea if that was the intention when the round was designed but the effects of wounding a soldier is not.
It was doctrine. We were taught that wounding the enemy was just as effective as killing them, maybe more so because of logistics. The intention to wound is not a myth.

Originally Posted by R93

Yeah, no idea if that was the intention when the round was designed but the effects of wounding a soldier is not.
It was doctrine. We were taught that wounding the enemy was just as effective as killing them, maybe more so because of logistics. The intention to wound is not a myth.

I think you are onto it there. Not design but acceptable result intended or not would explain it well .

He's making an assertion, I'm asking for any shred of proof from an official source

His assertion is founded but I doubt it will ever be official.

It doesn't make a lot of logical sense when you stop and think about it but the myth will never die and I can't be fucked arguing on the internet so I'm gonna go read a book instead

Eh?

The thing is any bullet which hits living tissue creates a wound, it is the size and the immediate effect that counts , Way back in 1899 at the Hague Convention when the powers that be were discussing military projectiles they banned hollow pointed ammo , thinking it would upset the British who were using hollow point projectiles, made in the Dum Dum arsenal in India, in their 303's . the Brits had already found that a spitzer projectile with a light cone of alloy or cardboard or even air in the tip was inherently unstable in tissue and would tumble, creating a bigger wound than the hollow point so they happily went along with the idea because it was within the word of the convention if not the spirit .
This is a copy of the declaration:

Declaration on the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body; July 29, 1899

The Undersigned, Plenipotentiaries of the Powers represented at the International Peace Conference at The Hague, duly authorized to that effect by their Governments,

Inspired by the sentiments which found expression in the Declaration of St. Petersburg of the 29th November (11th December), 1868,

Declare as follows:

The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions.

The present Declaration is only binding for the Contracting Powers in the case of a war between two or more of them.

It shall cease to be binding from the time when, in a war between the Contracting Parties, one of the belligerents is joined by a non-Contracting Power.

The present Declaration shall be ratified as soon as possible.

The ratification shall be deposited at The Hague.

A proces-verbal shall be drawn up on the receipt of each ratification, a copy of which, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to all the Contracting Powers.

The non-Signatory Powers may adhere to the present Declaration. For this purpose they must make their adhesion known to the Contracting Powers by means of a written notification addressed to the Netherlands Government, and by it communicated to all the other Contracting Powers.

In the event of one of the High Contracting Parties denouncing the present Declaration, such denunciation shall not take effect until a year after the notification made in writing to the Netherlands Government, and forthwith communicated by it to all the other Contracting Powers.

This denunciation shall only affect the notifying Power.

In faith of which the Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Declaration, and have affixed their seals thereto.

Done at The Hague the 29th July, 1899, in a single copy, which shall be kept in the archives of the Netherlands Government, and of which copies, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to the Contracting Powers.

Originally Posted by R93

Yeah, no idea if that was the intention when the round was designed but the effects of wounding a soldier is not.
It was doctrine. We were taught that wounding the enemy was just as effective as killing them, maybe more so because of logistics. The intention to wound is not a myth.

The intention to wound was in training back in my day. The rationale was akill = 1 out wher a would = 3 or 5 out (depending on evacuation distance for stretcher bearers)

through my 17 years of service we were always taught to shoot for centre of mass but told the 5.56mm projectile while it may well be lethal would more than likely wound and it's unstable movement characteristics within a body would create a large wound channel. the wounding of the enemy was thought to be more effective than killing them as it took more people off the battle field, the one that's wounded, two to carry them and one to tend to the wounds. while this may not always be the case, as far as I am aware it is still the methodology used within the NZ forces today. the forces were in the process of changing projectile weights when I left mid last year, not sure if that was completed as as they were intended to be for the new intermediate length barrels on the upgraded steyr's.

Originally Posted by Rushy

The intention to wound was in training back in my day. The rationale was akill = 1 out wher a would = 3 or 5 out (depending on evacuation distance for stretcher bearers)

It still is Rushy. That is all I was trying to point out.

7.62 wounds as well. Youre trained to hit what you aim at. If it kills or wounds who gives a fuck as long as you hit it first. COD fanboys may think you fly around the battlefield making headshot kills at whim but that is fantasy not real world.

Originally Posted by R93

It still is Rushy. That is all I was trying to point out.

Just read what I typed. Fuck I should slow down with this one finger I use.