As an avid reader of Slashdot myself, I have to take issue with your
implication that Slashdot does any research at all. It's the first
time I've heard of it ;-)
Anyway, on to your question.
The very short answer is yes, glass and plastic bullets are probably
forbidden under the Geneva Convention of 1949, with several caveats -
the main two being, a) nobody really takes any notice of the
convention and b) glass bullets were never manufactured.
The field you're interested in, is that of terminal ballistics - "the
science of what happens when the bullet strikes the target (and thus
the mechanism of incapacitation)":
http://pages.zdnet.com/remingtonsniper/remington700rifleclub/id13.html
Be warned: the above page has a solid anti-gun-control agenda, which
runs throughout the text. Judging by their enthusiasm for the topic,
though, it can probably be relied upon as a fairly good source for
much of the information you require.
As you can see from this page, the actual origin of the ban was in the
Hague Convention of 1899, which banned the use of expanding
projectiles in warfare. This rule was subsequently adopted in the
Geneva Conventions of 1949. Expanding projectiles are those usually
belong to the "soft point" or "hollow point" class of projectiles. See
Declaration III of the Convention, but note that it frowns only on the
projectile class, not on specific types:
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/hague.html
For full details on these classes of bullets, see the link below:
http://www.planetrainbowsix.com/armm/nato3/nato3_manual/ammo.htm
The BBC takes a different view, and sees the expansion of the bullet
as a way to limit entry too deep within the body, perhaps limiting
more fatal injuries - but this does not seem to be the mainstream
opinion in available articles on the internet.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1443324.stm
The reason bullets cause injury and can kill, is the damage they
produce as they enter the body. A small calibre solid lead bullet can
quite easily pass through a non-vital fleshy area, exiting the body
intact and deformed very little, and cause little injury to a man; in
comparison, a large calibre soft point bullet will enter the body,
flatten out or even seperate into different parts, and rip through a
greater area of flesh. The kinetic impact produced will enter still
further into the body, even if a bone manages to stop the bullet. See
the link below for more information (the penultimate and ultimate
paragraphs are most useful):
http://www.ncku.edu.tw/~medicine/wwwboard/messages/397.html
Any bullet which splits up upon entry was (and perhaps still is) seen
as unsporting. It makes it very difficult to for a field medic to
retrieve all the various parts from an injured solder, which can lead
to various septicaemic conditions which tend(ed) to be fatal on the
front line.
To the specifics of glass and plastic bullets: Glass bullets have, as
far as I can tell, never been manufactured. Glass is not a material
suited to withstanding the immense forces placed upon it when fired.
If there was a glass which could be made into a fireable bullet, it
would be too strong to deliver the supposed benefit (that of
shattering into shards when it hit its target). This is, however,
speculation from myself - someone with post-high-school physics may be
able to tell you otherwise.
The plastic category encompasses a wider range, including what some
people call rubber bullets. Plastics is a huge field, ranging from the
old Bakerlite to the modern supermarket bags. At the time the Hague
Convention was passed, plastics were just beginning to enter the
public consciousness (having been around in preliminary forms since
the mid 1800s). At the time, most plastics were brittle - perhaps
useful as a bullet which might fragment. These days, police use
plastic bullets in situations where (supposedly) nonfatal crowd
control methods are needed. At ranges which are not immediate, these
bullets are nonfatal but they still inflict serious injury on a number
of people. The page below contains four photos of moderate facial
injuries to minors - if this is likely to upset you, then please skip
this link.
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/4521/
There have been 17 cases in Northern Ireland (a province held by the
United Kingdom, which is in constant terrorist uproar) where plastic
bullets have caused fatal injuries. Please see the link below for
details (it contains supplementary information beyond the initial page
- see the links at the bottom). Also, note that the page owners have a
political agenda (but who doesn't?).
http://www.relativesforjustice.com/plastic/plastic.htm
Finally, for a slightly more detailed medical approach to these
bullets, see the site below. It contains one photograph of an adult
male, whose back has been fairly badly injured by these bullets. Yet
again, if you feel worried about viewing this kind of material, it
might be best to skip this one too. Note that the article contains
some excellent references to print journals, if you are interested in
taking this topic further.
http://www.mindfully.org/Health/2002/Rubber-Bullets-Israeli-Arab25may02.htm
I hope this has increased your understanding of the issue. If you need
clarification of this answer in any way, I'd be happy to help you out.
-- Search terms: plastic bullet, glass bullet, plastic Geneva
Convention, plastic Hague Accords, plastic Hague Convention 1899 |
Request for Answer Clarification by
pne-ga
on
17 Aug 2002 05:14 PDT
Thank you for your answer and for the comments! Still I think my
question wasn't completely answered. You gave me a lot of information
on what happens when a bullet enters a body, information on different
types of ammunition and what they might be used for, whether plastic
ammunition is harmful or not, or how incapacitation works, all of
which was interesting to read. You also pointed me to the Hague
Convention which disallowed projectiles which easily expand or
fragment in the body, which was a useful.
But my main question was "What is it that makes glass bullets
'particularly nasty', and how do they 'make it extraordinarily
difficult to treat a wound'?". You mentioned that glass bullets are
more a theoretical possibility since they aren't manufactured
(apparently because it would be difficult to make a material both hard
enough and brittle enough to give the desired effects), which is also
useful information (and is a good explanation why I hadn't heard of
glass bullets before).
But the bit about why they are nasty and how (expanding or fragmenting
-- I suppose glass bullets are supposed to be the latter) bullets make
it difficult to treat a wound was not, I feel, answered very well:
only a brief comment in the paragraph beginning "Any bullet which
splits up...". There was a lot of material about temporary and
permanent cavities, penetration depths, and theories as to how people
are incapacitated (kinetic energy, hole size, ...), but not much on
difficulty of treatment.
Can you find me more information on why expanding or fragmenting
bullets make wounds difficult to treat, or the difficulties
encountered in such wounds?
|
Clarification of Answer by
seizer-ga
on
17 Aug 2002 13:05 PDT
My apologies for a slightly delayed response...
Some further insight as to why fragmenting bullets make a wound
particularly difficult to treat can be found in the article linked to
below. Specifically, "Surgery is easy when you know the anatomy, but
when the anatomy is destroyed, the surgeon is at a loss."
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/archives/shoottomaim.htm
When a bullet fragments into tens, hundreds, or even thousands of
pieces, it will spread through the body, destroying what it meets
along the way, until its momentum is spent. The injuries caused are
that of a solid bullet, pretty much multiplied by the fragment count.
To see how a bullet fragments (along with graphics) you could see
here:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/volume3/number2/article2.htm
Summarising what I posted originally and here, in order to address
your particular question about treatment, it seems that the issue
boils down to two main points:
* Kinetic energy of the impact destroying tissue over a larger area,
so there is less to build on when the medic or body is attempting to
heal.
* Haemorrhaging (especially internal) immediately following impact is
greatly multiplied by fragmentation, causing probably larger bloodloss
than a single bullet. Internal haemorrhaging is typically very
difficult to treat.
The hypothetical glass bullet would satisfy the second point very
well, but due to the low weight (as mentioned by thx1138 in the
comment below) would not do so well with the first. An ideal bullet
would be a uranium one which fragmented on entry (uranium being the
heaviest stable element generally worked with).
I hope this clarifies your question!
|
