{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
6/5/2013 7:20:44 PM
38
Why are certain weapons banned by the Geneva Convention?
I just found out that using a .50 cal machine gun against people is technically banned by the Geneva Convention, as the .50 is supposed to be used against Vehicles and Materiel only. Why is this? If you are a soldier shooting at another soldier, the objective is to kill them. Wouldn't you use the most potent weapons systems to accomplish this?
-
Edited by Recon Number 54: 6/4/2014 4:08:43 PM[quote]I just found out that using a .50 cal machine gun against people is technically banned by the Geneva Convention, as the .50 is supposed to be used against Vehicles and Materiel only. Why is this? If you are a soldier shooting at another soldier, the objective is to kill them. Wouldn't you use the most potent weapons systems to accomplish this?[/quote] Sgt to Private: "Fire on those troops!" Private: "Sir, all I have is the Ma Deuce and that is only supposed to be used against vehicles and materiel." Sgt: "Son, do you see those men coming at you? Those men who are coming to kill us all?" Private: "Y-y-y-yes Sgt!" Sgt: "Well, they are all wearing uniforms and uniforms are material. Shoot at their goddammed uniforms!" Private: Rat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat!!!!
-
Technically your objective is to "neutralize" the threat, same reason three-sided bayonets and knives are illegal, the wound is much harder to seal and bleeds a lot, also have you seen what a .50 does to a person? It's terrible, they want the bodies to be able to be sent home.
-
Cuz apparently things like Agent Orange, Mustard Gas, and White Phosphorous are "immoral." Pffft, Liberals.
-
I think it's stupid. Do they really think any evil country is going to follow those rules?
-
I don't see a shot like that as inhimane. It's a quick death. Now chemical warfare is a different story.
-
2 RepliesEdited by TrussingDoor: 6/6/2013 12:42:48 PMThey're all OP so Geneva had to nerf warfare.
-
You ever seen a video of it?
-
15 RepliesWhat's the point in the Geneva Convention, anyway? The people we're fighting don't abide by it, so why should we?
-
Ever heard of Agent Orange? Come back to me when you have.
-
Fun Fact: General procedure to get around that is to say that you were aiming for the enemy's weapon(which is Material, so fair game). You "missed" and hit the soldier instead. Oops.
-
It's more of a production limitation. It would be easy to give every soldier heavy armaments, and just shove tons of bullets into the breathing space of the enemy, but to eliminate the Inhumane slaughter that would follow, not forgetting that these weapons lead to massive injuries fairly often much like landlines. It's not to say "don't shoot this gun at people," but rather "shoot these smaller guns at people so that if they don't die when you hit them, they can at least keep their arms and legs."
-
Well, if the actual goal of War and fighting was to just kill your enemies, we wouldn't use guns at all.
-
1 ReplyWho would want a mangled corpse lying on the ground after he got shot by a .50 MG? Even if he was a baddy, the corspe needs to be removed and buried/cremated and you dont want that process to be messy
-
3 RepliesEverything fun in life is illegal.
-
3 RepliesI don't know about the .50 cal specifically, but most of the weapons are illegal as shit for a very good reason - e.g. it's very hard to target specific targets without collateral damage (clusters) or it causes extreme, uneccesary suffering (chemical weapons).
-
1 ReplyThe objective isn't to kill them, the objective is to wound them so bad it takes a soldier or two to carry out each of the wounded.
-
People listen to the Geneva convention? I thought Murica' just did whatever they wanted and got away with it... oh wait...
-
1 ReplyI've never understood this. So you're fighting against an enemy that wants to kill you, but both of you can say we wont use these types if weapons because its immoral? Logic.
-
it isn't banned by the geneva convention at all. it's just discouraged by the policies of european nations because of the inhuman mess it creates out of a torso if it happens to detonate internally. and more specifically that's only the Raufoss Mk.211 Mod 0 ammo type.
-
Ya, they have a lot of strange rules.
-
1 ReplyBecause apparently being humane in a time where we send trained soldiers, high-tech machines and advanced weaponry to violently attack each other is extremely important, and makes total sense. I mean, we can't be [i]too[/i] cruel when we're slaughtering each other, right?
-
7/10 I lol'd. Would read again.
-
Video related...
-
Because our ruthless slaughter of the innocent must have [b][I][u]etiquette[/b][/u][/I]!
-
Some things in war are more not nice than others.
-
Not sure if chemical weapons are covered under the Geneva Convention, but they are a banned as well as cluster bombs.
