
If you've got to the point where you're shooting a gun at a criminal, chances are things have already got a bit OTT. At least they'll be effective.
( , Thu 12 May 2011, 0:15, Reply)

www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&biw=1217&bih=575&sa=X&ei=ExnLTYfFG5KGhQfVvu2oAg&ved=0CBcQBSgA&q=charles+de+menezes&spell=1
( , Thu 12 May 2011, 0:18, Reply)

My point is that, if the police are in a situation where they have to fire their weapons, 9/10 they're intending to kill that person. If they don't want to kill the person they'll use the wide variety of non-lethal weapons they have- tasers, attack dogs, bean bag rounds, baton rounds, tear gas etc.
You can't say you want to give the police lethal force and then say "but you can't use those bullets, you might kill them".
( , Thu 12 May 2011, 0:34, Reply)

Hollowpoints not only have more stopping power but also 'tumble' and stay lodged in the flesh.
FMJ's are really quite barbaric and outdated. The only reason the military don't use them is because of a stupid peace treaty dating back to WWI that prevents them from making a more informed contemporary choice.
( , Thu 12 May 2011, 10:42, Reply)

There may be something / someone *behind* the exit wound that you don't want to hit. These bullets would eliminate that risk.
( , Thu 12 May 2011, 11:29, Reply)