Talk:Soft-point bullet

Hague Convention
The article states:

"However, this convention does not apply to use on a nation's civilian population."

Should this be use by, not use on? Axeman (talk) 23:51, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Reference Citations
The following unsourced text has been removed from the article following a year-long period of tagging for inadequate reference citations. Some or all of it may be replaced into the article with appropriate reference citations. Thewellman (talk) 00:43, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

The mechanism is the same as hollow-point bullets, but the lack of a hollow depression reduces the area upon which the hydraulic pressure can act on the lead, and thus the soft-point bullet expands more slowly than a hollow point.

Soft-point bullets are less common than hollow points, due to the slower expansion and greater penetration, but they fill roles that hollow points do not. In some cases the reduced expansion is desired, so that more penetration is achieved before the bullet begins the rapid deceleration caused by expansion. In other cases, the smooth, rounded profile typical of a soft-point bullet is preferred over the concave tip of a hollow point, because the latter tends to suffer failure to feed malfunctions in certain magazine-fed firearms. Many of the more modern magazine-fed firearms were expressly designed to feed hollow points reliably, but many older and military-derived designs were not. Many military firearms, especially pistols, were designed to fire only full metal jacket bullet (FMJ) ammunition, and will suffer failures to feed with hollow-point ammunition, leaving soft-point ammunition the best choice for non-military defensive purposes in these firearms. Military firearms are designed to use FMJ rounds because the Hague Convention prohibits signatory nations from using expanding bullets in warfare. However, this convention does not apply to individuals in non-warfare situations, such as law enforcement, personal defense and hunting.