Gunning for war: infantry rifles and the calibration of lethal force

References

• Andrews, E. 1893. “The Impending Revolution in Military Surgery Caused by the New Infantry Rifle.” Journal of American Medical Association 21 (26): 955–959.
   Google Scholar
• Annan, K. We the peoples: the role of the United Nations in the twenty-first century: Report of the Secretary-General. New York: United Nations (A/54/2000). 27 March 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Barad, K. 1998. “Getting Real: Technoscientific Practices and the Materialization of Reality.” Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 10 (2): 87–128.
   Google Scholar
• Barad, K. 2003. “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matters Comes to Matter.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 28 (3): 801–831.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barad, K. M. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics & the Entanglement of Matter & Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, J. 2010. Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beyer, H. G. 1901. “Experiment and Experience with the Rifle.” Boston Medical and Surgical Journal 144 (1): 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Bilby, J. G. 2006. A Revolution in Arms: A History of the First Repeating Rifles. Yardley, PA: Westholme Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Boguslawski, R. V., and W. Sawyer. 1883. “Instructions for the Conduct of the Infantry Soldier in Action.” Royal United Services Institution. Journal 27 (120): 531–539.
   Google Scholar
• Bolton, M. 2015. “From Minefields to Minespace: An Archaeology of the Changing Architecture of Autonomous Killing in US Army Field Manuals on Landmines, Booby Traps and Ieds.” Political Geography 46 (1): 41–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourke, J. 1999. An Intimate History Of Killing: Face To Face Killing In The 20th Century Warfare. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Bourne, M. 2012. “Guns Don’t Kill People, Cyborgs Do: A Latourian Provocation for Transformatory Arms Control and Disarmament.” Global Change, Peace & Security 24 (1): 141–163.
   Google Scholar
• Bousquet, A. J. 2009. The Scientific Way of Warfare: Order and Chaos on the Battlefields of Modernity. London: Hurst Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Boutwell, J., M. T. Klare, and L. W. Reed, eds. 1995. Lethal Commerce: The Global Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons. Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Bowker, G.C. and S.L. Star (eds). 1999. Sorting Things Out: Classification And Its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, B., and S. J. Whatmore, eds. 2010. Political Matter: Technoscience, Democracy and Public Life. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bromley, M., N. Cooper, and P. Holtom. 2012. “The UN Arms Trade Treaty: Arms Export Controls, the Human Security Agenda and the Lessons of History.” International Affairs 88 (5): 1029–1048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chivers, C. J. 2010. The Gun. New York: Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Cohn, C. 1987. “Sex And Death In The Rational World Of Defense Intellectuals.” Signs 12 (4): 687–718.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coole, D., and S. Frost, eds. 2010. New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Correspondence, O. “Cartridges – Experiments and Report on the Difference between the Effects of the Minié Ball Cartridge and the Common Spherical Ball Cartridge Fired from the Percussion Musket.” National Archives of the United Kingdom, WO/701. Richmond, 1854.
   Google Scholar
• Daston, L., and P. Galison. 2010. Objectivity. New York: Zone Books.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, H. J. 1897. “Gunshot Injuries in the Late Greco-Turkish War, with Remarks upon Modern Projectiles.” The British Medical Journal 1789–1793.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Landa, M. 1991. War in the Age of Intelligent Machines. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• De Larringa, M. 2016. (Non)-Lethalityand War: Tear Gas as a Weapon of Governmental Intervention. Critical Studies on Terrorism 9 (3): 522–540.
   Google Scholar
• Dolan, T. M. 2013. “Unthinkable and Tragic: The Psychology of Weapons Taboos in War.” International Organization 67 (1): 37–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dupuy, T. N. 1984. The Evolution of Weapons and Warfare. Fairfax, VA: HERO Books.
   Google Scholar
• Efrat, A. 2010. “Toward Internationally Regulated Goods: Controlling the Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons.” International Organization 64 (1): 97–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis, J. 1975. The Social History of the Machine Gun. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fleetwood, W. E. 1899. Immediate and Confidential Letter to Sir John Ardagh.” National Archives of the United Kingdom. Richmond: Sir John Ardagh-Personal Correspondence, PRO 30/40/3.
   Google Scholar
• Ford, M. 2013. “Towards a Revolution in Firepower? Logistics, Lethality, and the Lee-Metford.” War in History 20 (3): 273–299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, M. 2016. “Marskmanship, officer-man Relations, And The Short Magazine lee-enfield.” War in History 23(3): 278–295.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. 2007. Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the College de France 1977–1978. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, C. E. 1958. The Rifled Musket. New York: Bonanza Books.
   Google Scholar
• Garcia, D. 2012. “Banning Evil: Cluster Munitions and the Successful Formation of a Global Prohibition Regime.” Cornell International Affairs Review 2: 5. Retrieved from http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1244 Accessed online: 15 December 2016
   Google Scholar
• Garcia, D. 2014. “Global Norms on Arms: The Significance of the Arms Trade Treaty for Global Security in World Politics.” Global Policy 5 (4): 425–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilmore, R. 1976. “‘The New Courage’: Rifles and Soldier Individualism, 1876-1918.” Military Affairs 40 (3): 97–102.
   Google Scholar
• Gough, P. 2010. “The Living, the Dead and the Imagery of Emptiness and Re-Appearance on the Battlefields of the Western Front.” In Deathscapes: Spaces for Death, Dying, Mourning and Remembrance, edited by A. Maddrell and J. D. Sidaway, 263–281. Farham: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Gould, J. 1895. “Observations on the Action of the Lee-Metford Bullet on Bone and Soft Tissues in the Human Body.” The British Medical Journal 2 (1803): 129–130.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Granat, M. G. 1993. “Modern Small-Arms Ammunition in International Law.” Netherlands International Law Review 40 (2): 149–168.
   Google Scholar
• Greenwood, C. 1998. “The Law of Weaponry at the Start of the New Millennium.” In The Law of Armed Conflict: Into the Next Millennium, edited by N. Michael, M. N. Schmitt, and L. C. Green, 185–232. Newport: U.S: Naval War College.
   Google Scholar
• Gregory, D. 2011. “From a View to Kill: Drones and Late Modern War.” Theory, Culture, and Society 29: 188–215.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregory, T. 2014. “Body counts disguise the true horror of what wars do to bodies.” 7 November 2014. Available at: http://theconversation.com/body-counts-disguise-the-true-horror-of-what-wars-do-to-bodies-31416 (accessed 20 May 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Gregory, T. 2016. “Dismembering The Dead: Violence, Vulnerability And The Body In War.” European Journal Of International Relations 22 (4): 944-965.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. 1991. Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. Routledge: New York.
   Google Scholar
• International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Weapons that may Cause Unnecessary Suffering or have Indiscriminate Effects – Report on the Work of Experts. Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross, 1973
   Google Scholar
• International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Conference of Government Experts on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (Lucerne 24.9-18.10.1974). Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross, 1975.
   Google Scholar
• International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Conference of Government Experts on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (Second Session – Lugano, 28.1-26.2.1976). Geneva: International Committee on the Red Cross, 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Jackman, S. D. 2004. “Shoulder to Shoulder: Close Control and ‘Old Prussian Drill’ in German Offensive Infantry Tactics, 1871-1914.” Journal of Military History 68 (1): 73–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jervis, H. J. W. 1854. The Rifle-Musket: A Practical Treatise on the Enfield-Pritchett Rifle Recently Adopted in the British Service. London: Chapman and Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Kauchak, M. 2013. “Small Calibre Ammunition Evolution - .22-50cal.” Military Technology 9: 138–143.
   Google Scholar
• Keefer, S. 2013. “‘Explosive Missiles’: International Law, Technology and Security in Nineteenth Century Disarmament Conferences.”.” War in History 21 (4): 445–464.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keegan, J. 1993. A History of Warfare. New York: Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Keith, A., and H. Rigby. 1899. “Modern Military Bullets: A Study of Their Destructive Effects.” The Lancet 154 (3979): 1499–1507.
   Google Scholar
• Kerr, R. E. “Wall of Fire: The Rifle and Civil War Infantry Tactics.” MA Diss., Pennsylvania State University, 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Kindervater, K. H. 2016. “The Emergence of Lethal Surveillance: Watching and Killing in the History of Drone Technology.” Security Dialogue 47 (3): 223–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krause, K. “Norm-Building in Security Spaces: The Emergence of the Light Weapons Problematic.” Notes de recherché due GERSI/REGIS Working Paper Series (2001)
   Google Scholar
• Krause, K. 2011. “Leashing the Dogs of War: Arms Control from Sovereignty to Governmentality.” Contemporary Security Policy 32 (1): 20–39.
   Google Scholar
• La Garde, L. A. 1916. Gunshot Injuries: How They are Inflicted, Their Complications and Treatment. New York: William Wood and Company.
   Google Scholar
• La Garde, L.A. 1914. Gunshot Injuries: How They Are Inflicted, Their Complications, And Treatment. New York: William Wood and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Lichtenberg, J. 1994. “War, Innocence, and the Doctrine of Double Effect.” Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition 74 (3): 347–368.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, J. A., ed. 1990. Tools of War: Instruments, Ideas, and Institutions of Warfare, 1445-1871. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• MacCormac, W. 1895. “An Address Delivered at the Opening of the Section of Surgery.” The British Medical Journal 2 (278): 278–284.
   Google Scholar
• MacLeod, G. H. B. 1862. Notes on the Surgery of the War in Crimea with Remarks on the Treatment of Gunshot Wounds. Richmond: J.W. Randolph.
   Google Scholar
• Magee, R. 1995. “Muskets, Musket Balls and the Wounds They Made.” Australia and New Zealand Journal of Surgery 65: 890–895.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marres, N., and J. Lezaun. 2011. “Materials and Devices of the Public.” Economy and Society 40 (4): 489–509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMahan, J. 2011. Killing in War. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mordecai, A. Military Commission to Europe, in 1855 and 1856: Report of Major Alfred Mordecai of the Ordnance Department. Washington: George W. Bowman, Printer, 1861.
   Google Scholar
• Mutimer, D. 1997. ““Reimagining Security: The Metaphors of Proliferation”, in Keith Krause.” In Critical Security Studies: Concepts and Cases, eds. M. Williams, 187–221. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norman, R. 1995. Ethics, Killing and War. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Price, R. M. 1997. The Chemical Weapons Taboo. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Prokosch, E. 1995a. The Technology of Killing: A Military and Political History of Anti-Personnel Weapons. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Prokosch, E. 1995b. “The Swiss Draft Protocol on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems – Bringing the Dumdum Ban (1899) up to Date.” International Review of the Red Cross 35 (307): 411–425.
   Google Scholar
• Rappert, B. 2005. “Prohibitions, Weapons and Controversy: Managing the Problems of Ordering.” Social Studies of Science 35 (2): 211–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raugh, H. E. 2009. The Victorians at War, 1815-1914: An Encyclopedia of British Military History. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Report of Experiments of Small Arms carried on at The Royal Manufactory, Enfield, 1852.
   Google Scholar
• Salisbury, H. 1899. “Private Letter to Sir John Ardagh.” In The National Archives of the United Kingdom, dated 28 June. PRO 30/40/3 Richmond: Sir John Ardagh-Personal Correspondence.
   Google Scholar
• Salter, M. ed 2015. Making Things International 1: Circuits and Motion. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Salter, M. ed. 2016. Making Things International 2: Catalysts and Reactions. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scarry, E. 1985. The Body in Pain: The Making and Unmaking of the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schachner, A. “The Surgical Aspects of the Modern Small-Bore Projectile.” Paper delivered to the Mississippi Valley Medical Association, October 5, 1899.
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, J. J. 1987. “The Theory of the Empty Battlefield.” The RUSI Journal 132 (3): 37–44.
   Google Scholar
• Shah, N. 2017. “Death in the Details.” Organization. 24 (4): in press.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Showalter, D. E. 1974. “Infantry Weapons, Infantry Tactics, and the Armies of Germany, 1849-64.” European Studies Review 4 (2): 119–140.
   Google Scholar
• Smithhurst, P. 2007. “The Pattern 1853 Rifled Musket – Genesis.” Arms and Armour 4 (2): 123–140.
   Google Scholar
• Smithhurst, P. 2011. The Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle. Oxford: Osprey Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Star, S.L. 2002. “Infrastructure and Ethnographic Practice: Working on the Fringes.” Scandinavian Journal of Information Studies 14 (2): 107–122.
   Google Scholar
• Stavrianakis, A. 2011. “Small Arms Control and the Reproduction of Imperial Relations.” Contemporary Security Policy 32 (1): 193–214.
   Google Scholar
• Stavrianakis, A. 2016. “Legitimising Liberal Militarism: Politics, Law and War in the Arms Trade Treaty.” Third World Quarterly 37 (4): 840–865.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stead, W. T. 1899. “Letter to Sir John Ardagh.” National Archives of the United Kingdom. Richmond: Sir John Ardagh-Personal Correspondence, PRO 30/40/3.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, J. 2004. “Technology, Society, and the Infantry Revolution of the Fourteenth Century.” The Journal of Military History 68 (2): 361–380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tannenwald, N. 2008. The Nuclear Taboo. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations, Conference on the Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons 1980. Convention on the Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects. 10 October. (Appendix E: “Resolution on Small-Calibre Weapons Systems”).
   Google Scholar
• Van Creveld, M. L. 1991. Technology and War: From 2000 B.C. to the Present. New York: Touchstone.
   Google Scholar
• Vasquez, J. A. 1993. The War Puzzle. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, A. 1862. “Rifle Trajectories and Rifles.” Royal United Services Institution. Journal 6 (24): 436–446.
   Google Scholar
• Waltz, K. N. 1979. Theory of International Politics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Walzer, M. 2015. Just and Unjust Wars. 5th ed. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Webb, T. D. 1996. “Empty Battlefieldxxi: Revolutionary Tactics for the Force XXI Light Infantry Unit.” In School of Advanced Military Studies, United States Army Command and General Staff College. Fort Leavenworth.
   Google Scholar
• Wilford, B. 1857. “On the Rifle: Showing Necessity for Its Introduction as a Universal Infantry Weapon.” Royal United Services Institution. Journal 1 (3): 238–253.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, Q. 1965. A Study of War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zehfuss, M. 2011. “Targeting: Precision and the Production of Ethics.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 17 (3): 543–566.
   Google Scholar