ATF to reclassify armor piercing ammo

[Mudinyeri]

I went back a read the proposal gain and am fairly certain MARCH 16 is the valid date for comment.  Send those letters.

Yes, it is ... for comment on implementation of removal of the ammunition from the civilian market.  Arguably, I guess you could say that this is the real teeth of the "ban" (rescinding of the exemption).

[depserv]

ATF under the most anti-freedom and anti-American president in history will not concern itself with anything patriots have to say about this illegal edict of theirs.  They know the truth and they knew it all along; they know that what they do is illegal and based in lies.  Sending those traitors a letter is like sending a letter to ISIS asking them to please stop beheading Christians. 

I sent an email to Senators Fischer and Sasse, and my Congressman Jeff Fortenberry, asking them to do anything they could to stop this act of criminal aggression being committed by Obama's ATF, and nicely reminding them that the voters did not give Republicans control of both houses of Congress because we wanted them to let Obama and his team of traitors continue breaking the law. 

I don't know what Congress might be able to do but I assume it has some kind of oversight authority, and can bring bureaucrats in before a committee, and of course funding can be cut off.  If enough patriots remind their representatives of how important these illegal gun control edicts are to us maybe the Republicans will take a stand and do something.  We should remind them of anti-gun politicians like McCain and Romney who will go down in history as big losers, partly because they did not stand up for our Second Amendment rights.  An email to the RNC might be a good idea too.

The letter posted by Denman Shooter includes very good talking points that I would include. 

[GreggL]

I have seen many good reasons put forth to recommend that the ATF not reclassify M855, one I have not seen
is the reduced muzzle velocity of the round when fired from a pistol length barrel, making it less effective for its intended purpose.

Just a thought.

[Mudinyeri]

I have seen many good reasons put forth to recommend that the ATF not reclassify M855, one I have not seen
is the reduced muzzle velocity of the round when fired from a pistol length barrel, making it less effective for its intended purpose.

Just a thought.

That's a good one. It would be interesting to see the results of some tests demonstrating the reduction in penetration capacity with the reduced muzzle velocity.

[mott555]

I haven't been following this issue very closely. The problem is that M855 can be fired from pistols? I don't understand.

[RobertH]

AR15 pistols to be exact. Its back door gun control. We gotta hit up our Federal Reps. We control congress, so why is this crapstill be pulled?!

[Lmbass14]

AR15 pistols to be exact. Its back door gun control. We gotta hit up our Federal Reps. We control congress, so why is this crapstill be pulled?!

Robert, it still happening cause nobody in Congress has balls to stand up against obama.  They don't want to be a racist.

[RobertH]

Yea, i know.

[JAK]

If you read through the notice the ATF posted, the basis they claim for banning M855 ammunition is that it can be fired in a easily concealed handgun and will penetrate body armor and this represents a potential threat to law enforcement.

The first flaw in their argument is that body armor is rated as to what it will stop.  To the best of my knowledge, no one manufactures concealable armor (what law enforcement wears) that is rated to stop 5.56 regardless of bullet composition. This also goes for any of the handguns that have been chambered in a rifle caliber.

The second flaw is the handguns that fire this ammunition are easily concealable.  While it is possible to conceal one of these handguns, I would not call it easy, it is just easier then concealing a rifle in the same caliber.

What I am concerned about is that by using this argument, what else can be banned in the interest of law enforcement safety?

John K

[AAllen]

First we need to understand what the laws are on AP ammo, from the NRA: The "existing laws" were adopted in 1986 and prohibit the manufacture and importation, for private use, of handgun bullets made of special, hard metals and (in a 1994 amendment) specially-jacketed lead bullets. These bullets were invented for use by law enforcement and military personnel. NRA helped draft the 1986 provisions and didn`t object to the 1994 amendment. (;18 U.S.C. 922(a)(7) and (8 ), and (b)(5), and 921(a)(17)(B) and (C))

As this quote says Congress has specifically outlawed the production of AP "handgun" ammo, and limited its ability to be sold.  In doing this Congress has set a definition to what is Armor Piercing Handgun Ammo, specifically it must has a solid core made of one of several listed metals (M855 does not) or have a jacket made of certain materials (M855 does not have these) or have a jacket that is over a certain percentage of the bullets total weight (the jacket of M855 does not).  So even though the ATF had M855 on an excepted list it appears that it does not meet the specific requirements in the law, so the ATF should not have the authority to ban it as AP Handgun Ammo.

This comes from several articles that I have read over the last several days, too much reading trying to understand, and I may be wrong on these points.  But if I am would someone please tell me where I am, I am trying to understand the authority the ATF is claiming.

[Husker_Fan]

My understanding is that the law says any handgun ammo that has a steel core is AP for purposes of the act. I think the ATF reading is quite possibly correct as far as the definition goes.

However, under the act, the AG can exempt ammo that would otherwise be banned if the AG finds it is "primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes." M855 was originally classified as AP and made exempt by the AG in 1986 after the act passed.

Now, BATFE has decided that M855 is not "primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes." When the AG makes that determination, the ammo is then illegal to manufacture, sell, or import. They say that AR pistols are more prevalent now, so 5.56 ammo is more useable in pistols. That really should have no bearing on what the ammo is primarily intended for.

It is a ridiculous way for the AG to stick it to gun owners by only reducing the supply of cheap(ish) surplus ammo. It will have no impact on crime or officer safety. It's Holder's parting gift to gun owners. Oh, and while he may be on board with this, POTUS can't do anything about it. The statute gives the authority to the AG.

The AG has the statutory authority to do this. The only ways to stop it are 1) a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of either the AP ban or the AG's decision, or 2) an act of congress which, even if it could pass, would never be signed.

The bottom line is that M855 manufacture, commercial sales, and imports will very likely be stopped until we get a new POTUS with an AG that will re-institute the exemption.

[AWick]

Is authority is to only exempt not to add to the list so the thing that needs to happen is a suit that scientifically breaks down the arguments as illegitimate as to why it was listed as AP to begin with. Then it is out of the hands of the AG.

[AAllen]

Husker fan. My understanding is the same, along with several other metals like depleted uranium a solid steel core would fit the definition of an AP round, but from what I have been reading M855 has a steel tip and lead core.  Even if it was steal and lead combo for the core it would not fit the explicit discription of solid steel core.

[Husker_Fan]

You are right that M855 has a steel tip. We are getting into what is the definition of "core." ATF seems to say it is any component inside the jacket. We'd say the core is everything inside the jacket.

We could use one of the companies with a pending exemption request to be denied and then sue to sort it out. That could still take us out to January 2017.

[AWick]

The language explicitly states entirely of or a combination of just those components. So just the fact that there is lead in the core should exclude it from the list.

[FarmerRick]

Those in the BATFE can, and do, interpret anything they want in any way they care to. Letters from a few thousand pissed-off gun owners will not change that fact.

Our only hope at this point is to get a person in the White House who actually respects the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment and will appoint people to AG, etc. that will do the same and roll back a few of these ridiculous restrictions.

I'm not holding my breath. 

[depserv]

I've seen it pointed out a few times that these bullets won't penetrate any body armor that can't be penetrated by other and still legal (so far) 5.56 bullets.  And the shorter barrel of (what is legally defined as) a pistol has to make them even less capable of penetrating armor.  Given that and other considerations, there is no doubt that ATF bureaucrats are using a law that never should have been written, to outlaw as much ammo as they can get away with outlawing.  This is just one more example of Obama and his team of traitors doing as much damage as they can to the Republic before he leaves office. 

To whatever extent sporting use language is used in any gun control law, that law is illegal, according to both the Miller and the Heller decisions, because those decisions both made clear that sporting use is not what the right is about.  So why is that language still being used?

I want to know if the Republicans who were given control of both houses of Congress are going to just sit back and let this crime be committed.  I know their power is limited, but they are not impotent.  Unless they choose to be.  It's up to us the voters to ask them, because otherwise they would much prefer to just bow down and kiss the hand of those who seek to be our masters.

[Mudinyeri]

The specific wording of what defines "armor piercing" is in my article on Trek Tech Black: http://trektechblack.com/batfe-seeks-ban-m855-ball-ammunition/

For those who can't access TT Black, for whatever reason:

the definition of a prohibited “armor piercing” projectile is a “projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely … from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, berylium copper or depleted uranium.”

[Mali]

Good video with a clear discussion regarding the situation, how we go there and what to do next:

[GreggL]

Here is a copy of an email I sent off to our congressional reps. except Ashford from dist. 2, his system wouldn't accept my email because I am out of his district!
This should be of interest to Sen. Fischer as it is contrary to her Sportsman's Act which in part is aimed at avoiding restricting sportsmen's choice in ammunition.
Dear,
I would like to encourage you to contact the ATF in regards to the ATF considering reclassifying M855 Ball ammo on the basis
that it is now possible to use this ammo in pistol configurations of the AR platform.
Firstly, although there are now pistols that can use this ammo I do not see that in itself changing the intended use at manufacture.
Secondly, that ammo fired from a pistol length barrel will have less muzzle velocity than when fired from a carbine or rifle length barrel
rendering it less effective as an AP round.
Furthermore, The Federal Government defines AP ammunition in 18 USC sec. 921(a)(17).
Definition
(17)(A) The term “ammunition” means ammunition or cartridge cases, primers, bullets, or propellent powder designed for use in any firearm.
(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means-
(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or
(ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.
Please note: the bullet (projectile) must have a core made entirely out of the metals listed above, or be a full jacketed bullet with a jacket weighing more than 25% of its overall weight. This means that the SS109/M855 bullets wouldn’t be covered, as their cores are partly steel, and partly lead. Lead isn’t listed in the metals above.

I see this as a direct violation of the 2nd ammendment as well as restricting sportsmen’s ammunition choices – such unnecessary constraints drive up hunting costs, impede participation in shooting sports, and consequently decrease conservation funding thus, it is counter productive to the Sportsman's Act recently introduced by Senator Fischer.
Thanks for your consideration,
Gregg L