Ammo End State - Beyond M855

[Apachedriver]

There was a thread recently regarding how the anti's were unusually quiet. To borrow a Liberal's recent comparison of Eric Holder, the Anti-gunners as a whole are ducks. If they aren't busy flapping and quacking, you'll have a few pecking at you while the rest appear calm in the water. But be sure that they're always working.

Three congressmen were behind a move in 2012 regarding armor-piercing rounds. They obviously weren't alone in this move, just the most visible. Simply because actors change or small movements are defeated, don't think for a minute that their fight is over.

Below is a quote from the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence from 2012. (http://smartgunlaws.org/federal-law-on-ammunition-regulation/)

The federal definition of armor-piercing ammunition, which is based on its content and weight, rather than on the ammunition’s actual performance against body armor, has been criticized because it fails to halt the manufacture and sale of all types of ammunition that can penetrate body armor[/B].17

The existing ban on armor-piercing ammunition can be made more effective by adopting performance standards that require ammunition to be tested for its ability to penetrate bullet-resistant vests and body armor, as opposed to the existing standard based on the bullet’s content.18

It's not just about a poor performing M855/SS109 round, that's just an inching forward for them. Then again, many of us have known that all along.

 

[Comrade Mike]

Changing the language of legislation on AP laws will go no where. They'd have to ban almost every rifle round in existence

 

[Drail]

I am not real clear on how the ATF is able to legislate Federal laws. I thought they were in the enforcememt racket.

 

[Blue Jays]

That is my same thought here...my understanding is this is a change BATFE wishes to see.
Unsure how BATFE themselves can make a unilateral decision without legislator involvement?

 

[Speedo66]

Having been out there for so long, how did they finally figure out now that it should be banned?

 

[CLP]

"Unsure how BATFE themselves can make a unilateral decision without legislator involvement?"

The ATF has a long history of unilaterally declaring gun/gun-related items legal or illegal. They sometimes change their minds as well. John Q. must obey or risk imprisonment.

 

[Speedo66]

As long as this ammo has been out, what precipitated them finding now that it should be banned?

 

[hso]

Drail, Blue Jays, et al,

Every Agency interprets laws passed by Congress. Since legislation can't address every detail the Agencies decide what does and doesn't fall under the various laws and how it does or doesn't. They open comment periods when they propose to change an interpretation of existing law to make the public aware of the proposed change. The public, and industry and interested organizations, comment on the proposed change. At times the executive or legislative branches tell the regulating Agencies that they're wrong and they withdraw. At times the arguments in the comments from the public are compelling enough the Agency withdraws.

The BATFE is interpreting LEOPA, the '86 law that was supposed to prohibit AP ammo for pistols from being sold to the public. In this case they've decided that M855 ball ammunition is armor piercing and banned under LEOPA and they don't intend to extend the "sporting purposes" exemption to it.

Speedo66,

The assumption is the proliferation of AR pistols or the Sig Arm Brace making AR pistols more usable or the creeping authoritarian attempt to strip the American citizens of arms. Pic any one or two or all three or make up one.

 

[bannockburn]

If I remember correctly from my college days, in some cases Federal Agencies, creating and enforcing their own administrative regulations, can carry the full weight of law, even though such regulations were never legislated by Congress.

In other words if it's something that falls within their jurisdiction they have the authority to do something about it if they so choose.

 

[lxd55]

well Comrade the language is indead in play. this was lost when they redefined ap
to mean vests and not the armor in vehicles.

 

[rogerjames]

My guess is that if BATFE goes through with this, it just may create enough attention to itself that may lead to a loss of unilateral power and decision making in the near future.

 

[HorseSoldier]

If it does, that'll pretty much be a first for a federal bureaucracy. When was the last time one was downsized or had its authority abbreviated?

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

^^^^^^ What he said! The Congress long ago surrendered it's authority to the bureaucracy so that the elected officials could go home and say "We couldn't do anything about it!" just as they are doing with the excesses of the IRS, Justice Department, and the EPA. They are using the progressive philosophy of moving incrementally so as to keep mostly under the radar. I would expect something to happen with Homeland Security (bomb blast, terrorist shooting, or something involving illegal aliens) soon in order to distract the public from this move and to also give them some basis for the sheep to agree that ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION is not a good thing to have on the open market. Better load up on the steel core ammo for your Mosins.......

 

[PedalBiker]

If the .223 is now considered a pistol round then won't the Barnes X bullets (required by law in CA) be covered as "armor" piercing as well? I think the GMX and E-tip by Nosler are even worse since they are brass.

I don't like steel in my ammo, but the armor piercing law does not just cover steel.

 

[PedalBiker]

I am not real clear on how the ATF is able to legislate Federal laws. I thought they were in the enforcememt racket.

You would think that being mostly lawyers CONgress could pass laws that are clear, but they don't hence the agencies have to "interpret" them.

 

[MachIVshooter]

If the .223 is now considered a pistol round then won't the Barnes X bullets (required by law in CA) be covered as "armor" piercing as well? I think the GMX and E-tip by Nosler are even worse since they are brass.

"Sporting exemption"

There are lots of exempt 100% copper handgun bullets, but they are evaluated on a case by case basis. Submit a solid and pointy one, it will not get an exemption.

 

[jerkface11]

Doesn't this law actually define armor piercing? And doesn't this ammo fail to meet that definition?

 

[MachIVshooter]

Doesn't this law actually define armor piercing? And doesn't this ammo fail to meet that definition?

Yes.

Doesn't matter.

This agency is completely rogue. Last month they issued an edict that exerts control over manufacturing equipment. Not long before that decided that how a firearm is used defines what it is. And the list goes on and on....

 

[1911 guy]

I'm of the mind that Comrade Mike is on to something. Their eventual goal *IS* to ban all ammunition. We've speculated for a long time that a firearm ban would go nowhere due to political winds. However, a governmental agency incrementally restricts ammunition to the point of unavailability and no candidate takes the rap.

 

[lxd55]

I'm of the mind that Comrade Mike is on to something. Their eventual goal *IS* to ban all ammunition. We've speculated for a long time that a firearm ban would go nowhere due to political winds. However, a governmental agency incrementally restricts ammunition to the point of unavailability and no candidate takes the rap.

we have a winner!!!

 

[Pilot]

I'm of the mind that Comrade Mike is on to something. Their eventual goal *IS* to ban all ammunition. We've speculated for a long time that a firearm ban would go nowhere due to political winds. However, a governmental agency incrementally restricts ammunition to the point of unavailability and no candidate takes the rap.

Doesn't Heller, and/or Miller addresses this? I will have to do some research. A de facto ban through limiting ammo or making it too expensive needs to be addressed in legislation, or the courts. "The Sporting Purpose" clause of GCA 1968 is unconstitutional.

 

[kayak-man]

I am not real clear on how the ATF is able to legislate Federal laws. I thought they were in the enforcememt racket.

I always thought the same thing... Then last night, I was watching Archer and one of the characters made the comment in regards to a legal document "of course it's enforcible, and even if it wasn't, this is the federal government, they would enforce it anyway." Funny how fiction sometimes mirrors real life.

Changing the language of legislation on AP laws will go no where. They'd have to ban almost every rifle round in existence

Maybe that's the point....

 

[mope540]

Those "tin foil hat wearing ammo hoarders" have made a lot of people look like naive fools.

 

[1911 guy]

You can't really address price in legislation. The market sets price, as we have seen with .22LR ammo. Also, checking the commodities page of your newspaper shows where some of the increase is coming from.

What CAN be addressed, however, is the regulation of ammunition type and intended purpose. Legislation that clearly spells out bullet construction is already on the books, as evidenced by the LEOSA verbiage that contradicts the definition by BATFE of M855 as armor piercing. The real problem is a government agency that has zero accountability to the populace.

That is why this move is being made by them, rather than an elected politician. They'll get the ban they want and not be held to account because it was a faceless government entity that did it, not someone who is standing for re-election.

 

[barnbwt]

If arbitrarily banning an entire class of firearms in common use is not allowed, why can we do the same for an entire class of ammunition? I think we may be on shaky ground for this law already. (Especially if the use of said item redesigns it from armor piercing to target ammo --I'd love to have the ATF cross examine that argument in court )

TCB