BATFE proposes to ban SS109 & M855 ammunition for civilian sales.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

This is a dupe of a post in the Legal forum; but I thought it would be relevant here as well:

From the ATF Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/HQATF):

Notice to those Commenting on the Armor Piercing Ammunition Exemption Framework

Thank you for your interest in ATF's proposed framework for determining whether certain projectiles are "primarily intended for sporting purposes" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C). The informal comment period will close on Monday, March 16, 2015. ATF has already received more than 80,000 comments, which will be made publicly available as soon as practicable. Although ATF endeavored to create a proposal that reflected a good faith interpretation of the law and balanced the interests of law enforcement, industry, and sportsmen, the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and include issues that deserve further study. Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework. After the close of the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process (for example, through additional proposals and opportunities for comment) before proceeding with any framework.

So, assuming that this is a legitimate Facebook page and not something that someone just did as a practical joke; it looks like ATF is giving us a "I'll get you my pretty! You and your little dog too!" before flying off on its broom. We will probably be revisiting this issue again if Congress doesn't step in to smash it now; but the good news is:

A) No framework will be issued at this time
B) There will be additional proposal and opportunity for comment before ATF seeks to go forward

 

[morcey2]

On the ATF site:

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2...-piercing-ammunition-exemption-framework.html

Notice to those Commenting on the Armor Piercing Ammunition Exemption Framework

Thank you for your interest in ATF's proposed framework for determining whether certain projectiles are “primarily intended for sporting purposes” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C). The informal comment period will close on Monday, March 16, 2015. ATF has already received more than 80,000 comments, which will be made publicly available as soon as practicable.

Although ATF endeavored to create a proposal that reflected a good faith interpretation of the law and balanced the interests of law enforcement, industry, and sportsmen, the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and include issues that deserve further study. Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework. After the close of the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process (for example, through additional proposals and opportunities for comment) before proceeding with any framework.

Text is basically the same as above, but this is directly off the ATF web site which makes it legally binding.

 

[Trent]

Well, congratulations everyone!

I don't know how many submitted comments of that whopping 80,000 stemmed from THR, but to those who did write in, thanks! And good work!

For those who didn't think it would work... and what people said don't really matter... or that "they're going to do what they are going to do and you won't change that"... I suggest you take a moment of time, to reflect and learn from this.

80,000 comments will take them quite a while to process, so if nothing else, this is tabled for another day.

Now it's important to use this time we have wisely, to keep the push on your representatives to close the gap on this, so when they do get out from under the comment backlog, the BATF can't push for it again.

 

[OilyPablo]

Wow. Interesting to say the least.

 

[MEHavey]

For those who didn't think it would work... and what people said don't really
matter... or that "they're going to do what they are going to do and you
won't change that"... I suggest you take a moment of time, to reflect and
learn from this....

This is the environment I work in.

I recommend people read the fine print:

The ATF said in a statement on Tuesday it would not seek to issue final
guidelines "at this time." The agency said it will instead wait until Americans
have finished commenting on the federal regulations and evaluate their
comments and suggestions before "proceeding with any framework."

All they have done (IMHO) is innoculate themselves against lawsuit for procedural error. Please do not think
it will not reappear/go into effect as the furor settles into quieter times and people are looking in other
directions.

 

[NickEllis]

Does ANYbody on this board actually believe that ANYthing submitted by the
public against this move will stop ANYthing associated w/ this ammunition ban ?

I do. Nice job folks. The battle (much less the war) is not over, but I'd say the furor that was raised had a significant impact on this public discussion.

 

[CoRoMo]

I admit that this sudden change-in-plans from the bureau today came as a surprise to me. And I still don't understand it.

It is 100% out of phase for both this administration and this bureau to do an about-face on things like this. What did they have to lose by proceeding as planned? Nothing I can see. Why in the world wold they capitulate? It's not at all in their nature. What is it that they have to gain from this immediate concession? Nothing at all.

I don't get it.

 

[hatt]

All they have done (IMHO) is innoculate themselves against lawsuit for procedural error. Please do not think
it will not reappear/go into effect as the furor settles into quieter times and people are looking in other
directions.

Most likely. There's no other reason that makes sense. Certainly no one at the ATF is concerned about a backlash effecting them. Obama couldn't care less; he's shoved much more unpopular stuff right down everyone's throat. No one will remember this in 2017. And whoever wins the WH(Dem or RINO) won't be rocking the boat on "settled common sense gun laws."

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Guys, we have won a single battle in a campaign; but we are a long ways from winning the campaign or the war. We need to press Congress to resolve this issue before ATF can revisit it. There are still some very disturbing claims that ATF has not relinquished:

1) M855 wasn't AP ammo by statute to begin with and ATF's "exemption" was a farce. ATF needs to explain how they arrived at that erroneous conclusion and Congress needs to describe to ATF why that conclusion was erroneous.

2) ATF used a great deal of leeway in interpreting phrases that Congress did not define. Congress needs to removes that ability from ATF by either removing the statutory authority or more strictly defining the terms ATF relied on for their failed power grab.

Right now, we have a lot of angry gun owners who are mobilized and mad. We need to capitalize on this. ATF realizes now that they made a big mistake. They ARE going to revisit this. When they do, they will have learned from this mistake. And they'll be hoping that gun owners have been lulled back to sleep. Instead of trying to wake everyone up, inform them, and spur them to action next time, we need to use the momentum we already have to pursue and destroy ATF while they are retreating.

 

[tcoz]

It is 100% out of phase for both this administration and this bureau to do an about-face on things like this. What did they have to lose by proceeding as planned? Nothing I can see. Why in the world wold they capitulate? It's not at all in their nature. What is it that they have to gain from this immediate concession? Nothing at all.

This is absolutely true and the first thing I thought of. It's just like going into a battle that you expect to win and running into much greater than expected resistance. You retreat a little then rethink and retool your strategy, then attack again. I think this is the only explanation for what is seemingly an about-face.

I also saw something about the Justice Department making the final determination which I don't remember seeing anywhere before. I don't like that at all.

One more thing...this is what we're going to face again and again for at least the next year and a half and maybe longer. Please don't become complacent, stay vigilant and be ready to mobilize at a moment's notice.

 

[hso]

Although ATF endeavored to create a proposal that reflected a good faith interpretation of the law and balanced the interests of law enforcement, industry, and sportsmen, the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and include issues that deserve further study. Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework. After the close of the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process (for example, through additional proposals and opportunities for comment) before proceeding with any framework.

We deserve to be happy that our efforts resulted in a positive outcome, but this is only a temporary retreat and unless someone at AFT sacrifices their job for this they will be back sometime before the election for POTUS.

We should use this momentum to get our Congresscritters to propose an amendment that specifically bounds ATF on this issue. A window of opportunity existed with the DHS funding bill, but that's passed. There will be other opportunities for such an amendment to GCA and/or LEOPA to limit ATF's ability to make up their own definitions.

For those of you that tried to undermine the efforts of the members here, and by extension all gunowners, that spoke out against this particular over-reaching of the BATFE, I hope that you'll provide constructive and useful assistance in the next attack instead of spreading defeatism.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Guys, as optimistic as I've been the last several weeks, even I am surprised by how well we delivered on this issue.

The ATF "Sporting Purposes for Importation of Shotguns" proposal was published in the Federal Register, had a 90-day comment period, got 21,000 (Internet-typical) comments, and was implemented without ATF even dusting their jackboots.

The ATF 41P (NFA Trust) Proposal was published in the Federal Register, had a 90-day comment period, and received only 10,000 something comments; but the ones I read were just incredibly higher quality. In the Shotgun implementation, I read every comment that was in the same raft of letters mine was published in, and there wasn't a single comment that was over 500 characters. A good portion of them were "Buy my cool electronic device!" spam. Even though 41P had fewer comments, they were of much higher quality. There were many professionally prepared legal briefs. The one I signed I had about 148 pages including exhibits. ATF had to delay the response at least 18 months just to process the information they received.

The AP ammo notice wasn't even published in the Federal Register. ATF tried to slide it in as a "policy change" that didn't even require notice. They offered only a 30-day comment period. Despite all this, they received 80,000 comments in just 3 weeks. And if the comments I was asked to review were any guide, they were much higher quality than either of the previous efforts (I read at least 10 different legal briefs prepared by attorneys). In legal terms, this is something that even non-gun geeks are going to be amazed by simply because it is unparalleled in APA history.

Every single one of you who took the time to share how this proposed change might affect you personally deserve a huge thanks. It might not seem like much; but you have literally made history. I will bet money right now that there has never been a non-published, regulatory change that has received that kind of feedback and certainly not over that short period of time. There were a lot of people pushing the "Why even fight?" line; but we not only fought. We set records.

However, here is the bad news. The ATF did not give up. They are going to be back. Unless you believe that the ATF has the genuine best interests of the law-abiding gun owners at heart (and there was NOTHING in that proposed framework to justify that outlook), they are going to come back better informed and better armed. If we do not use the time we have bought with this spectacular fight to lobby our elected Representatives, then the second go-around of this is likely to be really ugly for us.

Don't quit. Don't let your buddies quit. Use that anger and use that momentum now before it fades. Push Congress to do the right thing and limit the ability of the ATF to make wild interpretations inconsistent with the law.

 

[blarby]

Atf just announced that they're giving up.


http://www.nssfblog.com/atf-to-not-move-forward-with-5-56-m855-ammo-ban-at-this-time/

 

[mokin]

First of all, thanks to everyone who called, faxed, and wrote your politicians. Secondly, this seemed pretty easy. B. Hussein and company may have been out of their league when they arrived in Washington six years ago but I figure they've upped their game some. The level of political chicanery that takes place these days knows no bounds. My tin foil hat is buzzing a little and I call this a feint or some sort of distraction. Election season is just around the corner and the news types and politicians will be much busier in the near future. As others have said we need to keep the pressure on our representatives to pass a law to protect or rights and our ammunition.

 

[tcoz]

Atf just announced that they're giving up.

They never said or even implied that theyre giving up. They only said that they're not moving forward with the ban at this time while they review the comments and study the data and information that was submitted. We won the battle, not the war.

 

[Blade First]

"Please do not think it will not reappear/go into effect as the furor settles into quieter times..."

There aren't going to be any quieter times...act accordingly. To wit: contact your representatives on state and federal levels and insist that your voice be heard. But don't let that deter your efforts on the ground in your community.

For a change, in a long time, accountability to the inherent rights recognized by the 2nd Amendment is not an alien concept to the American public.

As more common violations of our God-given rights are ID'd, the more we must refuse to accept the intrusions of fascist/totalitarian/progressive activists and their sophist/apologist/anarchist enablers. The former "main-stream" media are in full panic-mode. Let's do our best to increase their stress and angst.

 

[F-111 John]

This is not the first time ATF tried to rescind the M855 exemption, and it won't be the last. The last time the ATF tried to alter the meaning of "sporting purposes" was in December of 2012. Two years later and they're back at it again. Don't expect them to wait another two years before their next try.

It is time to push congress to repeal the armor piercing ammunition ban, or at least modify it to exclude ammunition originally intended for use in rifles, and to only include handgun ammunition that has a proven ability to defeat Level IIIA soft body armor using NIJ Standard-0101.06. Barring that, it is time to have a court rule on the ATF's interpretation of the armor piercing statute, and whether M855/SS109 meets the definition of armor piercing ammunition as defined by 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B).

And Hso, I hope your comments weren't aimed at me. Calling facts defeatism isn't very "high road" of you. I wrote the ATF a comment letter. I wrote my Senators and Representative. I gave to the NRA-ILA. I also know what the current state of affairs is, and we need to calculate our actions based on current realities, not on our emotions.

Speaking of current realities, the ATF has returned the exemption for M855/SS109 and M2AP ammunition in their 2014 Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide, found on page 190:

https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/f...ated_2014_firearms_reference_guide_3-7-15.pdf

I suggest everybody download and read page 190 of the 2014 Regulations Reference Guide, and look at the long list of ammunition that is currently banned from sale or importation.

M855 is still considered Armor Piercing Ammunition by the ATF, and is granted an exemption. And until the law is changed or the determination is contested in federal court, it will remain so.

What is your next move? Mine will be more letters to my congressional delegation, and a letter attached to a check to the Second Amendment Foundation.

 

[elwoodm]

my next message to the congresscritters in n.c. will be for them to find out how much money atf spent and who allowed the money to be used for a problem that did not happen.these are the people that need to find new jobs that are not payed for by taxes.a big high five to all of you that made this happen

 

[tcoz]

my next message to the congresscritters in n.c. will be for them to find out how much money atf spent and who allowed the money to be used for a problem that did not happen.these are the people that need to find new jobs that are not payed for by taxes.a big high five to all of you that made this happen

With all due respect, your efforts would be more beneficial if you wrote to them asking that Congress revisit the Armor Piercing Ammunition Ban and ask that ammunition originally designed for use in rifles be exempted, as F-111 stated.

 

[Tirod]

Almost as good news as getting my 10.5" barrel today.

Once everybody is finished clapping each other on the back and giving out hi fives, lets' take a moment to see just exactly what the ATF plans next.

I very much agree it's a back pedal because the new regs were outed too soon. Of course, it would be just as obvious if they were released for distribution on March 17, but we've seen this Administration pull that stunt in the past, too. The shutdown of the National Parks required at least a 4 week prior commitment to make the signs and posters - so they were ordered long before the entire debacle came to a head.

Same here on the regs, and somebody outed the ATF this time. We are not alone.

So, as was said, they are waiting for a more opportune and legal moment to release their final framework. It does not mean it's been dumped and will never reappear.

I don't expect it will resurface close to the election. It might just wait for the current President's successor, who very well could push for even more, sooner, and with a vengeance.

She doesn't like us.

 

[hso]

And until the law is changed

And that is exactly what we should be pushing to achieve. We need to push to get an essential line in the law amended to make it apply to the original specifics of armor piercing ammunition "designed and intended to be fired from a handgun" with the caveat that any ammunition designed to be fired from a rifle is excluded from the scope of the law.

It would also help if we only had to deal with the false flag ops from Bloomberg and not have our own Quislings tearing us down.

 

[barnbwt]

"It is 100% out of phase for both this administration and this bureau to do an about-face on things like this. What did they have to lose by proceeding as planned? Nothing I can see. Why in the world wold they capitulate? It's not at all in their nature. What is it that they have to gain from this immediate concession? Nothing at all."
The point is diversion. In case anyone has noticed, after six long years of this mess, this administration thrives on discord; whenever something looks set to be resolved, a new scandal --usually instigated by themselves directly or indirectly-- conveniently presents itself. Some lazy sentences thrown together by ATF 'crats resulted in the burning of a lot of our resources; a great many gun-owners now have their biennial "advocacy" action knocked out, blew all their money on M855 ammo and won't be donating to orgs anytime soon, and are feeling fat and happy with this 'victory' (it isn't victory when the enemy stops charging and falls back to the trench). Compared to how much money Bloomberg has to dump in order to rile us up this much, the ATF's play here was chickenfeed. The trick is for us to keep ourselves riled this time; that's what they won't be expecting.

I will be sending a two-part letter to all my representatives and possible presidential candidates. The first part will thank them profusely for their vocal support of our cause (as applicable) and encourage them to support us in the future. In the case of my Senator, I may even break with tradition and actually make a token monetary contribution since the Senate letter to the ATF was put together and circulated/signed very quickly. I like to encourage hustle.

The second part will be to present a solution they owe us, the public, after leaving us exposed to this kind of bureaucratic mendacity in the first place. The only reason this "framework" saw the light of day is because the Bureau was so poorly constrained and guided by its operating statues.

Remove the reference to 'core(s),' 'pistols/rifles,' and 'jackets' entirely from the statute. Make a list of metals that are to be prohibited from all ammunition used in centerfire rifles/pistols (or 'non-shotguns') and leave it at that. If we're to keep this useless and moronic legislation around in some form, let's at least make it simple and bounded. Tungsten alloys, Beryllium, or Uranium (or Mercury; we'll call it a 'compromise'). Steel, iron, copper, brass, bronze, and zinc are all so commonly in use in cores, jackets, cases, and primers that broadly banning them unconditionally is unsupportable.

If the notion of "allowing" the citizens to use steel or bronze-based ammunition in lieu of lead is too sobering for our betters, add a second sentence establishing a fixed Brinell Hardness threshold for any component of a projectile to skate under. Hardness and substance; easily identified, understood, defined, legislated, and enforced. No "suitability," no "sporting purposes," no "intended design," no 'objective' field tests, no component definitions to quibble over as technology advances.

It's the least they owe us after this fracas.

TCB

 

[Blade First]

"Since M193 has a lead core, and the jacket does not constitute more than 25% of the total bullet weight, there is no legal criteria [sic] to ban M193."

There are no legal criteria to ban M855. What, then, is your point?

Don't really care about the minutiae of your argument because it doesn't equate to bovine flatulence with the BATboys...they are the coprolite crew at the bottom of the proverbial barrel of the fed.gov whores.

The response to their "proposal" has had a very positive effect, but it is by no means adequate to deter an administration that is as clearly defined as lawless as any our nation has ever known.

In other words, we must keep fighting such illegal, illogical interpretations until at least 01Nov16...and perhaps beyond that, God forbid.

 

[justin22885]

now we need to push on to 7N6, then steel core 7.62, and then take out the 68 GCA entirely as it seems the 86 bill may be losing its teeth as well

 

[steve4102]

I admit that this sudden change-in-plans from the bureau today came as a surprise to me. And I still don't understand it.

ATF Statement.

Although ATF endeavored to create a proposal that reflected a good faith interpretation of the law and balanced the interests of law enforcement, industry, and sportsmen, the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and include issues that deserve further study. Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework. After the close of the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process (for example, through additional proposals and opportunities for comment) before proceeding with any framework.

There plans seem to remain the same as they were to me.

Take comments on this proposed ban until March 16th. After that, evaluate and organize all comments.

After evaluating all comments, make a determination and proceed with their framework.

Nothing has changed, they just need more time to process all the thousands of comments.