Bill introduced to rescind proposed ATF ban of rifle ammunition.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Excellent. It would be awesome if the text of the Bill matched the title, meaning it would hopefully apply to any further restrictions on any ammo.
 
We'll have to see the text. The ATF is proposing new enforcement of an existing restriction and that existing restriction can snatch up quite a bit with the proposed interpretation.
 
Sorry, I applaud Rep. Rooney for stepping up to the plate, but if passed by Congress, doesn't this have to make it to Obama's deck for signature?
 
tcoz reported on that yesterday, but we still don't know what's in it. http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=9828282&postcount=134

This will be the first of several and there will need to be one in the Senate and then they'll need to get it through Committee before the differences get hammered out between the House and Senate version and then it might make it on its own to the Whitehouse or it might be put in another bigger (DHS?) bill that needs to be signed by the Whitehouse.

DHS would have been a good one to slip a simple amendment to the existing legislation the BATFE is underpinning the proposal to ban M855. Something as simple as introducing the "designed and intended for a handgun" language that Moyahan originally intended would have stopped any rifle ammo from being banned under LEOPA.
 
"Something as simple as introducing the "designed and intended for a handgun" language that Moyahan originally intended would have stopped any rifle ammo from being banned under LEOPA."
Wouldn't that technically let through the steel-core subgun ammo that the bill was designed to interdict in the first place, though? Those Swedish K's are short barrel rifles, but rifles all the same.

Just playing Devil's Advocate, here, since that language would allow you to design tungsten-core (or some other statutorily 'armor piercing' design) projectiles for a pistol-caliber carbine with impunity. The burden would then be on the end user to differentiate between projectile types (good luck) and avoid using them in handguns (again, good luck).

The law fundamentally suffers from the same ailment as the NFA itself (attempting to quantize infinite permutations of human invention) so I doubt it can be remedied properly. But some more friendly & reasonable language would be a nice start, though :)
 
The wording in this article (media wording, not bill wording) is interesting:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...es-bill-revoking-atfs-power-to-regulate-ammo/

On Friday, Rep. Tom Rooney (R-FL) introduced legislation revoking the ATF’s claim of power to regulate ammunition via “armor piecing” language in the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA).

The ATF is specifically claiming the ability to regulate ammunition via the “armor piercing” language contained in the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act, an amendment added to the GCA in 1986. Their current focus is on banning the wildly popular M855 round for AR-15 rifles.

Rooney’s bill would roll back the ATF’s powers to pre-1986 levels.

According to The Hill, Rooney’s bill “would prohibit the ATF or any other federal agency from issuing or enforcing any new restriction or prohibition on the manufacture, importation, or sale of ammunition in the United States.”

Rooney said:

The Obama administration’s [proposed ban of M855 ammo] would unilaterally strip law-abiding hunters and sportsmen of their Second Amendment rights. Congress has made its intentions clear that this ammunition is for sporting purposes and should not be restricted. We cannot and will not stand by while the Obama administration tramples on the constitution, the rule of law, and the Second Amendment rights of hunters.


The bolding is mine for emphasis.
 
OpticsPlanet said:
Steve,

It would need Obummers signature, but if he vetoes it then we proceed to the 2/3 override option

-Matt S.
Click to expand...
Considering the Senate couldn't overcome his veto of the Keystone pipeline, which would create jobs and help foster energy independence, there's no way that would happen. Not for ammo.
 
Rooney’s bill would roll back the ATF’s powers to pre-1986 levels.
Click to expand...


This is exactly what I've been talking about. The original bill passed in the 80's to outlaw "cop killer bullets" was based on a phoney farce to begin with as no cop had ever been killed by a "cop killer bullet".
 
Just to stir the pot further, this little article has an interesting revelation (though not one that comes as any surprise really). http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2015/03/06/exclusive-atf-has-already-banned-common-at15-green-tip-ammunition-n1966761

The ATF has already banned green tip 5.56mm ammo. Bear in mind, the "discussion period" wherein they invite comments on the matter doesn't end for another ten days yet. But they had already posted the 2015 regulation guide in January, and it doesn't have the exemption for this ammo that was written into the 2005 guide. They basically already wrote the new regs, and the comment and discussion period was just for show.
 
Billy Shears said:
Just to stir the pot further, this little article has an interesting revelation (though not one that comes as any surprise really). http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2015/03/06/exclusive-atf-has-already-banned-common-at15-green-tip-ammunition-n1966761

The ATF has already banned green tip 5.56mm ammo. Bear in mind, the "discussion period" wherein they invite comments on the matter doesn't end for another ten days yet. But they had already posted the 2015 regulation guide in January, and it doesn't have the exemption for this ammo that was written into the 2005 guide. They basically already wrote the new regs, and the comment and discussion period was just for show.
Click to expand...
I'm still trying to find out how it could have been exempted from being "armor piercing" when it doesn't fit the legal definition in the first place. To me (not a lawyer), it would be the same as if they added a paragraph to the regulations stating that all flat-nosed lead-core 150gr 30-30 ammunition was exempt being defined as "armor piercing", then a couple of years later removing that "exemption". Removing the exemption doesn't change the fact that it didn't fit the definition in the first place.

Matt
 
morcey2 said:
I'm still trying to find out how it could have been exempted from being "armor piercing" when it doesn't fit the legal definition in the first place. To me (not a lawyer), it would be the same as if they added a paragraph to the regulations stating that all flat-nosed lead-core 150gr 30-30 ammunition was exempt being defined as "armor piercing", then a couple of years later removing that "exemption". Removing the exemption doesn't change the fact that it didn't fit the definition in the first place.

Matt
Click to expand...

Because it fits the POLITICAL definition.
 
The lack of text this long after filing the bill could mean several things. My guess is that the bill was filed as a "placeholder" and the author is waiting ATF's response to the Goodlatte letter due March 13th before proceeding.
 
I just pulled down the PDF linked to in the townhall.com article referenced in post #14 and something strikes me as odd. Not only is the exemption for M855/SS109 removed, but so is the exemption for 30-06 M2AP black tip rounds. Not that anyone is currently manufacturing it so I don't know if that's really an issue, but it does come up for sale now and then.

What I do note as absent in that document is an explicit listing of M855/SS109 as armor piercing. They do list steel core 7.62x39 explicitly, but not M855. If the exemption was removed specifically to ban M855, I think they would have added a specific listing for there saying that it was an AP round.

Again, IANAL so I may be misreading things.

Matt
 
crazysccrmd said:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1329

A bill to abolish the ATF
Click to expand...

A BS bill.

To abolish the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, transfer its functions relating to the Federal firearms, explosives, and arson laws, violent crime, and domestic terrorism to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and transfer its functions relating to the Federal alcohol and tobacco smuggling laws to the Drug Enforcement Administration, and for other purposes.

It does nothing but transfer everything over to the FBI and DEA. How does that benefit us with respect to what the ATF currently does?
 
Anybody that knows anything about the ATF knows that Sensenbrenner is just making noise and doesn't expect that to go anywhere. You can't transfer the ATF's role to the FBI since the FBI is a criminal investigation agency and the ATF is supposed to primarily be a regulatory agency.
 
hso said:
Anybody that knows anything about the ATF knows that Sensenbrenner is just making noise and doesn't expect that to go anywhere. You can't transfer the ATF's role to the FBI since the FBI is a criminal investigation agency and the ATF is supposed to primarily be a regulatory agency.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I was just sitting here thinking about that, how the role of the FBI and DEA is to investigate criminal violations of statutes, not to maintain and produce interpretations of statutes.
 
True. I thought it more of a gesture of frustration, not something that would happen. Even if it did nothing would change, just the same laws being interpreted/enforced by different agencies with a whole lot of wasted time and money making the transition happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Bill introduced to raise NFA transfer tax
Replies
21
Views
2K
adcoch1
adcoch1
redneck
  • Locked
House Resolution 127- licensing of firearms and ammunition possession.
Replies
5
Views
2K
hso
hso
W
  • Locked
Links to research 117th Congress firearms bills
Replies
1
Views
570
wiscoaster
W
barnbwt
  • Locked
HR2620 Attacking "Sporting Purposes" Regulation
Replies
15
Views
2K
ilbob
ilbob
Hugger-4641
  • Locked
FAA regs for mounted guns
Replies
4
Views
632
mcb
mcb
Back
Top