User Panel
[#1]
Quoted:
He is mistaken. This ammo was never previously declared armor piercing. It was given a special exemption, but it was never singled out and proclaimed to be armor piercing. View Quote There would be no need for an exemption it if it had not been determined to be "armor piercing ammunition". BATFE claims it made that determination in 1986 after the statute was passed. Is the agency telling the truth? Who knows? |
|
[#2]
|
|
[#3]
View Quote FTWH |
|
[#4]
|
|
[#5]
View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes “This seems to be an area where everyone should agree, that if there are armor piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerable more risk,” Earnest explained when questioned about the ban by White House reporter Fred Lucas. So everyone should agree that since virtually any center-fire rifle round pierces soft armor they put our law enforcement at considerably more risk? |
|
[#6]
Quoted:
So everyone should agree that since virtually any center-fire rifle round pierces soft armor they put our law enforcement at considerably more risk? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
“This seems to be an area where everyone should agree, that if there are armor piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerable more risk,” Earnest explained when questioned about the ban by White House reporter Fred Lucas. So everyone should agree that since virtually any center-fire rifle round pierces soft armor they put our law enforcement at considerably more risk? Of course. It's "common sense." |
|
[#7]
Quoted:
So everyone should agree that since virtually any center-fire rifle round pierces soft armor they put our law enforcement at considerably more risk? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
“This seems to be an area where everyone should agree, that if there are armor piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerable more risk,” Earnest explained when questioned about the ban by White House reporter Fred Lucas. So everyone should agree that since virtually any center-fire rifle round pierces soft armor they put our law enforcement at considerably more risk? No kidding. It's 100% pure unadulterated agenda-pushing derp coming out of the white house. Expect to hear lots more of it as things continue to heat up from the Republicans and NRA. |
|
[#8]
I like how they are now describing a 4-5lb pistol that is two feet long as "an easily concealed weapon.". Not to mention the other general dero in that White House answer.
|
|
[#9]
Quoted:
No kidding. It's 100% pure unadulterated agenda-pushing derp coming out of the white house. Expect to hear lots more of it as things continue to heat up from the Republicans and NRA. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
“This seems to be an area where everyone should agree, that if there are armor piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerable more risk,” Earnest explained when questioned about the ban by White House reporter Fred Lucas. So everyone should agree that since virtually any center-fire rifle round pierces soft armor they put our law enforcement at considerably more risk? No kidding. It's 100% pure unadulterated agenda-pushing derp coming out of the white house. Expect to hear lots more of it as things continue to heat up from the Republicans and NRA. Yup. The only people who oppose this "common sense" ban are people that want police officers to be killed. |
|
[#10]
Because we all know a person willing to kill police officers will change his mind when he learns that the ammo he intends to use is illegal. Common sense.
|
|
[#11]
abcnews.com now has the ban up as an article and a comments section...JFYI
|
|
[#12]
Quoted:
abcnews.com now has the ban up as an article and a comments section...JFYI View Quote cbsnews.com as well. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/proposed-ban-on-popular-bullet-triggers-run-on-ammo-sales/ |
|
[#14]
Might as well go full retard
Stir up the hornets nest and make everyone aware of this backdoor judassry - might not be ammo on the shelves for a hot minute but at least the dirt is in the open |
|
[#15]
As Karen Carpenter used to sing, "We've only just begun..."
The Imperial Presidency By Turd Ferguson | Monday, March 2, 2015 at 7:38 pm After finding no resistance to his "executive action" on such issues as illegal immigration and ammunition sales, President Woody II is about to boldly go in a direction we should have expected all along. No, were not talking about martial law...yet. Instead, at today's daily White House press briefing, we learned this: White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest confirmed Monday that President Obama is "very interested" in the idea of raising taxes through unilateral executive action. "The president certainly has not indicated any reticence in using his executive authority to try and advance an agenda that benefits middle class Americans," Earnest said in response to a question about Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) calling on Obama to raise more than $100 billion in taxes through IRS executive action. "Now I don't want to leave you with the impression that there is some imminent announcement, there is not, at least that I know of," Earnest continued. "But the president has asked his team to examine the array of executive authorities that are available to him to try to make progress on his goals. So I am not in a position to talk in any detail at this point, but the president is very interested in this avenue generally," Earnest finished. Full link here: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/conncarroll/2015/03/02/obama-very-interested-in-raising-taxes-through-executive-action-n1964629 So, there you have it. When there is no opposition...when the two political parties are simply differing wings of the same party...this is what you get. There is no "Constitution" and there are no silly, arcane notions such as "separation of powers" and "checks and balances". Instead, you have an imperial presidency, where the chief executive dictates by fiat and imposes his will, unhinged from the rule of law. What does this have to do with the metals, you ask? Everything! Ownership of physical precious metal* has always been...and always will be...an investment in your personal economic freedom. I urge you to acquire some/more today, before some future "executive action" takes away your right to do so. http://news.goldseek.com/GoldSeek/1425410266.php View Quote *Guns and ammo, too, Terd. |
|
[#16]
I just heard a caller, "Marcus" ask Sen. Roberts about the M855 ban on a conference call. Marcus if you're on this thread, good job.
|
|
[#17]
anything else I can do?
I have sent letters to all my elected representatives multiple times commented with the atf. signed the wihitehouse petition weeks ago. donated to the nra and goa contacted the nra and goa its been a couple of weeks and i want to keep the pressure on. what else can I do that I am not thinking of??? |
|
[#18]
Quoted:
anything else I can do? I have sent letters to all my elected representatives multiple times commented with the atf. signed the wihitehouse petition weeks ago. donated to the nra and goa contacted the nra and goa its been a couple of weeks and i want to keep the pressure on. what else can I do that I am not thinking of??? View Quote Yes, pop the pmags. |
|
[#19]
I spoke with the ATF today and have been told the following:
Extension has not been granted. Deadline is still March 16 for comments. If and when the deadline is extended, the ATF will post the notice on the website. After the deadline passes, the ATF will respond to comments. There is no set timeline for implementation of the rule. |
|
[#20]
Quoted:
I spoke with the ATF today and have been told the following: Extension has not been granted. Deadline is still March 16 for comments. If and when the deadline is extended, the ATF will post the notice on the website. After the deadline passes, the ATF will respond to comments. There is no set timeline for implementation of the rule. View Quote We need to keep turning up the heat. The more attention the better. |
|
[#21]
Quoted:
I spoke with the ATF today and have been told the following: Extension has not been granted. Deadline is still March 16 for comments. If and when the deadline is extended, the ATF will post the notice on the website. After the deadline passes, the ATF will respond to comments. There is no set timeline for implementation of the rule. View Quote NoloContendere for Presidente |
|
[#22]
Nolo, you being a lawyer and all, once this date comes and the ban goes into effect, is there nothing on a legal level that might or could happen to turn it around?
|
|
[#23]
|
|
[#24]
Have you guys noticed all the gun shops bypassing their retail customers and selling their 5.56 on Gunbroker?
I bet well over half of the sellers on Gunbroker are retail gun shops. They can sell there somewhat without conscience and complaints about "gouging". Plus, they can double their money. |
|
[#25]
Quoted:
Have you guys noticed all the gun shops bypassing their retail customers and selling their 5.56 on Gunbroker? I bet well over half of the sellers on Gunbroker are retail gun shops. They can sell there somewhat without conscience and complaints about "gouging". Plus, they can double their money. View Quote Plenty of shops selling it at $1 a round. Maybe they just want to clear their inventory as fast as possible before they get legally stuck with it? Appealing to a wider customer base makes sense in that context. |
|
[#26]
Quoted:
Have you guys noticed all the gun shops bypassing their retail customers and selling their 5.56 on Gunbroker? I bet well over half of the sellers on Gunbroker are retail gun shops. They can sell there somewhat without conscience and complaints about "gouging". Plus, they can double their money. View Quote Yesir. It's their right to do so. If it were me I would rather take care of the "local" customers first. You know the ones that take care of you. Even if you offered it to the locals at 60cpr whatever. Is what I find really freaking weird though http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=471149558 http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=471305793 Why did the first one sell for 85cpr and the second one was a no sale 18 minutes earlier @ 60cpr? |
|
[#27]
Anybody who thinks there aren't a bunch of sham auctions going on right now is pretty naïve.
|
|
[#28]
|
|
[#29]
Quoted:
Quoted:
“This seems to be an area where everyone should agree, that if there are armor piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerable more risk,” Earnest explained when questioned about the ban by White House reporter Fred Lucas. So everyone should agree that since virtually any center-fire rifle round pierces soft armor they put our law enforcement at considerably more risk? Of course. It's "common sense." Go back to your sheep pen, citizen. Firearms are for the guard dogs only. And while you are there, pick up that can. |
|
[#30]
|
|
[#31]
Quoted:
Anybody who thinks there aren't a bunch of sham auctions going on right now is pretty naïve. View Quote Definitely some kind of BS going on, I've been saving the auctions that have sold for $1+ per round, not all of them but quite a few, seems like the same sellers are getting the premium while a lot of the others are cheaper and they don't sell. |
|
[#33]
Quoted:
Go back to your sheep pen, citizen. Firearms are for the guard dogs only. And while you are there, pick up that can. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
“This seems to be an area where everyone should agree, that if there are armor piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerable more risk,” Earnest explained when questioned about the ban by White House reporter Fred Lucas. So everyone should agree that since virtually any center-fire rifle round pierces soft armor they put our law enforcement at considerably more risk? Of course. It's "common sense." Go back to your sheep pen, citizen. Firearms are for the guard dogs only. And while you are there, pick up that can. Not that can. The other one. |
|
[#34]
I was in towards the beginning, and I checked in around page 30 or so.
Is anything of interest happening, or is this thread mostly banter about neckbearding and comments about the obvious futility of this ban? |
|
[#35]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nolo, you being a lawyer and all, once this date comes and the ban goes into effect, is there nothing on a legal level that might or could happen to turn it around? yes. Yes there is nothing, or yes there is something? |
|
[#36]
Quoted:
if this does go through (or more likely, as it winds its way though the courts), we should write the ammo companies and get them to switch production to Mk318. it costs the same to make as M855, has much better accuracy and has much improved terminal ballistics and is barrier blind. there is also no way that the AP statute the ATF is using can be applied to it since the core is 100% lead in the Mod 0 and 100% copper in the Mod 1 Mk318 Mod 0 http://tirotactico.net.dedi3682.your-server.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/cutaways14018.jpg Mk318 Mod 1 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/intvw04.jpg View Quote And yet the jacket is what... 40+% of the weight? |
|
[#37]
Quoted: And yet the jacket is what... 40+% of the weight? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: if this does go through (or more likely, as it winds its way though the courts), we should write the ammo companies and get them to switch production to Mk318. it costs the same to make as M855, has much better accuracy and has much improved terminal ballistics and is barrier blind. there is also no way that the AP statute the ATF is using can be applied to it since the core is 100% lead in the Mod 0 and 100% copper in the Mod 1 Mk318 Mod 0 http://tirotactico.net.dedi3682.your-server.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/cutaways14018.jpg Mk318 Mod 1 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/intvw04.jpg And yet the jacket is what... 40+% of the weight? but its not 'designed and intended for use in a handgun' which is the qualifier on that part of the statute that discusses jacket weight. the ATF is using the other part of the statute that says 'may be used in a handgun' and lists the prohibited metals which must make up 100% of the core |
|
[#38]
Quoted: Have you guys noticed all the gun shops bypassing their retail customers and selling their 5.56 on Gunbroker? I bet well over half of the sellers on Gunbroker are retail gun shops. They can sell there somewhat without conscience and complaints about "gouging". Plus, they can double their money. View Quote It works better for everyone if gun shops and ammunition manufacturers are selling at a price people are willing to pay. If they all sold it at 30 cents a round you would have a million people waiting in Walmart to snag it up and resell it on gunbroker for a $1 a round. |
|
[#39]
Quoted:
but its not 'designed and intended for use in a handgun' which is the qualifier on that part of the statute that discusses jacket weight View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
if this does go through (or more likely, as it winds its way though the courts), we should write the ammo companies and get them to switch production to Mk318. it costs the same to make as M855, has much better accuracy and has much improved terminal ballistics and is barrier blind. there is also no way that the AP statute the ATF is using can be applied to it since the core is 100% lead in the Mod 0 and 100% copper in the Mod 1 Mk318 Mod 0 http://tirotactico.net.dedi3682.your-server.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/cutaways14018.jpg Mk318 Mod 1 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/intvw04.jpg And yet the jacket is what... 40+% of the weight? but its not 'designed and intended for use in a handgun' which is the qualifier on that part of the statute that discusses jacket weight It was redesigned when AR handguns became common... The fact they still make it after AR pistols became popular establishes intent. Don't think about this like a normal person. Think about it from the perspective of someone completely ruthless, and willing to bend any word and tell any lie to accomplish their agenda. It is a mindset I have been trying to copy from them. |
|
[#41]
Quoted:
Yes there is nothing, or yes there is something? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nolo, you being a lawyer and all, once this date comes and the ban goes into effect, is there nothing on a legal level that might or could happen to turn it around? yes. Yes there is nothing, or yes there is something? there is something that can be done. |
|
[#42]
Here is the draft of a Freedom of Information Act request that I am going to submit. I welcome any constructive comments.
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act. I request that a copy of the following documents [or documents containing the following information] be provided to me: Priority #1: ATF request for public comments on an armor piercing ammunition proposal where comments were due back to the ATF by 31 December 2012. Priority #2: Minutes of meetings held around November 2012 about the armor piercing ammunition proposal. Priority #3: Copies of public comments on the ATF armor piercing that were due back by 31 December 2012. In order to help to determine my status for purposes of determining the applicability of any fees, you should know that I am an individual seeking information for personal use and not for a commercial use. I request a waiver of all fees for this request. Disclosure of the requested information to me is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in my commercial interest. Requested information will be provided to other individuals and organizations interested in the current ATF proposal on armor piercing ammunition where comments are due on 16 March 2015. I request that the information I seek be provided in electronic format. Microsoft Word is preferred but PDF format is also acceptable. I ask that my request receive expedited processing because it is needed to help formulate my response and that of thousands of other US citizens to the ATF proposal comments due by 16 March 2015. Items can be sent as established by the priority list above rather than wait for all items. I am also including a telephone number at which I can be contacted at your convenience if necessary, to discuss any aspect of my request. Thank you for your consideration of this request. |
|
[#43]
Quoted:
And yet the jacket is what... 40+% of the weight? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
if this does go through (or more likely, as it winds its way though the courts), we should write the ammo companies and get them to switch production to Mk318. it costs the same to make as M855, has much better accuracy and has much improved terminal ballistics and is barrier blind. there is also no way that the AP statute the ATF is using can be applied to it since the core is 100% lead in the Mod 0 and 100% copper in the Mod 1 Mk318 Mod 0 http://tirotactico.net.dedi3682.your-server.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/cutaways14018.jpg Mk318 Mod 1 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/intvw04.jpg And yet the jacket is what... 40+% of the weight? It is 22 caliber. What does the jacket weight matter? |
|
[#44]
Is what I don't understand is that the ATF claims they issued an exemption for M855 and 30-06 black tip, both which at the time were (and still are except for the 5.56 pistols) a rifle only round. The exemption was made under a law that only applies to pistol rounds. So tell me why 30-06 black tip needed an exemption? And why can you still buy 50 BMG API Rounds legally, if they are claiming that 30-06 black tip needed an exemption?
|
|
[#45]
Quoted:
if this does go through (or more likely, as it winds its way though the courts), we should write the ammo companies and get them to switch production to Mk318. it costs the same to make as M855, has much better accuracy and has much improved terminal ballistics and is barrier blind. there is also no way that the AP statute the ATF is using can be applied to it since the core is 100% lead in the Mod 0 and 100% copper in the Mod 1 Mk318 Mod 0 http://tirotactico.net.dedi3682.your-server.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/cutaways14018.jpg Mk318 Mod 1 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/intvw04.jpg View Quote why the EPA will just ban lead. |
|
[#46]
I think the height of irony with this poorly written law is that if I reload a 30 cal M2 AP projectile in a 308 case and fire it at 2600 FPS I am committing a crime according to the ATF. However if I load the same projectile in my 300 win mag at 3200 fps it is perfectly fine, or even a 30-378 at 3600 FPS.
|
|
[#47]
Quoted:
Is what I don't understand is that the ATF claims they issued an exemption for M855 and 30-06 black tip, both which at the time were (and still are except for the 5.56 pistols) a rifle only round. The exemption was made under a law that only applies to pistol rounds. So tell me why 30-06 black tip needed an exemption? And why can you still buy 50 BMG API Rounds legally, if they are claiming that 30-06 black tip needed an exemption? View Quote Not to mention M855 does not even have have a steel core. One thing that points out the BS in this determination: 5.56 pistols and 7.62x39 pistols were introduced within a year of each other. 7.62x39 steel core was banned in 1994 as a pistol round. M855 was not banned, although it was a pistol round at the time, it is not steel cored. |
|
[#48]
Quoted:
It is 22 caliber. What does the jacket weight matter? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
if this does go through (or more likely, as it winds its way though the courts), we should write the ammo companies and get them to switch production to Mk318. it costs the same to make as M855, has much better accuracy and has much improved terminal ballistics and is barrier blind. there is also no way that the AP statute the ATF is using can be applied to it since the core is 100% lead in the Mod 0 and 100% copper in the Mod 1 Mk318 Mod 0 http://tirotactico.net.dedi3682.your-server.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/cutaways14018.jpg Mk318 Mod 1 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/intvw04.jpg And yet the jacket is what... 40+% of the weight? It is 22 caliber. What does the jacket weight matter? Why is M955 AP than? |
|
[#49]
|
|
[#50]
Quoted: Yes there is nothing, or yes there is something? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Nolo, you being a lawyer and all, once this date comes and the ban goes into effect, is there nothing on a legal level that might or could happen to turn it around? yes. Yes there is nothing, or yes there is something? Nolo has already gave the Bingo call sign! Keep up man! |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.