This is the archive link that should go to the "Questions and Answers of the Month" in question:

https://web.archive.org/web/20130112090548/http://www.atf.gov/firearms/tip-of-the-month.html

How, convenient.


Guess we'll never know the details of what it is they asked for commentary on leading to the M855 ban.

This is what we need:

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/dad-richardson-opening-statement-at-ap-ammunition-listening-meeting.pdf

That is supposed to be the URL of the actual document which they supposedly "solicited public comment" on if M855 should be banned.

It has been purged from the BATFE website and the Internet Archive. I cannot find a copy anywhere else on the internet so far.

If anyone else comes across " dad-richardson-opening-statement-at-ap-ammunition-listening-meeting.pdf ", please save a copy and then let me know. You can email me if you'd prefer.

GOA form letter link here.  

I sent my letter.

This times a billion.





This is why we have to stand and fight, this is our line in the sand.
 

Figures.
 

Am I missing something?  I don't see here where the ATF is talking about banning or receding anything, but quite the opposite.









Something smells!

Yup... They are pulling some bullshit here.

This is what the ATF is saying:

"We already had a commentary on if M855 should be banned in December of 2012, now we only need a commentary on how we should ban it."

... And that pic is what they are talking about...

... And they have purged the actual document from their website...

Some serious fucking bullshit.

Is that not how the Federal Judge in Texas spanked the Obama Administration over Executive Amnesty, failure to abide by the necessary steps including public comment and so on?

Random note: Shout out to Roebuck. I found where you brought this up on another site in Dec 2012 and sounded the alarm... No one listened. Here's to you man, you fought the fight while we slept to the BATFEs lullaby that they were "expanding exemptions to AP ammo".

Well he must have been reading minds since there is nothing in those announcements that reflect anything like what they are about to do.

Sigh....

Emailed my LGS about this on Sat.  He emailed me back right away saying he was going to order 1500, 150 round boxes of AE M855 and sell it for $59.95 a box.  I even have the email from him that still says this...

Just checked his FB page and he is now listing it at $75.00 a box.

I'm actually good on ammo...and had no intention of buying any from him, but Im surprised he inflated the price so much from what he originally said.

It has turned into a much more tangled web than I originally thought... They did solicit comment... On a completely unrelated question than if M855 should be banned... And now they cite it as the reason they do not need to solicit comment on if M855 should be banned (the current comment period is simply for how M855 should be banned).

It's fucking bullshit.

Intuition and an inherent distrust of these bastards if I had to guess.

Looks like were are just going to have to start guess what the hell they are up to when they ask for comments.


We should all begin to address the fact that the ATF was deceptive in their requests for public comments in all our letters to both the ATF and to our Congressmen and Senators.

Just wrote my congressman, again.  Mentioned that above.
 

LOL

No way to know what his supplier charged him when he ordered.

A friendly judge is just what this situation needs.

The left uses that tactic constantly, I would think the NRA would have an idea where to present this.

Every ammo distributor right now:

If everybody who actually worked claimed or switched to "99" on their W-4's withholding....

Jesus Christ if this is what happened it is even worse than I thought.

That statement by the ATF in November, 2012 wants comments on exemptions not existing yet.

Pmags didn't come about until 2007 at SHOT. How to you stack something deep that didn't exist yet?

Started last year. Haven't paid them a dime.

The M855 exemption was implemented in 1986

Sent my letter-


How many agencies of the US Govt have we seen politically weaponized?

HHS - Obama care
JUSTICE- way too many examples.
INS- open borders
EPA- war on coal and fracking
IRS- " Whose got tea?"
VA- Replacing care with PR tricks
State Dept.- Benghazi to Syrian "refugees"
ATF- trying to create a shortage of target ammo for the most common rifle in America other than .22lr.

And on and on....

We're seeing all this go unchecked.
We are voting- and electing a fix for all of that- BUT NOTHING IS GETTING DONE!

We are taking casualties out here while those who were elected DITHER over how they will be perceived in the press-

Cover our ass and we will back your play. Stop this open harassment of lawfull sportsmen.

Thank you.

VET USMC

G. Russell


I've included the below form letter because it's got merit.


I hope that you will do everything in your power to "defund" or overturn the ATF's recent ban on SS109 and M855 "green tip" ammunition, which is used for one of the most popular guns in America -- the AR-15.

Please support an amendment to the DHS appropriations bill which would forbid the ATF from going forward with its lawless proposal.

Also, I agree with Gun Owners of America that the Senate must hold up the nomination of Attorney General Nominee Loretta Lynch until the ATF backs down from its unlawful gun ban.

You can go to the GOA website to get the particulars on this ban, and to see why this ammo does NOT fall within the parameters of the armor-piercing bullet ban.

Go to: www.gunowners.org/alert02182015.htm

The bottom line: SS109 and M855 "green tip" ammunition -- with a traditional lead core and a steel tip -- does not fit within the two-part test required by the armor piercing bullet ban.  Rather, this is an illegal attempt to ban or limit AR-15's by banning types of AR-15 ammunition.

Moreover, any particular ammunition can be, and has been, exempted if it has a sporting purpose. Well, according to surveys, the AR-15 is used for target shooting or hunting over 50% of the time -- thereby, making its ammunition easily fit within the "sporting purpose" test, no matter what the composition of the ammunition.

Again, please do everything in your power to rein in the ATF and overturn their recent ban on SS109 and M855 ammunition.

M855 still doesn't fit the definition of the things that they requested comments for. The entire thing is worded as if they were going to exempt ADDITIONAL rounds(ie the Barnes Solids).

Timeline;

1986:  BATFE issues an unnecessary exemption for M855. M855 never met the definition of AP under 18 U.S. Code § 921 (A) (17) (B).

2012 November:  BATFE holds meetings about AP ammo, we know very little about these meetings so far.

2012 December:  BATFE solicits for public comment related to new exemptions on AP status for Barnes Solids and other hunting projectiles. This solicitation for comment is presented under the guise of new exemptions, not rescinded exemptions or new restrictions.

2013 January:  All references to said solicitation for public comment on the BATFEs website are removed, while other solicitations for public comment both before and after are left intact. The primary document is also removed.

2015 February:  BATFE issues new edict stating that the exemption for M855 will be rescinded and claiming M855 meets the definition of AP under 18 U.S. Code § 921 (A) (17) (B). They state that the aforementioned meetings in November of 2012 were about this, and that public comments on the banning of M855 were solicited during December of 2012. Thus they do not solicit further comments on the legal status of M855, but rather they only solicit public comments on how M855 should be banned.


It's bullshit.

Mark my words, they will dismiss all comments on the subject of M855s legality under 18 U.S. Code § 921 (A) (17) (B) as not being relevant to the solicitation.

That is exactly what they are trying to pull here. Having to respond to all 30,000 comments on 41P must have been a real bitch. Now they are trying to set it up so they can dismiss 95% of our comments on this.

Not filing a return?  Kudos to you...and good luck.

I'm sure the wholesalers have responded with a price increase.

This.

I've been resending my emails with small changes at least once every day. Going to start on a new one this morning.

I know.........it appears that that comment period in November, 2012 was asking for ATF to consider more exemptions.

And they are using that as the reason they don't need to solicit public comment on the actual legal status of M855. The "we already did that, trust us" excuse.

They are setting this up to ignore every comment disputing the claim of M855 being AP. After all, they already did that, I mean, they said they did. They only solicited comments on how to smoothy ban M855, not if it should be banned.

It's slick, I'll give them that. No reason to have to listen to the lowly public, as required by law, amirite?

It sure sounds like you are right.

If this is all true, this is blatantly anti gun on ATF's part and it is disgusting they would let Obongo and his ilk turn them into an ideological Agency.

Just more evidence that rule of law is dead.  At some point the masses are gonna have to acknowledge this...or nothing will change for the better.

Its not slick, its just a lie. They intend to rule by regulation not law. So wrong.

This is the type of stuff that makes socialism/communism so scary. Mindless, faceless bureaucrats who decide what's best for everyone. Regardless of law. This is not how the founders of this country intended it to work.

Might be worth submitting a question during this comment period requesting the minutes from the meetings, the original request for comments, and any comments received.

It was already exempt, has been for 30 years.

I love the twisted logic of the primarily used for sporting purposes.  Millions of rounds of M-855 have been sold.  I would say 99% were used or will be used for target shooter or hunting, both sporting purposes. Versus how many crimes committed using this round?

Support your statement with facts or go troll elsewhere.

Winston Smith from the Ministry of Truth dropped them down the memory hole.

It's only slick it it's legitimate. They straight-up lied, and I think they're going to get called on it.

Thank you for your diligence on this. Upon an initial read of the memorandum, they barely mentioned the meeting with four entities and that reference was vague at best. What caught my attention was the use of the term "consumer group", which usually means anti-gunners or someone who supports the government's position.

Realistically.  If this go to court what is the likelihood we will win?

No idea.

But I like that we have a LOT of angles we can hit them from, legally. We only need them to screw up once.

http://www.atf.gov/content/contact-us/FOIA/how-to-request-ATF-records


Cold link to request information.

Looks like 4Chan is on this as well:

http://boards.4chan.org/k/thread/24785605/is-the-batfe-lying-about-public-commentary-on-the

They're pretty IT-savvy. Some decent info and commentary/ideas at link, including reaching out to their own search resources.

Pretty fucking good in front of the right judge.

Sent the GOA memo moments ago and received this from Sen. Dan Coats (Rino, IN)

And pretty bad in front of the wrong judge

I just saw that site - is he a member here? I'm wondering if he may have saved the links he posted as an image or PDF file.