Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 3/26/2009 5:40:34 PM EDT
According to this page it seems that "armor piercing" bullets are illegal in Connecticut. How does the law define armor piercing bullets?

I've seen someone here state that 62 grain steel core M855 is legal in CT and that steel core is not necessarily armor piercing, but that seems kind of shady to me?
Link Posted: 3/27/2009 5:36:47 AM EDT
A Google search for "M855 vs armor piercing" yielded this interesting patent. It seems to me that armor piercing rounds consist of a steel tip, therefore M855, though designed to penetrate lite armor, is not considered an armor piercing bullet because it has a lead tip and steel core.

What say you, hive mind?
Link Posted: 3/27/2009 7:01:02 AM EDT
Cartridge, 5.56mm, Ball, M855

The cartridge is used by the M249 machine gun and the M16A2/A3/A4 and M4-series weapons. The cartridge is intended for use against personnel and unarmored targets. This is a training standard item used in both training and combat.

The M855 cartridge has a 62-grain, gilded metal-jacketed, lead alloy core bullet with a steel penetrator. The primer and case are waterproof.

This ammunition should not be used in the M16A1 except under emergency conditions, and only at targets less than 90 meters in distance. (The twist of the M16A1 rifling is not sufficient to stabilize the heavier projectile of the round).

The cartridge is identified by a green bullet tip.

Type Classification: STD - MSR 05826003. Type Classification Date: 1982.
Unit cost: $0.26 (Fiscal Year 2005).
Link Posted: 3/27/2009 11:39:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/27/2009 11:41:50 AM EDT by steveinct]
As discussed on this board frequently:

5.56 mm M-855/SS-109 and black tip .30 cal (.30-06 ONLY) AP rounds are EXEMPT from the definition of Armor Piercing ammunition according to the BATFE

5.56 mm M-855 and SS-109 and black tip .30 cal (.30-06 ONLY) are perfectly LEGAL in CT and sold frequently (though the .30 cal hasn't been seen commonly sold in decades) - it used to be the round of choice for DCM matches

M-61 black tip 7.62 NATO is NOT exempt and is considered "AP" as are any and all SLAP rounds (in any caliber)

The federal ban on "AP" rounds since the 1980s has been construction based and pertains mostly to obscure handgun rounds many have never heard of. Included among these are rounds like : KTW, 9mm iron or sintered steel core and MSC corp .25 ACP brass rounds and French "Arcane" pointed cone shaped rounds. This was under the 1980s "Biaggi Bill" named after former US Congressman Mario Biaggi of NY, a former NYC policeman who was later implicated in the Wedtech defense contractors fixing scheme in the late 1980s.

The ONLY Connecticut prohibition on ammunition is on .50 BMG having ANY AP or Incendiary characteristic or component. In short. .50 BMG ball and tracer are LEGAL in CT. .50 BMG AP, API, APIT and Incendiary are NOT LEGAL and constitute a FELONY for possession, use, sale, or offering or exposing for sale, as are ALL .50 BMG SLAP rounds

There is a thread on this board from about 2 or 3 weeks ago about someone who was interested in obtaining a .50 BMG SLAP round to buy as a curio and he was correctly advised by myself and others to forget it.
We cited the statute in that thread.
Link Posted: 3/28/2009 2:01:14 AM EDT
God CT makes me want to hit myself in the head with a ball peen hammer. Short of and armored vehical wtf is going to stop a reg .50 bmg anyway let along AP lol?
Link Posted: 3/28/2009 2:25:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Badlatitude:
God CT makes me want to hit myself in the head with a ball peen hammer. Short of and armored vehical wtf is going to stop a reg .50 bmg anyway let along AP lol?

Logic isn't the point.

The law that was passed in 2001 was an agreed compromise in order for us to keep post ban clones and high cap mags. It was the only way, at the eleventh hour to protect it. I agree it's usually bad form to concede to the legislature, but sometimes we have to pick our battles and they have the votes.

Without the compromise (and no, I am not defending or advocating compromise, but unfortunately in politics you sometimes MUST) - we WOULD HAVE a California Part 2 Assault Weapons ban - meaning- all mags limited to ten rounds; a class D felony to sell, expose for sale, offer for sale any mags over ten rounds for ANY firearm; the "list" would have been expanded to include ALL AR clones of ANY and ALL manufacturers, configurations, etc. plus the additional bans of the M-1A, Ruger Mini-14 & 30 (all models); the M-1 Carbine; AL FAL clones, ALL HK clones, etc. and semi auto shotguns added to the list including Benellis, Berettas
and Remington 1100s

So, at the "eleventh hour" "we" (meaning the NRA and the Coalition of Conn. Sportsmen-not me personally) conceded to the legislature to allow them to PASS the "2001 Firearms Safety Initiative" which is what kept all the post ban features in place today, in CT along with the ban on .50 BMG ammo having an AP and/or Incendiary component. - which they would have passed ANYWAY without the compromise. So, it stunk, but it was less stinky than having a CA Part 2 ban, no AR-anythings for sale and ten round mags for ALL firearms and no M-1As, carbines, autoloading shotguns, Minis, etc.

So, here we are, today. Remember when you take your favorite post ban clone to the range with a high cap mag, you just can't buy any .50 BMG AP/I ammo in CT. We sacrified .50 BMG AP ammo in order to allow them to pass an otherwise "toothless" paper victory while simultaneously scrapping the expanded list, kept high cap mags and made permanent the "evil features" ban in CT
Link Posted: 3/28/2009 2:58:31 AM EDT
On that note, I suspect the strategy that will be needed THIS YEAR if we get backed into a corner - is to offer up S.358 (Prohibition on Minors -under age 18 from HANDLING or shooting a Machine Gun or ASSAULT WEAPON) in order to get microstamping (S.353) "de facto" new handgun ban from passing - with the term "ASSAULT WEAPON" removed from the language in S.358 (In order to allow under age 18 shooters to continue shooting AR clones in CMP programs and national matches and to allow under age 18 shooters to continue shooting semi auto shotguns IF HR 1022 passes on the federal level, or some other future "AW" ban on either the federal or state level.

Hopefully both bills S.353 and S.358 will "die" in committee this year. They have another week to vote them out of Judiciary. Also, the session isn't really over until June, so anything can happen.

I've been advised by many legislators that Microstamping will die in committee again and the kicker was having Union Reps from Local 376 testify along with the fact that we blew the ball out of the park to speak by packing the halls and stacking the walls with orange dot wearing progunners this year. We had over 200 people there at the hearing. I haven't seen that since the 2001 Expanded AW ban attempt. Usually we have five to ten people speaking at these hearings. Last year we had thirty or forty and last year we also had an AMMO BAN with a mandatory DISPOSAL REQUIREMENT for non serialized ammo as of 2012! And we beat it

McDonald's jaw dropped open and Lawlor turned red and slumped in his chair then had to leave for a family emergency and did not attend the actual hearing - when they saw the turnout we mustered this year. So, yes we "knocked their socks off" figuratively speaking. Which is what we want to do with numbers and presence. That's how we stop bad gun bills in CT. You have to keep it polite and politically correct, avoid sneering and cheering - it's not a rally, it's a HEARING, but you have to BRING IT. You have to SHOW UP. Even if only five or ten of us speak and leave the rest to the lobbyists and industry reps. Showing up together and leaving together in large numbers after we made our points conveys HUGE impact

The other thing to remember is, these bills are Senator Martin Looney's bills. (D) district 11 New Haven. Sen. Looney has been trying to ban guns for 30 years. The kicker is this - not only is Looney a ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, he is also the MAJORITY LEADER for the entire State Senate. All 36 of them. Remember, a lot of senators won't get they want for their districts if they don't give Looney something HE WANTS. So we can get a "midnight surprise" as a rider to some other committee bill during the session. There are a lot of "on the fence" committee members we can work on as well as newly electeds who haven't been "tainted" yet.

We need to work on them individually. INVITE them to gun club meetings, TAKE them to the range, give them some safety instruction. Host a Saturday afternoon lunch at the club. Let them shoot a few rounds under close supervision of an instructor plus appropriate members who can conduct themselves in a politically correct manner. Let them see the value that our local clubs offer especially if your club hosts youth events, women's events, raises money for local charities and provides law enforcement officers a place to train and practice. This will go a LONG WAY to our benefit, rather than sitting around bitching and moaning about how bad our legislature is and how bad CT sucks, etc. and it sucks that I can't get a real retractable stock for my M4gery or thread my muzzle for a flash hider.

We need to convey that we are constituents to be consulted and included when issues are raised about combatting crime. If we can achieve that, we will at least be on parity with the antis who have their ear every DAY. A little good will doesn't hurt. If we continue to sit back, segment our selves into our respective cliques and camps - we will LOSE. We've been playing "goalie" for 20 years blocking slap shots. It's time to slap the puck across the other side of the rink.
Top Top