ATF: Reclassification of M855/SS109 ammo as armor-piercing

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bartholomew Roberts wrote:
The Sen. Grassley (Chairman of the Senate Judiciary) letter went out today with 52 Senators (all Republicans - including several squishy Republicans like Sue Collins and Pat Toomey) signing it. Sadly, unlike the House, not a single pro-RKBA Democratic Senator joined the letter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re the last comment, politics has been justly described as a sickening pass time, or occupation.
 
Judging from some comments seen on the internet a few minutes ago, NRA being one source. It appears that, for the moment, this M855/SS109 BATFE sponsored ammunition ban is dead. I submit that it would be a very great mistake for "The Good Guys" to declare victory and go home,thinking that the battle had been won, for it hasn't been. Our side having won a skirmish. Better to win one than to lose one, but it must be remembered, we have won a skirmish, the war continues. Our side forgets that at it's peril.
 
I think this was click bait, a fishing expedition, a probe .....rattle the barn door and see what flys out ...
Get everyone riled up, see what their positions are and what legal avenues opposition to the ban might use...

Now they have the data they need to formulate a real plan of attack.
 
A coupe of posters, perhaps several have waved the caution flag re what appears to be the administration and it's Fellow Traveler,the BATFE having "lost" the battle over this proposed ammunition ban. In-so-far as the thing goes, they will be back, for intentions and goals are unchanged. We won a skirmish, others will follow, the war will go on, I expect, for a very long time, the ultimate winners being undetermined at this point. That being said, our side must remember, and be prepared for a very long war, assuming our side wants to win.
 
Many thanks to everyone who contacted their congressman/women and wrote letters to the BATFE.

Political appointees and high level bureaucrats don't like to get caught with egg on their faces. Stay on your toes, this one may come back to life.
 
May come back alive? Oh ho, it most assuradly will come back, though likely dressed in a different set of sheep's clothing.

Stay vigilant as others have said, tell BATFE and an ties have plenty more fight in them, and will likely continue to have much much more to throw at us. Patience is one of the virtues the have in spades, and the anti' are not stupid like how some pro gun folks like to portray them.

Then again I'm preaching to the choir here, so we'll done folks, but let's not pat ourselves on the backs just yet.

I suspect this us just yet another calm before the storm.
 
To those that contacted the BATFE, your reps and senators, and generally stood up and opposed this ban.

THANK YOU
For you help

To those that did nothing but rant and rave and sit on you hands.

YOU'RE WELCOME
We've done all the work for you

Keep vigilant my friends
 
We didn't win a skirmish, we didn't even get into a fight. They marched troops along the border, and rattled sabers. We rattled back, and they have, for now retreated.

There was no fight! When they saw we would put up one, like any bully, they backed down.

This time. No doubt in my mind they will try and bushwack us again, and do it gleefully for presumed "revenge".
 
At least we might be able to rest easy ,even for a little while, at least. I think their weak points, as exposed already, will lose their battle for them If they try to ban it again.
 
Instead of resting easy, we need to be using that momentum to make Congress put a halter on the ATF.

ETA:
thallub said:
This may be a hint of things to come:
Click to expand...

ATF just promised the public a new proposal and a period for comment before any framework was enacted. I have to think that failing to do that would be especially hard on them - especially since they were already on the wrong side of a gray area in interpretive rulings vs. legislative rulings.
 
The agency said in a statement on Tuesday it would not seek to issue the final guidelines "at this time." The proposal pertained to M855 "green tip" ammunition, used in the AR-15 rifle, which regulators looked at banning because it can pierce police body armor.

The ATF said it would instead wait until Americans have finished commenting on the federal regulations and evaluate their comments and suggestions before "proceeding with any framework."
Click to expand...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/10/atf-shelves-controversial-bullet-ban-proposal/

Sorry, I see nothing to get excited about here. The ATF has not backed off, they have not surrendered and they certainly have not raise the white flag.

All they did was call a time out and extend the time needed to evaluate all the thousands of comments.
 
RE: using rifle ammo in a pistol.

There's a major disconnect in the logic - how does a cartridge fired from a 10.5" barrel even begin to have the penetration of the same one fired from a barrel 20" long?

A rifle round fired from a shorter pistol barrel is LESS effective and has LESS penetration. For that matter, M855 isn't adequately penetrative nor does it expand consistently in short barrels. So much so the Navy went looking for something more effective from short barrels and type approved the MK262 77gr OTM round to do a better job.

As for anyone claiming that rifle ammo should never be used in a pistol and that's the cause of the issue, turn in your .22 Long RIFLE handguns. Your position requires you to shoot Shorts.

As for rifle ammo being shot out of pistols, it's been done for decades, back to the Remington XP pistol in the early 60's. The AR wasn't the first and certainly isn't the most powerful. It's unfortunately revealing that some have no idea what the background on this is, and sides with the ATF with the interpretation.

Each one of these controversies only seems to bring to light there are far too many who quickly come up short with any real commitment or tenacity to stay in the fight.
 
steve4102 said:
All they did was call a time out and extend the time needed to evaluate all the thousands of comments.
Click to expand...

If you'll read ATF's actual statement as opposed to news reports of the statement, you'll see they have acknowledged two things:

1) They are abandoning the current Proposed Framework for Sporting Purposes Exemptions to AP Ammo and will not move forward with it.

2) If ATF decides to revisit the issue after reading all of the comments, they have committed to A) Offering a new proposal and B) Holding a comment period on any new proposal
 
Now, if only we could use this to lift the ban on 7N6 ammo, then it would truly be something.

One can dream right?
 
If you'll read ATF's actual statement as opposed to news reports of the statement, you'll see they have acknowledged two things:

1) They are abandoning the current Proposed Framework for Sporting Purposes Exemptions to AP Ammo and will not move forward with it.

2) If ATF decides to revisit the issue after reading all of the comments, they have committed to A) Offering a new proposal and B) Holding a comment period on any new proposal
Click to expand...

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.

Not at this time issue a final framework. This does not sound like total abandonment to me.

Evaluate and process the comments received and have another "Comment" period before proceeding with any framework. Seems like they are just taking a time out to me.
 
steve4102 said:
Not at this time issue a final framework. This does not sound like total abandonment to me.
Click to expand...

It is abandonment of this particular framework. Given that it was the type of framework you can only get when you tell a subordinate "Pretend to create an objective test that creates this result.", I don't expect to see much better in the next proposal; but this particular one is done.

Evaluate and process the comments received and have another "Comment" period before proceeding with any framework. Seems like they are just taking a time out to me.
Click to expand...

Which is why we need to contact our Congresspeople and let them know that the underlying problem that led to this agency overreach is still there and we want to see that corrected. Now is certainly not the time to call it a day and go home.

Having said that, it was a really impressive if short-term victory. The last two major ATF regulatory proposals were talked about on Internet gun forums for months. They were published in the Federal Register and had 90-day comment periods. Combined, they had around 31k comments.

This "notice" wasn't published in the Federal Register at all and there was allowed only a 30-day comment period. With a week still remaining, we delivered over 80,000 comments on this issue - and not just "Cold dead hands!" type of Internet posing; but good substantive comments explaining the effects of the proposal and the problems.
 
I think the powers that be figured they could slide this one through without much opposition, especially if they used the correct spin on it. The limiting of response time of comments, and changing the site where comments are normally posted were blatant attempts to silence the public, which gets me rather miffed. I think it is time to start regaining some ground here. A good starting point would be to get suppressors off the NFA. It just makes good sense. Everybody wins in this case, especially the neighbors who don't like hearing the booms. It would also decrease some of the BATFE's funds, which certainly is a good thing. Then we can get to the SBR's.........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top