About an hour ago the BATFE issued the following statement on their Facebook page regarding their intent to ban the commercial sale of the M855 cartridge by removing its exemption as Armor Piercing Ammunition. If you haven’t commented, do it.
Notice to those Commenting on the Armor Piercing Ammunition Exemption Framework
Thank you for your interest in ATF’s proposed framework for determining whether certain projectiles are “primarily intended for sporting purposes” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C). The informal comment period will close on Monday, March 16, 2015. ATF has already received more than 80,000 comments, which will be made publicly available as soon as practicable. 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.
It can’t get much easier than this:
Nitelife Promotions offers Open Carry T-shirts that look real. While they were created by a Pro-2A business owner Paul Liebe to promote firearms, even he admits that they could be mistaken by law enforcement for a real gun. In fact, he includes this warning in his site as well as with each shirt.
They are available in a variety of sizes, colors and styles but regardless, they look real enough that it could cause some tension. I’d say that if you’re going to wear it under a vest or jacket like this photo suggests, you might as well expect some unwanted attention.
I don’t doubt the man’s dedication, I’m just questioning the execution. I’ll file this one in the “even though you could, you shouldn’t have” folder.
SIG has issued this statement…
BATFE Technical Branch issued an open opinion letter dated January 16, 2015 regarding the Pistol Stabilizing Brace (SB15 and SBX) which is marketed by SIG SAUER®. Contrary to several statements subsequently made in social media, this opinion letter did not make or otherwise declare that the SB15 product is illegal. The BATFE letter stated that the SB15 is a product “which is legal to own, legal to purchase and legal to install on a pistol.” SIG SAUER believes that the PSB enhances the shooter’s experience and offers the products as an accessory and pre-installed on a number of pistols. In all of its opinions, BATFE has consistently stated that a pistol with a stabilizing brace attached remains a pistol under the Gun Control Act when used as designed.
Way back in 1986 a great deal of your gun rights were legislated away. That year’s modifications to the Gun Control Act of 1968 along with the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act affected not only firearms but ammunition as well.
Last week, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives published a notice entitled, “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c)”. Specifically, they propose to eliminate M855 (SS109) ammunition’s exemption to the armor piercing cartridge prohibition.
That LEO Protection Act prohibited the manufacture and importation of a “projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely . . . from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.” Now, M855 does not meet this definition, but that’s not stopping them.
By now you’re asking yourself, “Wait a sec, where does the handgun come in if it’s 5.56? ” There has been a recent rash of AR pistols hitting the market. That’s enough for them to reclassify M855 as a restricted armor piercing round.
I look at this as payback from the ATF to the black rifle community for the attempt by many to circumvent SBR regulations by purchasing pistols and outfitting them with stabilizing braces. In case you have a short memory (and technocrats love it when you have one of those), the ATF just last month redefined the concept of manufacturing when it issued an “Open Letter to the Redesign of Stabilizing Braces“. They reversed a previous decision regarding use of the brace on a pistol.
Granted, the underlying legislation was passed back in the 80s based on the threat of evil “cop killer” bullets. That’s why it focuses on handguns even though patrol officers now carry rifles to prevent overmatch. Additionally, not only are almost all LEOs wearing armor almost 30 years on, the armor business itself has come a long way since then, developing new materials to protect.
But, the real danger here is that they may attempt to deny an entire range of .223 projectiles from civilians. If it’s being done in the name of LE, it’s a self-defeating move. To be honest, this will most likely also deny their availability from LE agencies if the market shifts away from their manufacture primarily for civilians. The vast majority of ammunition is consumed by civilians and the LE community does not collectively purchase ammo except at the federal level meaning they don’t hold much purchasing power. If it becomes a restricted, specialty product, it will be too costly for the vast majority of agencies. Once again, such actions not only impact the industrial base but the government customer as well.
But, this isn’t a done deal. At this point it is still only a proposed rule change. You can comment to the ATF regarding this proposal. If you choose to do so we suggest that you stay on topic, use proper English, refrain from cursing or communicating threats and be succinct and as factual as possible.
How to comment – from the BATFE
ATF will carefully consider all comments, as appropriate, received on or before March 16, 2015, and will give comments received after that date the same consideration if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or before March 16, 2015. ATF will not acknowledge receipt of comments. Submit comments in any of three ways (but do not submit the same comments multiple times or by more than one method):
ATF email: APAComments@atf.gov
Fax: (202) 648-9741.
Mail: Denise Brown, Mailstop 6N-602, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226: ATTN: AP Ammo Comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Brown, Enforcement Programs and Services, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070.
It’s our job to be heard. This story is a good place for readers to suggest comments. In addition to the misidentification of the round based on the legislation, there is this whole “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” nonsense that we’ve got to acknowledge as well.
Read the entire notice here.
Dimitri Karras is a man driven. The first time I spoke with him, I couldn’t help but feel his passion for the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Over time, this focused on the private finishing of so-called 80% lower AR-style receivers into firearms. In that first conversation he told me the story of the Battle of Athens and that’s some pretty heavy stuff. Karras is a very intelligent and creative man. He’s also a man who isn’t satisfied with the status quo. This makes him very vocal about his beliefs so this latest news wasn’t so much a surprise, as an update.
Over the past few years this former Marine and businessman has had a couple of scrapes with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Forearms and Explosives. The other day he sent me this letter about his most recent efforts that he feels will force the ATF to acknowledge that their position on 80% receivers is incorrect.
Yes, he was wearing a cape when he did this. I’d say that Karras sees himself as a crusader for 2A rights and he’s not afraid to use protest or the courts as a means to attain his goals.
TO: Whom It May Concern
FROM: Dimitrios Karras
SUBJ: Proof that 99% Lowers Are Legal. Part 1
DATE: February 9, 2015
Far too long have we permitted our government overlords to run amuck. They have systematically created a monster that tramples the humanity of the American People. The ATF believes that they have the power to create law. They are wrong. Their self-authorized law-making is unconstitutional, morally reprehensible and in direct conflict with the ideology of a free people.
When making decisions, a good man does not ponder what personal harm may come upon himself. He ponders only what action is just and right. I have acted upon my beliefs.
I have challenged the ATF to unjustly arrest me based on their unenforceable “opinion” of the law. I have not broken the law. I have put their “opinion” to the test.
I am no longer employed by Ares Armor, I have left the business in good hands. What I did, I did as an individual and not as an entity.
To slay a dragon, you must track him. Study his behavior. Learn his weaknesses. The battle takes place on your terms, but in his lair. I have prepared my armor, sharpened my spear; I traveled into the belly of his mountain to catch him asleep.
I have acted upon my conscience as a free man. They have no power over me. They can lock me up for a hundred years and I will still have won. To challenge the unjustness of tyranny is a victory unto itself. “A lifetime serving one machine is ten times worse than prison.” -The Clash
Remember John Brown, a true American Hero. He gave his life in an attempt to free others. He was executed under the laws of the United States.
Remember the Battle of Athens.
Remember Waco, Remember Ruby Ridge. Remember it all.
It is our responsibility as free men to undergo the rigors associated with the defense of liberty. It is our responsibility to pass on to our children free choice, free will. It is our responsibility.
Do more than just mourn your dead, America. Honor them. Protect their legacy. Too many have bled their last drop for us to allow their sacrifice to be for nothing. Too many have paid for the freedoms that we now give away in exchange for comfort.
Today, I walked into an ATF office in Indiana with a 99% Lower Receiver™, an Air-gun Upper Receiver and a gigantic neon sign offering said items for sale. After a rather lengthy amount of harassment, which included a full pat down, a short “ball massage” and an inspection of the 99% lower™, the Agents refused to charge me with any Federal Crimes.
The Agent stated that I was not breaking any Federal Laws by offering these items for sale. The local police were called and gave me a warning that I may not solicit any items for sale in Indiana without a local business license.
For those of you who are interested… Here is the a quote from the case I cited when discussing with the Agents the legality of the items I had offered for sale.
“PIETRO BERETTA U.S. 9mm M9 Chrome Pistol Lighter, Top Popular Men’s Gift was once a real Beretta (it wasn’t), but all its innards have been removed and if you pull the trigger all that happens is that the muzzle emits a tiny flame. Would a felon who possessed such a lighter be a felon in possession of a firearm? Maybe he would be if what the statute asked is whether the alleged weapon “was designed ? to expel,” but it doesn’t; it says “is designed.” That implies the possibility of redesign. In our example the gun lighter was originally designed to be a gun but later it was redesigned to be a cigarette lighter. We doubt that the statutory definition would fit that case, see United States v. Rivera, supra, 415 F.3d at 287; United States v. Reed, 114 F.3d 1053, 1058–59 (10th Cir.1997) (dissenting opinion); United States v. Wada, 323 F.Supp.2d 1079 (D.Or.2004), although a complication is that the statutory definition of “firearm” includes—remember—“the frame or receiver of any such weapon.” The frame or receiver (these are synonyms) is the housing of the gun, which contains the magazine and the trigger assembly—the operating parts. The gun lighter might be the frame of a real gun, although we’re inclined to think that it would not be the frame of a “weapon” that was “designed” to shoot and so would fall outside the statutory definition of a frame as a firearm.” (Emphasis added)
The first step to prove that 99% Receivers™ are not “firearms” under the Law has been completed with flying colors!
More to come…
Dimitrios Karras, A free man.
“But I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.”-Aldous Huxley
Last week, Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty (D-CT) unveiled their latest attempt to harm the rights of legal gun owners. The Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act would ban the importation, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Yes, this foolishness again. They were joined at a press conference by Senators Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy (both D-CT), House Representatives Diana DeGette (D-CO) and Ted Deutch (D-FL), House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), and advocates from the Newtown Action Alliance.
They proposed use of the hashtag sayno2moreammo.
Be heard! Use #sayyes2moreammo instead.