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.
Tags: BATFE
Could someone please put together a well written piece of boiler plate that we could copy, paste, write our name at the bottom and email. We have a tendency to hurt ourselves with this sort of stuff. I think that would be a great idea
Here is a link to a form letter that the Iowa Firearms Coalition has provided – to submit to the ATF.
https://www.votervoice.net/mobile/IFC/campaigns/38753/respond
Just wondering… is the word of “technocrat” rather than “bureaucrat” intentional?
It does change the meaning a little bit – technocrat essentially meaning evidence-based policy (highly based on statistics, studies, etc rather than ideology).
In any case, as I’m not american I’m not concerned directly by this but I wish you good luck preserving your rights. Once it’s gone it’s extremely hard to get back.
“Technocrats” is the correct term. We live under a technocracy or scientific dictatorship. An evolution of transhumanism (merger with man and machine) is evolving right now with most of us left on the sidelines playing the passive role of consumer and spectator.
Through the use of their technologies, most of us will love our servitude to the state.
Thats very interesting.
I know many technocrats that believe technology as a solution to all world problems and expect some kind of “Transcendence”-like integration with their machines. You should have heard a TED conference with google I believe. I shit you not, the man was having a near orgasm when he was talking about how cool it would be to get tax writeoffs and societal bonuses for “eating healthy”, for limiting your intake of bad foods, blah blah blah. Your financial transaction reports and everything else would be integrated into computers. Nothing could go wrong there. no siree.
To me, it is another example of tyrants trying to sell you shackles, while proclaiming how great they are.
That is there planned “utopia” for us. Only it doesn’t help (or include) mankind at all. They want complete battlefield domination with us to include our mind and eventually our soul.
They tested biometrics and advanced forms of surveillance in Fallujah, etc. and now those systems are coming home to a sports stadium near you.
Depopulation agendas are real. It’s just not for the 3rd world.
Please don’t send the ATF a comment on this issue, you’re only going to do us all a disservice.
Im going to look for it now.
It amazes me such unparalleled control brings such joy to somebody like that and the rest of the technophiles just cheered him on like mooks, unable to piece together, with their seemingly immeasurable superiority in intelligence, just how dangerous that is.
Yeah its “just conspiracy theory nonsense” *eye roll* Nevermind me reading about the DEA’s license plate scanning program from MSNBC the other day.
What you’re describing is not technocracy. This is transhumanism – an entirely different thing.
Transhumanism is the ultimate goal of the technocracy.
First off let’s talk about an urban legend… the cop killer bullet. most police that are shot on the job (FBI stats 38%) are done so with their own fire arm… the special cop killer bullet does not and has not ever existed. They jumped up and down regarding armor peircing rounds… again have spent years in the body armor industry these rounds do not exist! Any round that they might mention are 5.7 x 28 is the only one that comes close… and how many thugs are carrying FN 5.7s?
As for AP rounds… there is NO real reason to have AP rounds for sporting purposes… or for that matter self defense. These restrictions are being placed primarily on hand guns and you can legally own 5.7 black tips if you have done so prior to the ban… but why do you need AP rounds for a pistol?
I am a life time NRA memeber who actively hunts and shoot competively. I own multiple firearms (both long guns and pistols) and have carried for some 25+ years.
The Second Amendment (regardless what the Government, the Supreme Court, the Administration, or the BATFE says) has NOTHING at all to do with sporting purposes. Saying people don’t need AP, which M855 isn’t, for sporting purposes just because you don’t see the need is also wrong. Others could say the same about what you use.
It’s a slippery slope that we all need to stick together and work against lest we all slide off the deep end.
Matt
+1
+1 from me as well. When I saw this story & mention of ‘sporting purpose’ I was reminded of Cuomo’s idiotic statement: “No one needs 10 bullets to kill a deer.”
The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. And it should also have nothing to do with a firearm’s ‘sporting’ purpose.
+1
+1
This is actually the essence of it all; the motivation for their subterfuge and all their unconstitutional contortions. They want to defang and declaw all free men, especially those with professional training and experience. They have come to fear their own countrymen, their own fellow citizens, and with good reason because they do not act in the best interests of The People and the nation. Rather than serve the citizenry at the pleasure and for the benefit of the citizenry the bureaucrats and politicians, with very few exceptions, have come to view the people they serve as contemptuous subjects to be trampled upon and lorded over.
Most criminals don’t have access to sophisticated weapons. Let alone a hand gun style AR15 that will accept a 5.56 bullet. Most criminals who attempt to or have taken the life of a law enforcement officer. Have done so with a stolen weapon or a hand gun they obtained with a handful of bullets . Which more than likely they stole the bullets with the weapon. Or bought the cheapest they could afford to use. To support this claim really, how often do you think a person who commits a crime. Thinks of what type of weapon they are using to commit the act of breaking the law. These are desperate attempts of obtaining money or material objects for drugs or addiction problems. Now there are those dealers who have these sophisticated weapons. However statistically that has got to be low. I would believe most attempts on an officers life are done using a weapon lower than a 45 cal. Handgun .
It has nothing to do with what we need, as determined by someone else, especially government. Others have tried to govern based on what they thought we needed, or not.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”
“Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen”. – Morelly (1755), Louis Blanc (1839), Karl Marx (1875).
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” – 2nd Amendment, U.S. Constitution.
I do not see anything there that states anything about what we need or not, or anything about “sporting purposes”. The 2nd Amendment places limits on government, not us. Clearly, government wishes to infringe and determine what we need, what we keep and what we bear. I do not see anything “reasonable” about that tyranny.
This proposed ban (and the proposed ban on body armor) has nothing to do with LEO protection and everything to do with further restricting The People in their capacity to resist a tyrannical government. To argue ballistics and statistics, in my opinion, is a waste of time. You don’t think the ATF knows that? It doesn’t matter how much information you have, this is not based on reason. This is rooted in brute force and authoritarianism.
I really enjoy this site and equally learn a lot from the comments that visitors post on here, but I also notice that many people indirectly (through ignorance/Southern Poverty Law Center propaganda training, etc.) support the police state.
The government has the time, we have the watches. What’s ironic is that it’s our tax money at work against us. Kind of sick if you ask me.
+1
+1
Saying the 2nd Amendment is intended for “sporting purposes” is analogous to saying that the 1st Amendment only protects political satire.
AP rounds for “officer safety” is bullshit for many reasons.
Guys, the FBI uniform crime report reveals two reasons why any more gun control restrictions are illogical.
1.) Crime rates (violent and gun murder) are at 40 year lows.With a population of 300 million plus people. This is agreed upon by both liberals and conservatives. The causation isn’t however.
2.) Police officer deaths,also are at 50 year lows. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/30/law-enforcement-deaths/4247393/
So “officer safety” doesn’t jibe with me.
And did you know regular bimetal rifle bullets can pass clean through any body armor less than ballistic rifle plates? like the armor worn by law enforcement, security, etc?
“No reason to have AP bullets” is hysterical nonsense. You dont tell me my reasons, if im being safe and responsible. Give me a break.
Well Said ,either for sport purpose or Protection Damn I don’t care if it’s used to pick strawberries . I am afforded the right to obtain a comparable ammunition and firearm the same as my local police swat or entry team. To retain and regulate government with a militia of men . Which should and will uphold the rights afforded to us US citizens as guaranteed and God Given to all by Constitution of the United States of America. Tweeze manipulate and change the words written of the law. Only in an attempt to create a road block which will only be another hurdle to over come obtaining the above .
I don’t buy or like the M855 but its a slippery slope if they start banning types of 5.56 rounds.
+1
Doesn’t the ATF know that any kind of 5.56/223 ammo will defeat soft armor that police wear on duty so I don’t really understand the thinking behind this proposed change. It doesn’t take a green tip m855 to defeat that kind of barrier so this makes no sense to me. This “angle” the ATF are using could easily be broadened to encompass all 556/223 if they so desired since their are some many pistols out there that can fire that round. This would effectively strangle the availability of this caliber to the public. Truth be known I would say they would love for that to happen. Remember if they can’t outright ban the weapon then go after the ammo ! Gun rights people better take this seriously . This administration has two years left and they would love to score a big win against gun owners.
Quite right. No matter whether the officer is shot at with M855 or older M193, no standard issue NIJ IIIA armor, soft or rigid like a shield, will stop that round. It is a rifle round that can only be defeated by plates. M855 will penetrate some III plates (namely polyethylene), but is stopped by III+ or higher. I don’t really see the benefit or purpose to this proposal.
You are close to the point near the end of the post. Digging a little deeper though , it doesn’t really matter how small or huge a victory for them .They are playing the long game, in ten years people will accept that you can’t buy m855, just like you can’t buy steel core 7.62×39 now. Every gain they make ,whether it’s NFA in ’34 or GCA in ’68 or the slew of bills from 86 on , becomes permanent in people’s minds, to the point of gun owners being their own enforcement arm of all these stupid and pointless laws and regulations designed to strip everything away.
+1
To accomplish what King George couldn’t.
They’re the ATF dude. Those knotheads couldn’t find their penis for a piss.
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Fuck ups.
roposed a ban on the .223/5.56×45 mm ammunition variant known as M855 or “Green Tip.” The stated reason for this ban is that you feel that the ammunition would be able to defeat police body armor when fired from an AR-15 type “pistol.” As many of us know, M855 ammunition has been available on the open market for many decades and has caused no significant effect on the safety of police officers during this long period. It is also well known that any variant of .223/5.56×45 ammunition will generally penetrate soft body armor without issue– thereby calling into question the need or the reason to ban M855 from the open market. Surplus M855 allows law-abiding Americans to have access to an affordable source of ammunition for sporting, hunting and self-defense purposes. Therefore, I must ardently voice my opposition to any ban concerning this ammunition type or any ammunition type that is designed to be fired from AR-15 rifles or pistols.
Sincerely yours heres a form letter to start from
What I think amusing is that according to Geneva Convetions and Law of Land Warfare, armor piercing ammunition is banned. So seeing that M855 and SS109 are general issueand not listed as armor piercing but ball are we in violation of said Conventions and laws? I second the idea that a mass well written letter expressing our concern and discontent with the proposed ban be sent to batfe and your state and local legislators to get the word out on how the shooting community feels.
I just posted a link at the earlier comment.
…regarding the letter, that is…
Where does the Geneva Convention state what munitions can be used in small arms.
It doesn’t as far as I can tell, it states that restricted incendiaries do not include armor piercing, but that can be misread as a restriction on AP. Saying I can’t shoot you with AP but can drop a 2000 lb bomb on you makes no sense. I am still searching for a written restriction in the LoLW and GC.
Jon, OPT
Maintain a minimum level of ammo for all your weapon platforms that you are comfortable with, at all times. Replenish as you shoot to maintain that level.
That’s where I’m at on these issues.
Because you just never know what Uncle Sam is going to do from one administration to the next.
The thing is it’s not even just 5.56. they make ???? versions of 300 blackout, 7.62/39, even .308. Guess how many of those can defeat body armor? What’s next on the list?
*pistol, stinking auto correct
Alrite folks, here’s what I drafted up to send to my Senators…any comments/proofreading would be appreciated:
Senator,
I am contacting you regarding the continued erosion of constitutionally-protected legal use and ownership of firearms by the BATF. The agency has demonstrated a consistent theme of changing regulation and, subsequently, making use or ownership of certain types of firearms, ammunition, and accessories illegal for civilians. Specifically just this past week the BATF announced it intended to ban further importation, manufacture, and sale of a type of ammunition known as “M855” or “SS109”, a variation of 5.56mm/.223 Remington ammunition. The BATF maintains this ammunition presents a risk to law enforcement as well and is in violation of the LEO Protection Act, and that it is not suitable for “sporting purposes”.
What the ATF is ignoring are several key facts:
-M855 does not meet the definition of armor piercing ammunition as defined by the LEO Protection Act, and has been a legally sold and owned ammunition for nearly 30 years.
-M855 is commonly used in AR-15 rifles and pistols, which are the most popular firearms owned and enjoyed by the public today.
-M855 is not unusually or uniquely more dangerous than any other common ammunition, and its performance is actually hindered if fired from a handgun due to the subsequently lower velocity.
-M855 is one of the most common types of ammunition for AR-type firearms; as such prohibiting manufacture, sale, and/or importation of this ammunition places an undue burden on the public.
-Even if one applies the false logic of “sporting purposes” to 2nd Amendment rights, this ammunition – and the firearms which use it – are clearly used predominantly for sporting uses ranging from target shooting, marksmanship competitions, hunting, and self defense. Assault weapons of any kind – not just AR-15s – account for an incredibly small percentage of firearms used in crime, with most studies putting their role at less than 3%.
-Given M855’s common use by legal gunowners, restricting its sale would have overwhelming consequences for the law abiding public and minimal impact upon crime.
-Banning M855 will also likely place a significant burden on smaller law enforcement agencies whose purchasing power may be less capable of paying for the now-restricted category of ammunition.
-Finally, banning M855 ammunition represents yet another infringement on gun owner’s rights, accomplished by the ATF, which has circumvented the constitutional legislative process.
Given all of these factors above, please use the capabilities of your office to prevent the ATF from instituting this burdensome and pointless new regulation.
Hey just a thought. Scrap the word assault rifle due to the definition being something like this. An assult rifle is any rifle that fires more than one bullet with a single trigger pull. But other then that I just copy and pasted it to my senator and my previous sentor who is also my god father.
That’s the definition of a Machine Gun. Assault rifles are usually defined as being both FA and select fire.
Jon, OPT
my thought as well. the term “assault weapon” is a media created term. by definition an “assault rifel” is select fire. I prefer the term “semi automatic sporting rifle.” although that is kind of a BS term/title as well, it just doesn’t play into the hand of the gun grabbers as easily.
Otherwise, a well written letter.
Thanks for the feedback! And yes the assault weapon term was an oversight on my part; I agree with all the sentiments you all wrote. My bad.
I would like to see a armor manufacture/Distributor that has the means to make a video of all the various armor being worn by LEO/Swat/Federal agents as well as even military. Then stand them up to a 55 grain 5.56 target round to soft armor.
Then show the same round shot at a level IV plate and also a M855
A picture/Video shows a thousand words! Right?
Then I would like such a company to exploit them for this non sense and flat ass trying to exploit the ignorant majority!!! As usual!!!
The reason they are seeking to ban M855 is simple. It is the most commonly available surplus military ammo in the US, and feeds the most common semi-automatic rifle in use here. They are trying to ban the ammunition of the unorganized militia. Make no mistake, this is another shot fired in the government’s long war to consolidate corporatist/fascist power.
+1 you’re right on the money.
Any way they can legally interfere with the “unorganized militia”, they will do it. They dont need much of a reason to begin with.
+1
+1
yep, plain and simple. they know they don’t have the political juice to ban the weapon, so lets decrease the ammo supply.
Ya know what’s really disturbing here…not just this action but the actions of say the last 10 years by this government? Not just Dems but also Republicans, is that we are the proverbial frog being slowly cooked alive!
Maybe the UN is behind this as they don’t want to be shot with AP rounds when they come for our weapons? Ha….oh man I am just kiddin. That would never happen.
Seriously now, if AP rounds are being considered to be “banned” or a “threat” for an officers safety then what are they doing about police killed by auto accidents?
More officer deaths occur from auto related accidents then firearm incidents. So do they attempt to ban cars? Obviously no because it’s a RISK THEY ARE WILLING TO LIVE WITH.
This is just another control the Feds want over us, plain and simple. Then its going to be something else, and then something else, ad nauseam.
what really chaps my tail is, they do this in the name of police officers. I know of very few officers (I can think of 2 in a 20+ year career) who support any type of additional legislative firearms/ammo bans.
If you want to really put it to criminals. utilize the laws currently on the books. use the firearms modifier to the fullest, so a crook commits a crime with a firearm, then roast them at the stake, give every bit of time available and make it day for day time. If a convict (substitue convicted felon) has body armor, give them significant time, again day for day time. Make them make little rocks out of big rocks for a long time. don’t push through feel good bills/acts that do nothing but weaken the populace and the Constitution, then stand behind a podium and flex like you have actually done something to make the people safer.
How about a repeal/over-haul of the NFA (he says as if dreaming of a utopia)….
treat convicts like convicts, not citizens as second class.
I would agree with you here.
Just work with the laws we already have. No need to pile on new ones.
Inch by inch the enslavement of a free people continues. The emasculation of the American male is but one more avenue of attack to achieve that goal.
Are you stating that “Skinney BDU’s” are not manly?
What caliber’s do AR and AK “pistols” come in?
5.56, 7.62×39, .300 BLK, .308, 5.45…what else??
They can use this exact same reasoning to essentially ban all of these calibers completely.
I wouldn’t go as far as that although the proposed M855 ban would (potentially) give them an excuse to further ban just about any bi-metal round out there. What this ban could really do is put a further crimp on Californian’s gun rights because of CA’s thing about “green” ammo, if M855 or other non-lead cored ammo is banned by the ATF and combined with CA’s “green” ammo requirement would effectively mean no rifle ammo would be legal in CA.
Hey guys, talk amongst yourselves as much as you want about the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, but for petes sake write a letter and an email to the BATFE opposing the ban!