Ammo Ban Is Devious, Disingenuous All At Once
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By Gary [email protected]
M855 ball ammo is .223 (5.56 mm) ammo that has been used in the sport shooting and hunting communities for decades. It is rifle ammo. It may be the most popular rifle cartridge sold in America. It is fired in the AR-15, the Ruger Mini-14 and a host of other popular hunting and sporting rifles.
The AFT a couple of weeks ago announced its intention to ban this ammo because it is “armor piercing.”
Let’s talk about that armor piercing thing for a minute. Back in 1968, the Gun Control Act was passed. It prohibits the importation, manufacture of “armor piercing ammunition.” Here’s how the GCA defines armor piercing ammunition: “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.”
Oddly, M855 ball ammo has a lead core, which clearly by definition does not qualify it as “armor piercing” by GCA standards. M855 has a steel tip, but not a steel core.
Beyond that, the GCA also says if the ammo is made for “sporting purposes”, i.e., hunting and sport shooting, it’s exempt from the ban. The GCA also states: “GCA exempts ammunition that would otherwise be considered armor piercing if the Attorney General determines that the specific ammunition at issue is ‘primarly intended to be used for sporting purposes.’ ”
So, of course, President Barack Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder believes it must follow that the converse of what the GCA says is true.
The ATF believes the Attorney General can ban ammo he decides is not primarly intended for sporting purposes.
(Interestingly, in 1986, the ATF used this GCA provision to exempt the very same M855 .223 it is proposing should be banned today.)
The other thing to consider here is that the GCA clearly states the ban affects only handgun ammunition.
To be sure there have been a few .223 “pistols” developed over the past decade. The Sig Sauer P556 comes to mind. But calling that a “pistol” is a stretch. It’s basically a regular Sig 556 rifle with a 10-inch barrel and no stock. It’s 20.5 inches long and weighs north of 7 pounds fully loaded. Thompson Center Arms has been making the “Contender” handgun in rifle calibers since 1967.
Guns like that have never fit the ATF’s definition of a rifle, but suddenly the ATF feels it has the right to call the .223 a pistol cartridge. That’s just ludicrous.
The government goes on to rationalize its proposed ban because, since there are now .223 handguns, police are being outgunned on the streets. If this “armor piercing” ammo isn’t banned, criminals will be using these .223 pistols to punch through the body armor of police officers.
First, .223 handguns are rare as hens teeth, expensive and virtually unconcealable. No self-respecting criminal is going to make one his weapon of choice. In fact, a cop has never been shot by one – or shot at by one for that matter. According to the most recent FBI statistics, only 2.5 percent of all shootings involved rifles, let alone the tiny number of pistols shooting rifle-caliber bullets. The FBI doesn’t keep statistics on such things, but I would be willing to bet no one has been shot by a .223 “pistol.”
Second, today’s Level IV body armor is specifically designed to stop 30-06 black tips and all lesser Level III and III+. Even Level III and III+ will stop the evil .223 M855 ball ammo we’re talking about here.
Now, you don’t have to be some crazy conspiracy nut to wonder about the government’s motives in a case like this.
Let’s recap.
• The ATF wants to ban highly popular “armor piercing” sporting ammunition, which, by the AFT’s own definition isn’t really “armor piercing.”
• The ban is being proposed under a law that was previously used to exempt the same ammo from the same ban.
• The ATF says we need this ban because of the recent development of “handguns” that in fact have been in production for decades.
• The ban also is needed because these “handguns” might shoot through a police officer’s body armor even though that has never happened and couldn’t happen if the officer was wearing current protective gear.
Really?
This is an obvious and classic case of a solution looking for a problem. So why would the ATF do that?
I’ll tell you why.
President Obama doesn’t like guns and he’s no fan of the Second Amendment. He tried to ban “assault weapons” and Congress didn’t let him have his way.
Well then, why not ban “assault weapon” ammunition. What good is a gun if you can’t buy ammo?
Sure, this is only one type of one caliber, but if the ATF exerts its authority this time, I can assure you it’s only the beginning. There will be equally dubious reasons for banning all manner of other ammunition.
The ATF’s “framework argument” that ammunition should be banned not because of its intended use, but at the whim of the ATF is 100 percent bogus.
It’s also a perfect way to end-run Congress and effectively exert gun control.
Fortunately, Congress has identified this Obama administration move as the unconstitutional attack on the Second Amendment it clearly is.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte, (R-Va.) was able to collect the signatures of 172 House members opposing the ATF’s proposal.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley, (R-Iowa) is doing the same thing in the Senate.
And Florida Congressman Thomas J. Rooney has introduced H.R. 1180, the “Protecting Second Amendment Rights Act.
“The Obama Administration’s proposal would unilaterally strip law-abiding hunters and sportsmen of their Second Amendment rights,” Rooney told the Washington Examiner. “Congress has made its intentions clear that this ammunition is for sporting purposes and should not be restricted. We cannot and we will not stand by while the Obama Administration tramples on the Constitution, the rule of law, and the Second Amendment rights of hunters in my district and across the country.”
That pretty well sums it up.
ATF is seeking public comments. Email [email protected] to let them know how you feel.[[In-content Ad]]
M855 ball ammo is .223 (5.56 mm) ammo that has been used in the sport shooting and hunting communities for decades. It is rifle ammo. It may be the most popular rifle cartridge sold in America. It is fired in the AR-15, the Ruger Mini-14 and a host of other popular hunting and sporting rifles.
The AFT a couple of weeks ago announced its intention to ban this ammo because it is “armor piercing.”
Let’s talk about that armor piercing thing for a minute. Back in 1968, the Gun Control Act was passed. It prohibits the importation, manufacture of “armor piercing ammunition.” Here’s how the GCA defines armor piercing ammunition: “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.”
Oddly, M855 ball ammo has a lead core, which clearly by definition does not qualify it as “armor piercing” by GCA standards. M855 has a steel tip, but not a steel core.
Beyond that, the GCA also says if the ammo is made for “sporting purposes”, i.e., hunting and sport shooting, it’s exempt from the ban. The GCA also states: “GCA exempts ammunition that would otherwise be considered armor piercing if the Attorney General determines that the specific ammunition at issue is ‘primarly intended to be used for sporting purposes.’ ”
So, of course, President Barack Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder believes it must follow that the converse of what the GCA says is true.
The ATF believes the Attorney General can ban ammo he decides is not primarly intended for sporting purposes.
(Interestingly, in 1986, the ATF used this GCA provision to exempt the very same M855 .223 it is proposing should be banned today.)
The other thing to consider here is that the GCA clearly states the ban affects only handgun ammunition.
To be sure there have been a few .223 “pistols” developed over the past decade. The Sig Sauer P556 comes to mind. But calling that a “pistol” is a stretch. It’s basically a regular Sig 556 rifle with a 10-inch barrel and no stock. It’s 20.5 inches long and weighs north of 7 pounds fully loaded. Thompson Center Arms has been making the “Contender” handgun in rifle calibers since 1967.
Guns like that have never fit the ATF’s definition of a rifle, but suddenly the ATF feels it has the right to call the .223 a pistol cartridge. That’s just ludicrous.
The government goes on to rationalize its proposed ban because, since there are now .223 handguns, police are being outgunned on the streets. If this “armor piercing” ammo isn’t banned, criminals will be using these .223 pistols to punch through the body armor of police officers.
First, .223 handguns are rare as hens teeth, expensive and virtually unconcealable. No self-respecting criminal is going to make one his weapon of choice. In fact, a cop has never been shot by one – or shot at by one for that matter. According to the most recent FBI statistics, only 2.5 percent of all shootings involved rifles, let alone the tiny number of pistols shooting rifle-caliber bullets. The FBI doesn’t keep statistics on such things, but I would be willing to bet no one has been shot by a .223 “pistol.”
Second, today’s Level IV body armor is specifically designed to stop 30-06 black tips and all lesser Level III and III+. Even Level III and III+ will stop the evil .223 M855 ball ammo we’re talking about here.
Now, you don’t have to be some crazy conspiracy nut to wonder about the government’s motives in a case like this.
Let’s recap.
• The ATF wants to ban highly popular “armor piercing” sporting ammunition, which, by the AFT’s own definition isn’t really “armor piercing.”
• The ban is being proposed under a law that was previously used to exempt the same ammo from the same ban.
• The ATF says we need this ban because of the recent development of “handguns” that in fact have been in production for decades.
• The ban also is needed because these “handguns” might shoot through a police officer’s body armor even though that has never happened and couldn’t happen if the officer was wearing current protective gear.
Really?
This is an obvious and classic case of a solution looking for a problem. So why would the ATF do that?
I’ll tell you why.
President Obama doesn’t like guns and he’s no fan of the Second Amendment. He tried to ban “assault weapons” and Congress didn’t let him have his way.
Well then, why not ban “assault weapon” ammunition. What good is a gun if you can’t buy ammo?
Sure, this is only one type of one caliber, but if the ATF exerts its authority this time, I can assure you it’s only the beginning. There will be equally dubious reasons for banning all manner of other ammunition.
The ATF’s “framework argument” that ammunition should be banned not because of its intended use, but at the whim of the ATF is 100 percent bogus.
It’s also a perfect way to end-run Congress and effectively exert gun control.
Fortunately, Congress has identified this Obama administration move as the unconstitutional attack on the Second Amendment it clearly is.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte, (R-Va.) was able to collect the signatures of 172 House members opposing the ATF’s proposal.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley, (R-Iowa) is doing the same thing in the Senate.
And Florida Congressman Thomas J. Rooney has introduced H.R. 1180, the “Protecting Second Amendment Rights Act.
“The Obama Administration’s proposal would unilaterally strip law-abiding hunters and sportsmen of their Second Amendment rights,” Rooney told the Washington Examiner. “Congress has made its intentions clear that this ammunition is for sporting purposes and should not be restricted. We cannot and we will not stand by while the Obama Administration tramples on the Constitution, the rule of law, and the Second Amendment rights of hunters in my district and across the country.”
That pretty well sums it up.
ATF is seeking public comments. Email [email protected] to let them know how you feel.[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092