Return to “The ATF’s Ammo Ban Is Back…New Bill From Democrats”
Jones is the BATF director. A little hard to believe the Bill in question isn't a product of BATF direction.Instead, he suggested that he needed a broader ban, and he wanted Congress to write one. Bedard again:
…Jones said all types of the 5.56 military-style ammo used by shooters pose a threat to police….
“Any 5.56 round” is “a challenge for officer safety,” he said.
That's one way to look at it. I lost all confidence in the GOP, what little I had left, after the last election. It doesn't help when a GOP Senator makes a statement like this:Rrash wrote:I'd rather see this in Congress where it will be shot down than done through the BAFTE
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=229925"I’m pleased to see that the ATF has now decided to abide by congressional intent of the law, and its exemption protecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners, Iowa GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said after the ATF announcement. "ATF’s original proposal to short-circuit the exemption and limit access to rifle ammunition was an affront to the Second Amendment to the Constitution, and it was met with stiff rebuke."
At the very least the Dems are attempting to pollute the debate, and I suspect something far more nefarious is afoot, and either Grassley is ignorant of the law, providing cover for the BATF, or something else not likely to be in our interest.Ignoring the 2nd Amendment, which allows no constraint for "armor-piercing" ammunition (indeed, if the 2nd Amendment's purpose is ever necessary, God forbid, the ability to shoot through armor might well be essential) there is this little matter of black-letter statute.
Specifically, as I noted in my previous article, M855 ammunition meets neither of the criteria in the statute (18 USC Sec 921) to define it as armor-piercing, and thus irrespective of any so-called "sporting exception" there has never been, and cannot be without revision of the statute, any such lawful ban on the manufacture or import of same.
In other words there was never any such "exemption" issued as a matter of law, irrespective of any edict that the BATFE might have published. The reason is simple -- the ammunition in question is not larger than .22 caliber, it was not intended for use in a handgun and it did not have a jacket that was more than 25% of the total mass of the projectile. Note that all three criteria must be made (the word "and" is used twice) to meet this criteria.
Four House Democrats have taken the Obama administration’s idea of a regulation to ban a widely used kind of ammunition — one it had to pull back because it was so unpopular — and turned it into legislation.
Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) introduced the Armor Piercing Bullets Act, which he said would ban the sale of “.223-dervied, 5.56x45mm NATO ‘green tip’ rounds” that are commonly used on the AR-15 rifle. That’s the same ban that the ATF proposed in February, through the adoption of a “framework” that would justify a ban on all bullets that can pierce police body armor.
“There is absolutely no compelling argument to be made for anyone else to have access to them,” he said. “But the out of touch gun industry lobby is fighting tooth and nail to keep cop-killing ammunition on the streets.”