BATFE moves to ban SS109/M855 .223 ammo

We waste SO much time trying to rationalize the actions of irrational people.....BATF doesn't have to explain anything; their word is law.

But it doesn't have to make sense. It fits the narrative.

"a full jacketed projectile"

There is also some doubt as to whether M855 fits this description, too. The base of the bullet jacket is open.

you can attack this all you want on the details of the proposal and the details of the law. I think we need to look instead at the Constitutionality of the 'sporting purposes' justification for a ban. We have civil rights that do not depend on sporting purposes. Self defense is fundamentally not a sport, though we often make a sport of it.

Sounds like you have a valid public comment to submit.

Spot on, Fyooz.

So the question becomes why has the "sporting purposes" criteria never been challenged in court? Is there some sort of catch 22 standing issue?

Is this ammo not in common use? How can they ban something in common use and (Heller) and with a military purpose (Miller 1934?)?

"Sporting purposes" was the only fig leaf gunowners had to protect guns until Heller. Since Heller, we don't need sporting purposes language any longer. It's not about duck hunting, somebody used to say. In fact, in this case, sporting purposes language is being used against us.

The sporting purpose import ban was challenged after Heller v DC. A man challenged the import ban. He lost because the courts still refuse to take the Second seriously.

Mr. Hardy, this is the same argument I made for the 7n6 ban.

Less than .22, not entirely steel, not designed for a handgun, etc.

Also the actual bullet diameter for .223/5.56 is .224.

What is the actual bullet diameter for a .22 LR? There are conversion units in existence that allow .22 LR to be fired accurately (ie, no tumbling or key-holing)from an AR without alterations to the barrel. If an AR can fire .22LR, and it can fire 5.56mm/.223 through the same barrel, then it would certainly appear that 5.56mm is not larger than .22 in bore diameter.

The legal and constitutional issues here will be debated for a long time.

The thing to do now is buy as much of the stuff as you can. Soon, before the price goes up.

It doesn't even matter if you have an AR - SS109/M885 will be quite valuable if the ban is actually implemented. I don't expect they will ban possession of the stuff if you already have it.

Besides, if you buy the ammo on spec and still have no AR, it's a good excuse to go buy one.

The sad thing is that if the stuff is no longer available for the surplus market, it will be destroyed once it has exceeded the acceptable Military shelf life. We all know that actual shelf life is almost indefinite under proper conditions.

This has been an issue since 2011. See http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/08/robert-farago/atf-raid-elite-ammunition-confiscate-armor-piercing-brass-bullets/ They are just now starting to get the regulation published.

I cannot understand why the Obama administration want us not to defend ourself but gives firearms to other countries so they can defend their children and family.

Jim:

That is because the people in foreign countries are not here and so they are not worried about the peons getting uppity

Seems like this ammo has military utility, so the Supreme Court has already ruled on it (US v. Miller). Of course laws do not apply to the ruling class; they can do whatever they please.

Jim, it's in the interest of the ruling class to have unarmed peons. Just the way it is. Doesn't mean we should put up with it.

We should ban ATF, they are like flies bothering people and eating feces. Not one law that these government baboons enforce or rules they dream up deter crime or have any effect at all on criminal activity.

so we can try it again, with more cases favorable to the 2A civil right, and more cowbell.

It might not be on Gura's list, and if it doesn't fit with Gura's other cases he'll probably ignore it.

It just seems riper to me today, since McDonald, Peruta, aaaaaaannnnnnnd Mance v Holder.

Maybe CheaperThanDirt or Dan's Ammo want to hire an attorney like, er, Dave Hardy?

Fyooz - Why would USEDToBE Cheaper Than Dirt spend money on lawyers when they're too busy MAKING money on over charging customers?

Bobby,
because CTD would rather keep MAKING money on a continued supply of stock than USEDToMAKE money on a stock that will soon be depleted.

And they understand that ATF made 7.62x39 steel core disappear, and made 7N6 disappear, M855 is about to disappear, and M193 could be next. If CTD wants to sell anything other than Chinese scope rings and tacticool flashlights, they should protect continued commerce in ammo.

Maybe I chose poorly in CTD versus your favorite. The point stands.

http://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/time-eliminate-atf-rep-jim-sensenbrenner/
DO SOMETHING THAT MATTERS. 2 senators want to eliminate the BATF and with good reasons. There are enough angry progun owners to do it if we do not give up. Anything else is futile because there are no checks and balances for the batf. Calling senators should be every progun owners number 1 agenda. Ask them to defund them for now as well. Start making shirts for sell at the gunshows instructing people to do this with links, etc. We have to get organized and make the thoughts spread like a virus.

I see wh have an additional poster named Jim???

There does not appear to be a substantive difference between M855 projectiles and bullets constructed of similar materials for the sport shooting market such as this:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/1601240379/remington-bronze-point-bullets-30-caliber-308-diameter-150-grain

Gunwriter, Jack O'Connor, wrote of using Remington Bronze Point rounds as far back as 1927.

"There does not appear to be a substantive difference between M855 projectiles and bullets constructed of similar materials"
. . . . in its effect on hard targets.

The difference is in the details of the law, because the law is written with regard to design, intent, and construction, not ultimate effect.

If the ban had been written on the basis of effect, even its drafters, incl Sen Moynihan, realized that ban would have covered almost all rifle ammunition, and that it would have been politically impossible to pass and enforce. The design/intent/construction writing was a compromise to ban what they could without raising townsfolk with pitchforks and torches.

Part of that compromise was "sporting purposes," which I find to be a relic of a judicial regime prior to Heller, McDonald, and Peruta. These three cases should provide the blueprint for its demise. Maybe not in time to preserve the availability of M855, but eventually. Be ready to wait, work, and contribute over the long haul, like what led to Heller.

M855 never met the definition of AP in 18 U.S. Code § 921 (A) (17) (B).

The BATFE gave M855 an exemption it never needed.

Now they are taking the exemption away and trying to use the fact they issued an exemption as proof that an exemption is required.

All while never even examining the full wording of 18 U.S. Code § 921 (A) (17) (B), or explaining how the construction of M855 fits within that law.

It's a nice sleight of hand.

To top it all off, they are now framing their position, using a dishonestly presented solicitation for comment from 2012, such that any comments on the actual legality of M855 will be ignored. They have effectively sidestepped any public comment on the actual legality of M855 according to 18 U.S. Code § 921 (A) (17) (B).

Their argument for the "likely use" to determine sporting purposes is flawed too. They look at only the "likely use" in handguns in the "general community" but 18 U.S. Code § 921 (A) (17) (C) does not reference the use of the projectile only in a handgun. If you look consider the "likely use" of M855 in the "general community" of all AR owners that would be target shooting which they state is a sporting use.

Of course 18 U.S. Code § 921 (A) (17) (C)says "a projectile which the Attorney General finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes". So whatever the Attorney General says goes. That is a terrible way to write a law.

I think Dave's comment about .23 caliber might be developed into something....

In specifying "greater than .22 caliber", Congress implicitly specified two digit precision. Under such a scheme, .20, .21, .22, .23, and .24 are allowed calibers. No values between those can be considered. .224 caliber is not an allowed value in two digit precision.

Congress also specified "greater than", not "greater than or equal to". So, in order to fall under the law, ammunition cannot be .22 caliber. It must be at least the next allowed size larger, which is .23 caliber.

Further, 5.65x45, 223, 22LR, 22-250, and 222 Magnum cartridges are all commonly referred to as 22 caliber. So M855 is nominally 22 caliber, and too small to fall within the scope of the law.

If you walk into a gun store and simply ask for "22 ammunition", without specifying which 22, you'll practically always get 22LR. The specified caliber of 22LR is .2245.

Real 5.56x45 armor piercing ammunition, M995, will penetrate 12mm of steel. The M855? A paltry 3mm. The penetration of M855 in flesh is practically identical with the penetration of common lead core big game ammunition, 15-20".