NDR Ammo Ban

B

Bill Clark

Well-known member
Research ATF ammo ban. Then research soft body armor.
If you have an open mind you will see that this proposed ban is nothing more than gun control.
The fact is that soft body armor will not protect from rifle rounds . Rifle hunters in general will fall victim if this becomes law. This is an attack on the second amendment. I will leave it at that.
Let me say that i am a 30 year law enforcement officer retired, firearms instructor and police armorer. I am pro cop.
Moderators i post this because the use of arms is as relevant as duck boats or decoys. Forwarned is forarmed.
 
Deja vu, back in the 70's the anti crowd wanted to define handgun armor piercing ammo as any ammo that would fit into a comercially available handgun that would pierce a specific # of Kevlar layers. With Thompson Center's contender pistol that would have eliminated 30-30, 35 Rem plus a bunch more. And of course at that time no ammo manufacturer even offered traditional armor piercing ammo for sale to civilians. Like this attempt, it was a totally fabricated problem made up to pass restrictive laws that at best show a misunderstanding of the situation, at worse it is an intentional attack on unwitting gun owners.

Scott
 
I think the US Congress is partly to blame for this, too. Passage of the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA) seems to have given the executive branch agencies too broad a brush with which to paint. That is the law being used to propose this ban on M855-type ammo.

As a 24-yr law enforcement officer, I can appreciate the intent of the law, but like a lot of things, there are unintended consequences. I am not certain the law really had a measurable, positive impact on things, anyway. Repeal could inevitably result in some LEO somewhere being killed with a high-velocity, or steel-core round fired from a pistol which penetrates soft body armor. I think, though, that is highly unlikely. Such ammo is more expensive and not useful to 99.9% of the criminal population I believe.

When LEOs are targeted purposefully, I think statistics will demonstrate that long-guns are used to great effect.

If I remember correctly, single shot pistols (such as the T/C Contender) are exempted from that law. I could be wrong.

A quick repeal of that law by Congress would, I think, take away the BATFE authority to regulate this ammo, and probably end the issue. Would the President sign off on such a repeal?

The proposed ban has certainly created a buying panic. I cannot find any bulk .223 ammo online today from the usual outlets.


Clearly, the creation of the AR-platform pistols has had unforeseen consequences, too. If I understand it correctly, that caveat is what helped BATFE propose this ban.

Regardless of how it happened, this ban is ridiculous and unnecessary in my opinion. Government run amok.

Oh what a tangled web.
 
Last edited:
Anti gun and antihunter lobby's have continued to become more creative, and draw more resources as time goes on, this is a good example of their creativity and resourcefulness.

Many times people on forums go on rants against these groups and act as though they are ignorant, over sensitive morons, which is a mistake in my opinion to assume they are such. They beat way to be caught off guard is to underestimate the enemy and it's resolve.
 
I don't see this going anywhere.
Even if ATF does try to institure a ban on M855 rounds, its clearly inconsistent with the letter and intent of the law they are trying to use to ban it.
Either the courts or Congress with jump in quickly.
 
I don't see this going anywhere.
Even if ATF does try to institure a ban on M855 rounds, its clearly inconsistent with the letter and intent of the law they are trying to use to ban it.
Either the courts or Congress with jump in quickly.
Click to expand...

Good for sales in the short term.
 
I don't see this going anywhere.
Even if ATF does try to institure a ban on M855 rounds, its clearly inconsistent with the letter and intent of the law they are trying to use to ban it.
Either the courts or Congress with jump in quickly.
Click to expand...

Good for sales in the short term.
Click to expand...

you aint kidding T
 
Makes you kinda wonder at times if the ammo suppliers don't feed some of the hype.
Like the whole run on .22 ammo that had no basis in reality.
 
This is starting to get good coverage at least on fox news, i am happy for that.
I just did another search there is more information by informed sources available,that is another good thing. Still i view this as the camels nose under the tent.
I agree that it is good for sales . Do you think the ATF wants you buying ammo?
Lastly IMO .22 ammo is scarce because there is more profit in selling center fire ammo. I was told by a recently retired serviceman that the military is using AR15 style weapons chambered in .22 for training.
 
Gander and Cabelas say they are getting as much .22LR in as they did Pre-Hook.....


IN addition... I don't believe there is more profit in centerfire. The prices for centerfire are damn near the same price as they were pre-hook.... I venture to say % of profit is no greater for CF.
 
Last edited:
Military has been using .22 adapters in the M-16 family since at least the early 80's. We used them in ROTC back in mid-1980s.
The adapters we used were easy to use, but didn't always cycle well.
 
Part of my military responsibilities includes several small arms and artillery ranges. Building and running them. I know a lot about the ballistic capabilities of ammunition.
If M855, which is a very conventional lead core copper jacketed bullet were "armor piercing" then why did the military replace it with the EPR -enhanced penetrating round? They are really talking about banning the whole caliber, both 223 remington and 5.56mm. Banning entire lines of calibers is redonkyless even on its face because clearly the caliber has less to do with designed penetrating properties than does material, mass, velocity, distance and angle of strike. The quotes that I have seen on this regulation clearly are meant to be broad enough to outlaw nearly all rifle calibers. You can make a pistol in any caliber, may not be useful or painless to shoot, but a reading of the law only requires the pistol to be made.

This is really about disarmament and control. You must emphasize this point with everyone you know. The technicalities will turn off most people. You must frame your discussion on the broad scope of the proposed regulation. "Shall not be abridged" is the key language in this debate. Want nunchucks or a baton to be your arms, then the constitution says you should have it (sorry NY and NJ, your state laws say you can't -but that law must, under strict constructionism be rendered unconstitutional).

I agree that some quick action through congress is needed to revise the nonsensical law. However, I submit, is that not what the administration wishes them to do? POTUS would just veto the bill. It certainly would obfuscate many other abject failures, such as ISIS, Ukraine, the Iran nuke negotiations that are about to fail etc that are existentially hot at the moment.
 
It is about redefining the ammo. Because they know that most high power hunting rounds will go through a vest. If they can get away with this they will be able to redefine all ammo. With this admin. you have to look way past what they are actually doing and look to see what they are really trying to do.
 
Tom, You are prescient about defining the debate. We all know this is a Trojan Horse to banning rifles. I happen to know some of the details about what types of ammunition penetrate differing levels of hard body armor, rolled homogenous steel, etc. Kevlar only gear is really intended for spall and low velocity round or shrapnel that is big enough of a chunk for the webbing of the fabric to stop it. Again, that kind of details don't matter. They're not really listening to it anyway. It is intended to elicit an emotional response to a dire problem that has to be fixed. Any bullet can kill what it hits. A .22 was used to kill Niessman, the prosecutor in Argentina that was assassinated a few months ago; a .22 revolver almost killed Reagan. I've seen fragments less than 22LR size kill Soldiers that had armored doors and gear that I had seen stop AK round cold. Hell, slings, sling shots and atlatl will get it done massed in a proper fire sack. It's not about law and order or the lives of law enforcement. It's about control.
 
Erich, you are correct.....


These times... they are a changing... just wonder if I will be around to see what it changes into....
 
It is most definitely a control move, guess what happens when we are done in the Middle East? Loads of surplus ammo becomes available and will be sold off cheaper than prices Pre-Obama. With a whole bunch of new AR platform rifle owners this ammo will get purchased and shot or cache'd. This information came out 2/13/15, the BATF is giving the public until 3/16/15 to respond. I hope that anyone on this site who even owns a single shot shotgun would see the danger of this BATF ammo ban.
 
It is most definitely a control move, guess what happens when we are done in the Middle East? Loads of surplus ammo becomes available and will be sold off cheaper than prices Pre-Obama. With a whole bunch of new AR platform rifle owners this ammo will get purchased and shot or cache'd. This information came out 2/13/15, the BATF is giving the public until 3/16/15 to respond. I hope that anyone on this site who even owns a single shot shotgun would see the danger of this BATF ammo ban.
Click to expand...

I don't even own an AR15 (although I have family members that do) and I've emailed my list of politicians already. The Thompson Contender has been chambered for Remington .223 and was the center of a publication in 1968 I believe (I may be off on the year) where the BAFT assured the public that no ammo used in sporting arms would ever be banned. Now the big bad black gun doesn't have a stock so lets ban the ammo. How soon they forget. To my knowledge there is no documented use of a Thompson Center Contender or Encore in .223 or any other firearm for that matter chambered in .223 that has been used in a fatality of a law officer that I've been able to find. If I'm in error someone please educate me. Even intelligent non gun owners have to see this as a control measure. Hell today there are areas where the local fire department has outlawed propane grills. Is that not a control move? We can burn ourselves with charcoal but heaven forbid we use propane. Little by little they are whittling away at our way of life and no one is speaking up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top