There is a pincer movement taking place on ammunition. The ATF is coming after it on one side and the EPA is coming after it on the other. Apparently the gun-grabbers are this time focusing on the ammunition more-so than the gun…
Here’s how they’re doing it:
The following is paraphrased from having listened to a segment of Mark Levin’s broadcast last night, and I thought that some of you might be interested to know the latest angle of attack.
Gun grabbers spend much of their time wringing their hands over so called ‘assault rifles’ which are ‘scary looking’. These same gun-grabbers often insist that they don’t want to bother us about our hunting rifles, but instead want to rid us of our AR-15s (‘assault’ rifle) – which apparently, unknown to them are typically chambered for small caliber rounds (e.g. .223) compared to many (most) so-called hunting rifles.
Here’s what’s going on now though-
The ATF is apparently reasoning towards some pre-determined specific goal – the banning of what they wish to classify as ‘armor-piercing ammunition’ (which may typically include bullet materials other than lead such as tungsten alloy, steel, etc..). At the same time the EPA is being pressured and apparently working towards banning lead bullets altogether – forcing ammunition manufacturers and suppliers to look for alternatives to lead based bullets – which are the very same bullets as those which may be re-classified as ‘armor-piercing’ – and banned.
Here’s how they’re apparently trying to do it-
First they’re going after the AR-15 ammunition (probably the most popular in the US).
Note that there are existing federal regulations regarding so called ‘armor-piercing’ ammunition. Armor-piercing ammunition, sometimes referred to as metal-piercing ammunition, is ammunition that is designed primarily to penetrate metal or armor, including body armor commonly worn by police officers (apparently defined back in 1986). Under federal law, armor-piercing ammunition is defined as any projectile or projectile core that may be used in a handgun and that is constructed entirely from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium. In addition, armor-piercing ammunition is also apparently defined as a full jacketed projectile “larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.”
Note, the armor-piercing law applies to handguns. The AR-15 is clearly not a handgun. It is a rifle. Well, apparently that’s where ‘they’ are attacking…
If you remove the shoulder stock from an ‘AR’ style rifle, it apparently is no longer a rifle. It’s a handgun (what?!). Albeit one of the clumsiest and goofiest handguns on the market. Therefore, the fact that there’s a multi-shot commercially available ‘handgun’ for those non-lead .223 rounds, means that such ammunition can be banned as armor-piercing, even though it is not armor-piercing ammunition by use or design.
These non-lead bullets (made of tungsten or steel alloys for example) are not designed to pierce body armor. They are designed to keep lead out of the environment. But their composition means they can be classified as armor-piercing rounds if the Feds can find an excuse to do it.
The ATF is apparently maneuvering to remove the sporting exemptions for certain popular kinds of .223 ammunition allowing it to be reclassified as armor-piercing, and therefore banned. Even though it is not designed as armor-piercing and has no special armor-piercing characteristics.
The reason for this is the fear that the ‘AR’ style rifle has been ‘enjoying a new career as a handgun’. What a joke…
So, everybody goes back to the lead bullet.
Now steps in the EPA. Leftest environmental groups have been pressuring the EPA to regulate and ban lead ammunition under the ‘toxic substance control act’. Organizations such as the Humane Society are also petitioning to ban lead ammunition from public lands. (Note: If you’re into donating to this type of cause, please consider donating instead directly to local animal shelters – not the Washington based ‘humane society’ which essentially funds their political activism).
What gun rights advocates fear, is that this is the beginning of a ‘pincer movement’. With the ATF banning non-lead ammunition as a threat to armor-piercing, and the EPA banning lead ammunition as a toxin.
There’s no reason to assume that this will stop with the .223 ammo – popular for that ‘scary looking’ AR style rifle. There are multiple-shot handguns (mostly revolvers) that chambers for many types of rifle cartridges, meaning that the ‘armor-piercing’ designation could be applied to all sorts of ammunition for hunting rifles.
The gun grabbers have their sites on the ammunition.
If they ban non-lead .223 bullets and if they ban lead bullets for the AR-15 which is one of the most popular guns today, what’s to stop them from doing it with another gun… and another, and another… This is the tyranny.
Thought you would like to know…
You might consider contacting your Senator (this week – before the end of the month, FEB)
Urge your Senator to support an amendment to the DHS appropriations bill which would forbid the ATF from going forward with its lawless proposal to ban ammunition for the AR-15, the most popular sporting gun in America.
Find Your Senator
If you would like to listen to what Mark Levin had to say about it, skip forward to the 39 minute mark where he begins that segment.
Gun owners must act now to ensure BATFE does not get away with this. While emotions are running high in response to this latest attempt by BATFE to undercut the Second Amendment by administrative fiat, submissions should refrain from inappropriate language and calmly explain the framework’s errors. The following are just a few suggested points that can be addressed in comments to the proposed framework. This list is merely a sampling of the many points that could be raised against it.
M855 ammunition should not even be categorized as “armor piercing” in the first place, given that lead is the primary material beneath its copper jacket.
BATFE’s framework does not clarify the “sporting purposes” exemption; it simply interprets it into irrelevance.
The framework overturns nearly 30 years of settled law and the good faith expectations of gun owners and industry members.
The framework is totally at odds with the intent of the law to ensure that restrictions on armor piercing handgun ammunition do not unduly restrict common rifle ammunition, most of which is capable of penetrating police body armor when used in a rifle as intended.
BATFE incorrectly insists that it is required to establish an “objective” standard based on handgun design, yet it fails even to do that with the very broad “discretion” it retains to deny the exemption to projectiles that meet its “objective” test.
The framework will suppress the development of non-lead rifle projectiles that offer increased performance for hunters, decreased lead exposure, and solutions for hunters in states that restrict the use of lead in hunting.
The framework will likewise deter handgun development, as new designs could trigger bans.
Coupled with increasing attempts to ban lead projectiles, the framework could drastically reduce the availability of lawful ammunition for sporting and other legitimate purposes.
M855 ammunition in AR pistols is not a common threat faced by law enforcement officers.
Comments will only be considered by BATFE if received by March 16, 2015. They may be submitted in any of three ways:
1. Via email at APAComments@atf.gov
2. Via fax at (202) 648-9741.
3. Via mail to 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.
Finally, please contact your U.S. Senators and Member of Congress. Urge them to oppose BATFE’s attempt to ban M855 handgun ammunition and other rifle cartridges that are overwhelmingly used by law-abiding Americans for self-defense, sport shooting and other legitimate purposes as “armor piercing.”
Your efforts of contacting your senators and representatives have paid off (for now) with the help of the NRA.
“After much pressure from a large, bipartisan majority in the House of Representatives, I am pleased that the Obama Administration has abandoned its attack on the Second Amendment.”
“Congress will continue to steadfastly protect the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens and it is entirely inappropriate for President Obama to stretch his regulatory authority to implement partisan policies that Congress has refused to enact.”
“Such an abuse of power would impact many law-abiding gun owners and restrict the American people’s ability to legally and responsibly exercise their Second Amendment rights,”
“I and other members of the House Judiciary Committee will continue to keep a watchful eye on the Obama Administration so that we protect Americans’ constitutional rights. We cannot allow the President of the United States to infringe upon the Second Amendment rights afforded to all Americans.”
~House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA)
“Today’s announcement proves what we have said all along — this was 100 percent political,” “President Obama failed to pass gun control through Congress, so he tried impose his political agenda through executive fiat. But every gun owner in America needs to understand Barack Obama’s hatred of the Second Amendment has not changed,”