U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Hobbies and Recreation > Guns and Hunting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-18-2015, 05:21 PM
 
273 posts, read 160,732 times
Reputation: 50

Advertisements

It'll never happen........

Lake City salutes you Sir!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-19-2015, 02:09 AM
 
Location: NWA/SWMO
2,749 posts, read 2,617,577 times
Reputation: 2659
M855 does not meet either the spirit or the letter of the law that they are arguing should be used to ban it.
M855 does not meet AP definition per the BATFE.
This may or may not happen. Regardless, M855 is about the worst performing stuff out there. The only way it will result in ammo availability issues is people buying other plinking ammo instead of M855 to support their training needs. I never used M855 for training because its hard on steel.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 05:40 AM
 
1 posts, read 574 times
Reputation: 10
So what about Tula and Wolf ammo in 223 and 7.62 that are steel jacketed? I have had range officers tell me I can not use it because it damages the steel back stops. If Obummer wins this will he target this ammo nest? I already see 855 ammo jumping off the shelf.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 08:15 AM
Status: "King of the World" (set 20 days ago)
 
Location: Itinerant
5,201 posts, read 3,753,118 times
Reputation: 4078
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWG223 View Post
M855 does not meet either the spirit or the letter of the law that they are arguing should be used to ban it.
M855 does not meet AP definition per the BATFE.
That's the critical thing that might fortunately bring this down in flames.

The issue is that BATFE is trying to claim that because 5.56mm NATO has been used in a handgun (AR-15 pistols for instance) it may be used in a handgun. However using that clause of the AP ban requires...

Quote:
The term “armor piercing ammunition” means- (i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or

M855 fails this test because while it may be used in a handgun, it's core is not constructed entirely or in combination of the substances listed. It's a lead round with a steel chunk and a copper jacket. Lead is not included in the list of substances, so it cannot be constructed entirely of proscribed substances.



So according to law, it's not AP, regardless of any exemption BATFE have previously given it. Now if they want to ban it, they'll need to change the law, since 18 USC 921(a)(17)(B) was enrolled via LEOPA an act of Congress in 1986, and is not an ATF regulation. I'm not seeing that one flying too well through the House and the Senate.
__________________
My mod posts will always be in red.
The RulesInfractions & DeletionsWho's the moderator? • FAQ • What is a "Personal Attack" • What is "Trolling" • Guidelines for copyrighted material.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 08:43 AM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
7,838 posts, read 7,829,454 times
Reputation: 6245
Since when did the law & Constitution matter to this administration?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 10:49 AM
 
25,631 posts, read 29,145,474 times
Reputation: 23049
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoPro View Post
Since when did the law & Constitution matter to this administration?
And many others including supposedly conservative repubs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 10:57 AM
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
2,774 posts, read 3,683,653 times
Reputation: 4236
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac44 View Post
So what about Tula and Wolf ammo in 223 and 7.62 that are steel jacketed? I have had range officers tell me I can not use it because it damages the steel back stops. If Obummer wins this will he target this ammo nest? I already see 855 ammo jumping off the shelf.
All rifle ammo is "armor piercing" using the definition of "it can pierce soft body armor", but the 1968 GCA doesn't apply to rifle-only ammunition. The issue here is that the 1968 GCA defines "armor piercing" in two ways:
Quote:
(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means—
(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper or depleted uranium; or
(ii) 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.
In spite of the proliferation of AR-style handguns, 5.56 ammo clearly wasn't "designed and intended for use in a handgun". So it doesn't meet definition (ii). The problem is definition (i). The BATFE is saying the steel penetrator in M855 ammo qualifies as "a projectile core", even though it doesn't comprise the entire core of the projectile. As definition (i) only requires that the ammunition "may be used in a handgun", M855 qualifies as "armor piercing pistol ammunition" under the 1968 GCA using the logic applied by the BATFE

But this only stands if as the BATFE can convince the courts that the M855 steel penetrator qualifies as "a ... projectile core", even though it is only part of the core in the projectile. The counter-argument (as detailed by Gungnir) is that the entire core must be made of the hard material, meaning the lead in the lower half of M855 exempts it.

Looking at it another way and deconstructing grammar:
"a projectile ... which is constructed entirely... from one or a combination of [hard metals]"
"a ... projectile core ... which is constructed entirely... from one or a combination of [hard metals]"
The first definition clearly requires the entire projectile be made of hard metal. But the BATFE is claiming that M855 contains "a projectile core" constructed entirely from steel, even though it isn't the entire core.

Honestly, I can see this going either way. Really it depends on political pressure before adoption (sign the petition, call your congressman), and whichever judge gets the case after adoption.



Back to the post I quoted: If this ban is adopted and passes court challenges, then if people start building fake SBR's using AK-based "handguns" with "forearm braces" that look and function just like short shoulder stocks, then yes, "steel-core" 7.62 ammo will have the same problems as "steel-core" 5.56 ammo.

Last edited by jwkilgore; 02-19-2015 at 11:16 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 12:37 PM
 
9,112 posts, read 5,673,869 times
Reputation: 5270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango View Post
It wouldn't. You simply wouldn't be able to buy green tip ammo. (the steel core stuff)

Still, that's stupid... green tip stuff isn't any more lethal in non-combat situations than regular 5.56 and even .223 (which is somewhat lower in velocity) The benefit of the stuff is that it's what the military uses so there is a crap-ton of it, it's cheap and it's fairly reliable stuff.

There is absolutely no benefit to banning it, other than continuing to populate the list of things you and I aren't allowed to have "just because" and starting a run on it so prices can go stupid-high again.
Okay , so this ban doesn't really effect too many of us. Let's just say though, they ban all the steel core ammo, then once that is done they go after lead based. So now we are all left with a bunch of high dollar wall ornaments since we can't get ammo. Is that too much of a stretch ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
2,774 posts, read 3,683,653 times
Reputation: 4236
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabchuck View Post
Okay , so this ban doesn't really effect too many of us.
But it does, at least for now. The ammo industry produces M855 on the order of a billion rounds per year, and it's available as cheap mil-surp. If that source of ammo is lost for civilians then demand will increase for other types of ammo, which will increase cost.

Clarification from earlier: I didn't realize that steel-core 7.62x39 ammo has long been banned because a handgun that shoots 7.62x39 was produced in the early 1990's. At the time I was more worried about college than firearms. However, a copper-coated steel jacket over a lead core does not meet either of the "armor piercing" definitions above and is safe. For now.

Before now, 5.56 M855 was specifically exempted because 1) no "non-sporting" handguns existed and 2) the core isn't solid steel. The BATFE is attempting to reverse the exemption. Clearly handguns are all over the place now, but they'll have to fight because the steel part is only part of the core.


Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD Mill View Post
7.62X39mm and 5.45x39mm was banned because it was imported and also just so happened to be steel core.

M855 SS109 is domestic manufactured in USA by Lake City. If a ban happens, it is a clear case of sidestepping around Congress and using executive orders to do something like that. It's not armor piercing ammunition and it also is not imported. Someone is reaching far to go after it.

Look for it to be shot down once the news becomes public knowledge what they are trying to do. "You can't do that" is more than alright.....it's ILLEGAL and in violation of Federal, State and local laws.
I realize that conservative talk radio is spouting the usual nonsense about "Obummer's Executive Orders", but you need to get your facts straight. Although the BATFE is considered to be part of his administration, no executive order has been issued. And the ban has nothing to do with importing vs US made. The ban is on manufacture and import. All steel-core 7.62x39 was banned in the 1990's, not just the imported variety.

If they can convince a judge that the partial steel core in M855 meets the definition of armor piercing, then the ban will be just as legal and permanent as the 7.62x39 steel-core ban. And just like with 7.62x39, the price for lead 5.56 will jump. And the world will keep spinning.

Last edited by jwkilgore; 02-19-2015 at 04:02 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 04:40 PM
Status: "King of the World" (set 20 days ago)
 
Location: Itinerant
5,201 posts, read 3,753,118 times
Reputation: 4078
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore View Post
Looking at it another way and deconstructing grammar:
"a projectile ... which is constructed entirely... from one or a combination of [hard metals]"
"a ... projectile core ... which is constructed entirely... from one or a combination of [hard metals]"
The first definition clearly requires the entire projectile be made of hard metal. But the BATFE is claiming that M855 contains "a projectile core" constructed entirely from steel, even though it isn't the entire core.
There is no need to deconstruct, it's common knowledge that bullets are constructed either as a single material, or by enclosing the core with a jacket. This isn't debatable, it's the term used in the military, police, firearms industry, ballistics science and public. Thus "projectile core" refers to what is enclosed in the jacket. What could be claimed is that M855 has a steel penetrator contained in the core, however the law does not prohibit this, it's very clear, the core must be made entirely from any combination of the proscribed substances.

BATFE would have to prove that core in the law does not mean what everyone else thinks it means, and if that is the case we're all screwed in every way possible since any law can mean any thing by redefining the meaning of the words used to define that law.
__________________
My mod posts will always be in red.
The RulesInfractions & DeletionsWho's the moderator? • FAQ • What is a "Personal Attack" • What is "Trolling" • Guidelines for copyrighted material.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Hobbies and Recreation > Guns and Hunting
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top