BATF taking comments on "Armor Piercing Ammo"

[2farnorth]

BATF is taking comments 'til Dec 31 on the armor piercing ammo regulations. Sure has been kept quiet. It could lead to some rifle ammo being banned because it can be used in handguns such Contender etc. if it's pushed through. Not much time left.
2 links:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/da ... eeting.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

p.s.Hopefully not a repeat. Did a quick search on the subject and nothing came up

[jmra]

Interesting.

[Heartland Patriot]

I sent them an email. To boil down what I said, I asked them to actually take the projectiles in question, fire them into TODAY'S body armor, record the process and results, and base their decision on the empirical evidence after providing the evidence to law enforcement and the firearms/ammunition manufacturers for rebuttal. Body armor has been improved since they originally banned some ammunition. I have seen examples of body armor fired into on the internet by people who had no reason to "rig" it for or against, just done as "to see what happens" kind of thing. And it seemed that the armor does what they say it should do. And if they are so concerned about rifle caliber ammunition being fired out of pistols, I reminded them that with you lose velocity when the barrel gets shorter and velocity is one of the things that aids in defeating body armor. I have about zero confidence that my suggestions will be taken into the slightest account by anyone who matters, but at least I had my say. As a regular Joe, its about all I can do.

[The Annoyed Man]

BATF is taking comments 'til Dec 31 on the armor piercing ammo regulations. Sure has been kept quiet. It could lead to some rifle ammo being banned because it can be used in handguns such Contender etc. if it's pushed through. Not much time left.
2 links:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/da ... eeting.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

p.s.Hopefully not a repeat. Did a quick search on the subject and nothing came up

I read the PDF, and they're talking about restricting access to M855 ball in 5.56 NATO. It had previously been given a sporting use exemption, but now they want to broadly reclassify anything that is a "penetrator" round and rescind the exemptions.

This is NOT GOOD!

This PDF is in the public domain, so I will quote the whole thing here:

AP Ammo Meeting

Welcome/Greetings

Personal Background (brief bio)

Importance of Issue:
This issue is a priority for many reasons and it is important that we get it right for the sake of all stakeholders. It is important to the ActingDirector and the Deputy Director as well as to everyone associated with this process that we receive input from all of the vested interest so that we can make a well informed decision. It is for this reason that we have held meetings for three days this week. On Wednesday we met with representatives from Law Enforcement to get their perspective. On Thursday we met with Non Government Organizations to get their perspective. And today we are meeting twice with the Firearms Industry (Manufacturers your respective Industry Associations this morning and the remainder of Industry Associations this afternoon). It is important that we hear the issue from your perspective. In addition, it will help me to hear what you would do and how you would do it if you were making the decision.

I would like to take a moment to acknowledge a few things before we get started:

1. I realize that this issue has been pending since at least August 2011 (we attempted to hold these meetings earlier in September – but scheduling conflicts prevented us from being able to do so)
2. I know that there are existing variances some of which have been resolved and other which have not and are still pending.
3. I understand the economic impact and the future prospectus that this issue has had and continues to have on the industry.

That said, now I would like to frame the issue then listen to your input.

In 1986 Congress amended the Gun Control Act of 1968 to restrict the manufacture, importation, sale or delivery of “armor piercing ammunition.” 18 USC 921(a)(17) defines the term “armor piercing ammunition” in two parts:

1. 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
2. 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.

The purpose of this law was to protect law enforcement officers by regulating the ammunition that could be loaded into a handgun and would penetrate an officer’s bullet resistant vest. Therefore, the GCA defines armor piercing ammunition, in part, as any projectile that is made of a specified metal, including brass, which “may be used in a handgun.”

The law also provides a sporting purpose exemption from this definition for any projectile “which the Attorney General finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.” Historically, ATF has used this sporting test to exempt projectiles from this definition when used in particular cartridges. Such cartridges include the 5.56mm (223) SS109 and M855 and the U.S. .30-06 M2AP. In exempting the SS109 and M855 ammunition, ATF noted that although handguns were available in this caliber, the available handguns were “specialized long range competition weapons.” In exempting the M2AP ammunition, ATF simply noted that “it is well documented that the [M2AP cartridge] has been recognized as being suitable for target shooting with rifles due to its accuracy.” The letter concluded that the cartridge was therefore “primarily intended for sporting purposes.”

With the development of large caliber handguns, the broad language used to define “armor piercing ammunition” now includes numerous calibers that were traditional rifle calibers used for hunting or other legitimate sporting purposes. These brass projectiles are considered armor piercing because they may be used in a handgun of that caliber. Therefore, they may not be manufactured or distributed even if for rifles.

As a result, the ATF Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) has received numerous requests to exempt certain brass projectiles under the sporting purposes exemption. In developing ATF’s criteria, we recognize that a broad exemption will necessarily encompass many projectiles that may pose a danger to law enforcement officers. However, in developing a narrow sporting purposes test, ammunition in traditional hunting calibers will become regulated. Because of the proliferation of new, larger handgun calibers ATF must review the current sporting purposes test for armor piercing ammunition.

ATF has established a working group to address this issue. The purpose of these meetings is to acquire input from the primary stakeholders in
this matter to be taken into consideration by the ATF working group in its efforts to review the current sporting purposes test for armor piercing ammunition. The results of these findings will afford ATF the ability to consider exemptions under the existing law in a manner that takes into consideration both the need to protect law enforcement and to recognize current advancements in ammunition manufacturing technology.

Today’s format is designed to allot each participant a 15 minute oral presentation on the issue. If any attendee is unable to provide all relevant information within the allotted time, additional comments and information may be submitted electronically in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF format to the e-mail address: APAComments@atf.gov. Electronic submissions are limited in file size to 10 megabites and must be received by December 31, 2012.

It should also be noted that these proceedings will be audio recorded, and the recordings will be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

Conclusion:

• Thank you for your participation.

So here's the deal.....

Apparently there's an entirely NEW ( ) never-before-heard-of category of weapons, which include the Thompson Center Contender, Remington XP-100 and other similar pistols designed to shoot rifle calibers for hunting and/or target shooting. But because they are handguns, and can fire SS109 and M855 ball ammo if chambered in .223/5.56, those two cartridges are technically AP rounds because they have a penetrator core, and that ammo will no longer be considered legal to use in a rifle because it loses its hunting/sporting exemption. Similarly, the M2AP .30-06 cartridge will no longer be available for sporting use in rifles because there exist handguns which can chamber the cartridge......

....never mind that these handguns are not exactly concealable, and that they are single -shot guns.

[Heartland Patriot]

BATF is taking comments 'til Dec 31 on the armor piercing ammo regulations. Sure has been kept quiet. It could lead to some rifle ammo being banned because it can be used in handguns such Contender etc. if it's pushed through. Not much time left.
2 links:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/da ... eeting.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

p.s.Hopefully not a repeat. Did a quick search on the subject and nothing came up

I read the PDF, and they're talking about restricting access to M855 ball in 5.56 NATO. It had previously been given a sporting use exemption, but now they want to broadly reclassify anything that is a "penetrator" round and rescind the exemptions.

This is NOT GOOD!

Which is why I mentioned about the pistols thing...would M855 have the required velocity to penetrate level IIIA vests when fired from an AR-type pistol? It certainly doesn't have the mass to do the job, in and of itself.

[2farnorth]

The 223/5.56 is just a foot in the door. I'm sure that several other cartridges will "fall" into the trap they've got set. Even the lowly 30-30 and .35 Rem will defeat certain kinds of body armor. This is some of the Obama behind the scenes work that was mentioned last year. There is also a reason that it was held til after the election and will be completed over the holidays while most people are not paying attention. I'm sure there is more in the works.

[The Annoyed Man]

BATF is taking comments 'til Dec 31 on the armor piercing ammo regulations. Sure has been kept quiet. It could lead to some rifle ammo being banned because it can be used in handguns such Contender etc. if it's pushed through. Not much time left.
2 links:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/da ... eeting.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/industry/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

p.s.Hopefully not a repeat. Did a quick search on the subject and nothing came up

I read the PDF, and they're talking about restricting access to M855 ball in 5.56 NATO. It had previously been given a sporting use exemption, but now they want to broadly reclassify anything that is a "penetrator" round and rescind the exemptions.

This is NOT GOOD!

Which is why I mentioned about the pistols thing...would M855 have the required velocity to penetrate level IIIA vests when fired from an AR-type pistol? It certainly doesn't have the mass to do the job, in and of itself.

The quoted PDF makes no allowance for velocity. Hopefully, whomever was there to contribute commentary on behalf of manufacturers and advocacy groups had the sense to raise that issue. We'll see. The thing is, these types of pistols have been around for 20-30 years. It's not like they suddenly became part of the picture. They were for the most part in existence and present back in 1986 when the original guidelines were set. Nothing has changed........except that SOME fatherless child of a gun-grabber thought they found a loophole by which they could make ammo harder to get and more expensive for black rifle owners........hence the specific mention of 5.56 ammo.

[The Annoyed Man]

BATF is taking comments 'til Dec 31 on the armor piercing ammo regulations.

So... exactly how many folks have been shot with the ammunition they want to ban, again?

A whole bunch of Al Qaeda.......

[Heartland Patriot]

IF they are able to ban m855 from future sale, old M193 55 grain is going to get really popular. My carbine likes 'em both, thank goodness.

[The Annoyed Man]

IF they are able to ban m855 from future sale, old M193 55 grain is going to get really popular. My carbine likes 'em both, thank goodness.

Their trajectories are nearly identical out of a 16" barrel.

[gdanaher]

"That goes without saying, but I'm not talking about naughty people "

"Some folks just need killin'"----John Wayne, George Bush