If you like your m855, you can keep your m855

[Shadowrider]

Russell is my congressman and I voted for him. I wrote to him and only received a canned response about being a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. I had expected to receive some mention regarding the M855 issue.

That's normal. I've always got a response but it does take awhile. The canned one you get first is more of a confirmation that they got what you sent.

 

[SM Rider]

Who benefits?

The anti-gun crowd for certain. And perhaps the illegitimate neo-nazi Kiev government whose Soviet era arms are dwindling in their genocidal war against DPR/LPR. Somebody will buy and sell this ammo to Kiev as appears has been happening already.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7eSqggQ9Vc0

 

[OKCHunter]

Who benefits?

The anti-gun crowd for certain. And perhaps the illegitimate neo-nazi Kiev government whose Soviet era arms are dwindling in their genocidal war against DPR/LPR. Somebody will buy and sell this ammo to Kiev as appears has been happening already.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7eSqggQ9Vc0

That would be some high level thinking and manipulation. Ban M855 from the US civilian so that supply can be channeled to US backed foreign military operations. The cost would probably gone down as well for the foreign purchaser. They are not going to quit manufacturing the stuff since it is what the military currently uses. I've heard that much of the M855 that was available to the civilian was manufactured for the military but was rejected for a QC issue. Where will these "rejects" be going now?

 

[SMS]

IIRC, the military uses M855a1 now...totally different round than M855.

 

[RugersGR8]

Ran across these three articles that might inform:


http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/5/21/testing-the-army-s-m855a1-standard-ball-cartridge/
Testing The Army’s M855A1 Standard Ball Cartridge
by John Plaster - Wednesday, May 21, 2014



http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/5/28/the-m855a1-cartridge-a-long-time-coming/
The M855A1 Cartridge: A Long Time Coming
by John Plaster - Wednesday, May 28, 2014


http://www.army.mil/article/48657/
Evolution of the M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round
November 26, 2010

 

[OKCHunter]

IIRC, the military uses M855a1 now...totally different round than M855.

Okay, that blows my theory. Tin foil hat now off.

 

[Raoul Duke]

Seriously, you'd think our congressional delegation would uniformly be united and chomping at the bit to stand up to the executive overreach of an Obama administration federal bureau executive action.

Here are some good bullet points(pun intended) from the NRA to include your comments when you make contacts about this:

• M855 ammunition should not 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.

I would also mention how the BAFTE tried to bury this proposed rule change/public in a late Friday afternoon document drop to evade public awareness/scrutiny and the even more troubling potential violations of the APA:

http://www.examiner.com/article/atf-claims-administrative-procedures-act-exemption-for-proposed-ammo-ban-notice

A spokesperson for the Bureau of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told Gun Rights Examiner Wednesday afternoon that ATF’s recent ammunition ban proposal is not required to be published in the Federal Register. That claim was in answer to a query after determining ATF’s notice does not appear in the government’s official journal, and further noting a Wednesday Reuters report that a tangentially-related lack of rulemaking publication was given by a Texas judge as his reason for blocking the Obama administration’s “immigration overhaul.”

“U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen ... faulted Obama for not giving public notice of his plans,” the report explains. “The failure to do so, Hanen wrote, was a violation of the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act, which requires notice in a publication called the Federal Register as well as an opportunity for people to submit views in writing.”

While the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has invited public comment in its “framework for determining whether certain projectiles are “primarily intended for sporting purposes” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C),” correspondents with this column question if that meets the requirements of the APA, which states “General notice of proposed rulemaking shall be published in the Federal Register...”

No such notice has been posted at this writing by ATF. A search of Regulations.gov (“Your voice in Federal decision-making”) also turns up nothing.

View attachment 46047

It might also be worth mentioning that while the bureaucrats at the BATFE are furiously working to ban all other than lead alloys in ammunition, the bureaucrats at the EPA are furiously working to ban all lead ammunition and that implementing this ruling can have the unintended(?) consequence of leading to the extension or expansion this erroneous loose interpretation to ban other common calibers of civilian rifle ammunition. Perhaps we should ask our Congress critters to clarify to the BATFE the difference between a centerfire pistol cartridge and a centerfire rifle cartridge in no uncertain terms, terms that are not subject to the questionable interpretations or whims of federal bureaucracies? Maybe something as simple as along the lines of if a cartridge uses a rifle primer it is a rifle cartridge and if it uses a pistol primer it is a pistol cartridge?

http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/atf-framework-logic-would-ban-additional-ammo-beyond-m855-as-armor-piercing-ammo/#axzz3SW4i1R4u

III. Impact of Framework – Previous Exemptions

It is important to note that in applying the sporting purposes categories set forth above, the 5.56mm projectile ATF exempted in 1986 will NOT qualify for an exemption because cartridges containing this projectile may be used in handguns that are not single-shot. These cartridges are commonly used in AR-type handguns that utilize magazines. Accordingly, for purposes of consistency, ATF states that it will withdraw the exemptions for the 5.56mm “green tip” ammunition, including both the SS109 and M85 cartridges.

The exemption for the 30-06 M2AP cartridges would continue because there are no multi-shot handguns that currently accept such ammunition.

A significant number of cartridges originally manufactured for rifles would NOT be eligible for the exemption under the criteria proposed in the framework. For example, .224 and .308 cartridges would NOT be exempted due to the availability in commercial channels of AR and AK-type pistols, clearly not single-shot firearms. Projectiles in .430 caliber would also NOT be exempted due to the availability of .44 magnum handguns which will chamber this ammunition. Finally, .458 bullets, very popular for big game hunting, would NOT be exempted due to the availability of multi-shot handguns in 45-70 caliber.

All of this ammunition would continue to be subject to the restrictions on manufacture, importation, and distribution of armor piercing ammunition.

Once exposed, the EPA/BATFE endgame here is so undeniable that if pointing it out to them doesn't get our federal elected officials attention, I don't know what will.

 

[Yourshoesareuntied]

Wasn't there an X federal agent of some sort who told the heard to quit training themselves to shoot center mass due to BP vest? Anyway... it makes seance, being that BP Vest are available to all... start training with abdominal and pelvic shots, then move to the head.. insted of two to the chest one to the head....train with two to the abs/hips one to the head... sorta freaky I know but...it is what it is..

 

[SMS]

Serious question for our 2A historians.

Has the ATF ever reversed itself after the public comment period?

 

[HiredHand]

Wasn't there an X federal agent of some sort who told the heard to quit training themselves to shoot center mass due to BP vest? Anyway... it makes seance, being that BP Vest are available to all... start training with abdominal and pelvic shots, then move to the head.. insted of two to the chest one to the head....train with two to the abs/hips one to the head... sorta freaky I know but...it is what it is..

Concealable body armor isn't meant to stop high velocity rifle rounds.