ATF plans to ban M855 again... (Read 41800 times)

justin1098

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #20 on: February 20, 2015, 06:17:01 PM »
https://www.youtube.com/embed/OAzjDZCXHzI




I wish that was the case. I think its more likely the anti freedom leaders of the BATFE want to take away our rights by raising the price of gun ownership. They want to shrink our influence and marginalize us so they can take our guns away with the support of the masses.

Before we went into Afghanistan in 2001, you could buy a case of m855 for around $80. Imagine how much ammo we would buy if prices dropped that low. They don't want that to happen.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2015, 06:30:14 PM by justin1098 »

Heavies

Mr. Farknocker

eyeeatingfish

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #24 on: March 02, 2015, 09:37:53 PM »
Hmmm, normally I might call this thing a back door way to restrict rights but technically the way the law is written they are following the law I think.

Do any local gun shops even carry this ammo?

mauidog

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #25 on: March 03, 2015, 12:46:42 AM »
Hmmm, normally I might call this thing a back door way to restrict rights but technically the way the law is written they are following the law I think.

Do any local gun shops even carry this ammo?
An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.   -- Jeff Cooper

Lockin

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #26 on: March 04, 2015, 10:49:43 AM »
http://savem855.com/

If you want to do more than sign a petition.

mauidog

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #27 on: March 04, 2015, 10:57:40 AM »
236 members of Congress sent a signed letter to the ATF telling them their interpretation of the ban on armor piercing ammo is "preposterous."

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/04/the-one-word-dozens-of-house-members-are-using-to-describe-obamas-proposed-ammo-ban/
An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.   -- Jeff Cooper

punaperson

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #28 on: March 04, 2015, 11:12:46 AM »
236 members of Congress sent a signed letter to the ATF telling them their interpretation of the ban on armor piercing ammo is "preposterous."

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/04/the-one-word-dozens-of-house-members-are-using-to-describe-obamas-proposed-ammo-ban/
I note that our illustrious "representatives" Mr. Takai's and Ms. Gabbard's names seem to be missing from the list. Perhaps a phone call questioning their position supporting the ban and an adamant statement opposing their support?

Gabbard 202 225-4906   808 538-0233 (My bad: earlier D.C. phone number was actually the FAX number)

Takai  202 225-2726   808 541-2570

one2boost

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #29 on: March 05, 2015, 10:08:45 AM »
I just spent about $4 on postage on mailing letters to Gabbard, Schatz, Hirono and the BATF.  Hopefully the $5 will be worth it.

punaperson

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #30 on: March 05, 2015, 01:12:49 PM »
I just spent about $4 on postage on mailing letters to Gabbard, Schatz, Hirono and the BATF.  Hopefully the $5 will be worth it.
You can FAX your letter for free here: http://faxzero.com/fax_congress.php

I'm not sure if or how they "weight" emails vs. phone calls vs. FAXes vs. snail mail... but anything at least lets them know someone is watching.

That is the House page, at the very bottom of the page is the highlighted link for the Senate page. My .doc format wouldn't work, so I had to convert them into .pdf format and the site had no problem sending those. Also, all my long distance is included in the monthly cost of my phone service, so calling costs me nothing, except the exasperation of trying to explain to some staff member what I'm talking about as they are often clueless.

one2boost

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #31 on: March 05, 2015, 03:45:04 PM »
You can FAX your letter for free here: http://faxzero.com/fax_congress.php

I'm not sure if or how they "weight" emails vs. phone calls vs. FAXes vs. snail mail... but anything at least lets them know someone is watching.

That is the House page, at the very bottom of the page is the highlighted link for the Senate page. My .doc format wouldn't work, so I had to convert them into .pdf format and the site had no problem sending those. Also, all my long distance is included in the monthly cost of my phone service, so calling costs me nothing, except the exasperation of trying to explain to some staff member what I'm talking about as they are often clueless.

Mahalos for the link.  I will be sure to use it later. 

Each letter was the same 17 pages about this ammo ban issue.  To think someone had to read through 17 pages.  Then whip up some generic reply and mail it back to me as I requested a reply with their stance on the issue.  I also noted I will share/quote the reply to likeminded people.

mauidog

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #32 on: March 06, 2015, 11:43:28 AM »
EXCLUSIVE: Common AR-15 Green Tip Ammunition Already Banned in New ATF Regulation Guide

Quote
On Friday February 13 at 4:00 pm, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms released a proposal to ban commonly used M855 "green tip" AR-15
ammunition under the guise of law enforcement safety. The same day the proposal was released, on a Friday of a three day holiday weekend, ATF opened up a
shortened 30-day period for the public to submit comments about the new regulation.

But it turns out, ATF has been working on a ban of AR-15 "green-tip" ammunition for quite some time and has already issued the ban in its new, 2014 Regulation
Guide. For reference, ATF Regulation Guides come out approximately every ten years.

When you take a look at the 2005 ATF Regulation Guide, you'll see an exemption for AR-15 "green-tip" ammunition, which means it exempted from the definition
of "armor piercing" and therefore is legal on the federal level.

Quote
When you look at the last page of the new, most recent ATF 2014 Regulation Guide, which was published in January,
there is no longer an exemption for AR-15 "green-tip" ammunition.

Quote
ATF changed the law unilaterally, didn't tell anyone about it and has now put up a bogus comment period that means nothing. Because of these actions,
ATF and the White House have not only failed to follow the Administrative Procedure Act, but has gone around Congress to violate the Second Amendment rights of Americans.

So, what' next? ATF is going to have to explain why the change was made under the radar and will also have to explain what this means for people in possession
of "green-tip" ammunition after January 2015 when the new ATF Regulation Guide was published with the exemption missing. Is there no grandfathering period
for possession? When will manufactures be forced to stop producing? What does this mean for buyers and sellers? States are also going to have to find a way to
implement these regulations and define compliance under separate state ammunition possession laws
.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2015/03/06/exclusive-atf-has-already-banned-common-at15-green-tip-ammunition-n1966761
« Last Edit: March 06, 2015, 12:06:17 PM by mauidog »
An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.   -- Jeff Cooper

punaperson

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #33 on: March 06, 2015, 12:28:26 PM »
"No one is trying to take your guns away." Just the ammo.

mauidog

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #34 on: March 06, 2015, 12:49:11 PM »
Given the fact the ATF guides currently list Green Tip ammo as illegal armor piercing rounds, anyone selling, possessing, or manufacturing the ammo in the last 2 months is automatically guilty of a felony.

Good thing the permit application I signed this week requires I be indicted, waived indictment for, or convicted of a felony before answering "YES"!   :geekdanc:
An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.   -- Jeff Cooper

causa mortis

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #35 on: March 06, 2015, 01:15:18 PM »
This retroactive understanding of the law has just made felons out of probably hundreds of thousands of legal, law abiding gun owners. What kind of fucking banana republic law is this shit?!

I hope every single one of you Obama sycophantic ass sucking voters get yours in karmic payback for years to come. It's clowns like YOU that has allowed this lawless, dictatorial, Marxist thug the free rein in shredding the constitution, i.e., the Second Amendment and the Separation of Powers Clause.

causa mortis

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #36 on: March 06, 2015, 01:17:07 PM »
So, are any stores still going to sell them here? I'm sure OGC must've put in a restocking order prior to all this bullshit, right?
« Last Edit: March 06, 2015, 01:23:57 PM by causa mortis »

punaperson

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #37 on: March 06, 2015, 01:40:05 PM »
I emailed the Pavlich story to my LGS a few hours ago and he responded by saying he didn't believe possession would be illegal, as per previous bans of ammo, just the sale, after whatever the effective date is/was/will be. The "regulations", and the process for creating and implementing them, seem vague enough that they can pretty much not only make up any regulation they choose, but then also implement and enforce it whenever and however they choose. Again, governing with the consent of the governed?

causa mortis

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #38 on: March 06, 2015, 02:03:54 PM »
If it's just the selling being illegal, then would that encompass private sales between individuals after the ban date? I don't see how selling your OWN property could be illegal.

punaperson

Re: ATF plans to ban M855 again...
« Reply #39 on: March 06, 2015, 02:26:47 PM »
If it's just the selling being illegal, then would that encompass private sales between individuals after the ban date? I don't see how selling your OWN property could be illegal.
I asked the LGS owner about that and "gifting" and bringing material in in luggage from out of country, etc. Haven't heard back yet (not that he is an authority on the subject, but likely no one is).