Obama to ban bullets by executive action

Yeah I like the 308, just so costly.

 

I draw some thoughts from all of this. A few pages back, Brewskier quoted the section of the law that defines armor piercing bullets, and indicates that M855 does not fit the definition.
I suspect that the biggest reason for this is because the Gov. would rather destroy military surplus stocks than make them available to the public. As some of us old people recall, the usual thing to do is to dump surplus ammo on the grateful civvie market. This has been SOP since the invention of brass cased military ammo.
I find it odd that solid copper bullets are included in the definition of "armor piercing". Solid copper bullets have been gaining popularity, esp. since Queerlyfornia has banned lead core ammo in places where it threatens the Condor. DOD has adopted a new solid copper bullet for environmental goodness. I think it's basically the same size and shape as the current 62 gr. bullet, but the new one weights just 46 gr., because copper is less dense than lead.
But calling solid copper bullets "armor piercing" is a harbinger for future abuses of our rights.
Copper is the logical alternative to lead. When I first got curious about less toxic replacements for lead, I studied this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_table_%28large_version%29
This is quite a fascinating piece of work. If you click on any of the element symbols, you go to the wiki page about that element. Research shows us that Bismuth is just one increment in density from lead, is less toxic, and melts at a low enough temp. to be cast at home. Trouble is that Bismuth is a by product of lead smelting, and the supply is quite limited, so the price is high. America no longer has any lead smelters, so Bismuth can only be had from foreign sources.
Go through the other alternatives, and you end up at Copper. We make a LOT of it here. It will NEVER run out. Several bullet makers already specialize in Copper bullets. Drawbacks are: each bullet has to be machined, since the melting point is so high that bullets can't be cast. Copper is much less dense than lead, so ballistic performance falls off pretty quick. BATFE has already ruled that solid copper bullets can be banned as "armor piercing".
This issue really breaches an important crossroads for American gun owners. We need to move to Copper for environmental reasons. Our own Gov. is trying to make that illegal. It's a crossroad because the military is looking to move away from conventional ammunition that uses a brass case to hold the cartridge components together and launch a projectile. Civilians will most likely NOT be allowed to purchase and own the next generation of military weapons, which will likely be laser or some kind of particle beam. In the next decade or so, conventional, traditional firearms will be the domain of civilians.
This attempted ban on M855 is just the beginning. We must fight to preserve our 2A rights at every turn, because there are many in Gov. who want to have the People disarmed by the time the next Gen. of military weapons become common issue.

 

Just bought about 6 boxes of this stuff. Not much, but better than nothing. Would buy more if it wasn't tax time.

 

Is this a lie? http://www.nola.com/outdoors/index.ssf/2015/02/obama_administration_seeks_to.html

Or is this a lie? http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2560750

Since this piece of America-hating (*)(*)(*)(*) was first installed in the Presidency, we've heard lots of bald-faced LIES from him and his regime... so who do we trust..? Obama, or the National Rifle Association? I believe NOTHING that Obama says except when he promises to change the United States into something that it never was before, and, according to the Constitution of the United States, should never be!

It should not be up to any president (or any of his toady ass-kissers) to deny lawful citizens the RIGHT to have access to, purchase, and own ammunition for lawful firearms. PERIOD. What hyperlib-infested (*)(*)(*)(*)-hole did you guys on the Left explore to even find a thing as thoroughly bad as Barack Obama...?

 

Yes, it's a lie. Here's the headline on the article: Obama administration seeks to ban AR-15 ammunition The ban is only for one particular type of ammo, not all ammunition suitable for the AR15. So, it's a lie.

Yeah, that's worse than the first one you posted. Here's their headline: Obama to ban bullets by executive action, threatens top-selling AR-15 rifle

It's not "executive action", it will be an ATF regulation if approved by the Attorney General. I should also point out that this is allowed by law.

BTW - Really nice rant. Worthless, of course, and full of silliness, but the outrage was definitely there.

 

Who the hell do you think they get their orders from? That's right, the dirt bag mother(*)(*)(*)(*)er POS Obama!

 

They'll just believe the lie, and go around yelling about it.

Fearmongering and Obamahate are their natural environment.

 

The BATFE is a division of the DOJ, which is run by Holder, who answers to Obama.

Watching you guys try and shield Obama from this is laughable. Why not do you usual "na na na na na, Obama got his way" type gloating? He couldn't ban AR15's like he wanted to, so "regulating" AR15 ammo is the next best thing. Progressives are probably thrilled about this.

 

First, that wasn't the point of my post. I responded to the question, "is this a lie?", and in both cases the answers were "yes". Secondly, all you have to back your assertion that Obama directed them to do this is your fevered imagination and totally bereft of any factual basis.

 

Get your head out of your fecal factory, there is no justifiable reason to do this at all to support ATF's claim this will make police safer. They are being directed by Obama, things don't just happen of this magnitude that will affect millions without his say so. Wake up!

 

Okay. That is your theory. Doesn't change the fact that you have no evidence to support it.

 

If you had bothered to read the link I gave you, instead of tapping back into your fantasy world, you would have noticed this:

The proposal by the A.T.F. to reclassify the rifle ammunition started more than three years ago, before the Newtown shootings, and included meetings with members of the firearms industry, advocacy groups and law enforcement officials. After the 30-day comment period expires on March 13, the attorney general will have to make a final decision, officials said...

But it has been a priority for law enforcement groups that have long pushed for restrictions on armor-piercing bullets.

“We understand why law enforcement has always been concerned about the threat of armor-piercing bullets,” said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “We hope any new regulations will appropriately reflect the priority of keeping our nation’s law enforcement officers safe.”

Gun control organizations said police officers had pushed for the new rule because the bullets can easily pierce bulletproof vests and other armor that are worn almost exclusively by law enforcement personnel. Handguns are considered more dangerous to the police because they are easier to conceal and are more often used in crimes.

 

Finish the quote,

"Gun control organizations said police officers had pushed for the new rule because the bullets can easily pierce bulletproof vests and other armor that are worn almost exclusively by law enforcement personnel. Handguns are considered more dangerous to the police because they are easier to conceal and are more often used in crimes. But gun rights advocates said that the ammunition being targeted was no more lethal than traditional rifle bullets, made only of lead, which they said could also pierce bulletproof vests."

“Doing this is not advancing public safety,” Mr. Keane said. “You are talking about millions and millions and millions of rounds of ammunition that is used every year by law-abiding citizens for target shooting.”

Mr. Keane said the A.T.F. had been holding up action for months on requests from manufacturers to produce other similar kinds of bullets.

But Mr. Keane said his group had urged the A.T.F. to extend the public comment period on the proposed rule by 90 days to give gun rights advocates more time to express their views.

Representative Robert W. Goodlatte, Republican of Virginia and the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, urged the agency to reconsider the rule.

“Millions upon millions of M855 rounds have been sold and used in the U.S., yet A.T.F. has not even alleged, much less offered evidence, that even one such round has ever been fired from a handgun at a police officer,” Mr. Goodlatte writes in a letter to the agency’s director, B. Todd Jones, to be sent this week.

So what's the justification for this particular M855 steel core ammo instead of the M193 ammo too? Where is ATF's ballistics testing that shows a 62gr steel core M855 round fired from a 7.5" barreled AR-15 pistol that penetrates type 2 body armor?

Don't be fooled people, if its proven the M855 ammo will pierce type to body armor and so will M193 ammo also commonly used by millions, then what's to stop ATF from banning the last remaining ammo M193 used for the AR-15 rifle. So for those who don't care about the M855, your ammo the M193 is next, then what are you going to shoot out of your AR-15s?

 

if they want to put a ban on "cop killer" ammo the FN 5.7×28mm would be the first one on the ban list not .223 or .308. As usual politicians don't know squat about what they are talking about and the low info press and public even less. I would not put it past retailers and manufactures using this as a price bump. .22 rimfire plinking ammo has been very difficult to get ever since Newtown and this "rumor' just pushed it back into the impossible to find catagory

 

So where is your evidence that the BATFE has executive authority to ban any ammo?

 

Gee, I wonder what Holder is going to decide?

 

Define "armor" and "piercing" in precise, technical terms.

 

Watching you guys go around and try to ascribe every decision ever made by the Federal government directly to an Executive Order from the President (without any evidence) is evem more silly.

And yes, there's no real reason why people should be going around with AR 15's.

 

Where do they get off putting a ban on .223 caliber rifle ammunition? Who told Obama or anybody else that they can do that? This isn't ammo for a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing 155 millimeter howitzer! This is total bull(*)(*)(*)(*) and part of an ongoing Democrat government initiative to ban all ammunition, since they can't ban the guns themselves.

 

The OP says executive action, not executive order like you falsely assert. And yes, there is a difference. Learn about it.

In your biased and subjective opinion. There's actually many reasons. There's no reason why people should go around having gay sex, yet I don't see you trying to ban that.

 

I made no such claim. However, if it's true that it's the BATFE that's doing it, that would be pretty good evidence that they have the authority to do it.

 

So is it cool around here to lie in thread titles? Doesn't seem like something I would want going on if I ran a political message board.

 

Where is the lie?

 

What? look at the thread title. It makes only one assertion. This assertion isn't true. Therefore, I feel comfortable calling it a lie. Understand now?

 

You are aware that the BATF has been politicized by the Obama administration.

Remember "Fast and Furious" ?

Just about every executive branch of government has been politicized under the Obama administration. Even the uniform branches of the military is being politicized by embedding political officers with in the chain of command and purging the officers corps and replacing them with yes men.

All current federal gun laws were written by Congress not the BATF or any other President in the past. Only Congress is authorized by the Constitution to write our laws.

Like the office of POTUS, the BATF is suppose to enforce the laws that are on the books, not make them up or enforce those they approve of and not to enforce those they don't like. As we see, Obama ignores the Constitution, bypasses Congress and legislates from the Oval Office.

If Obama wanted to legislate and write the nations laws, he should have stayed in the Senate.