• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

5.56 ammo to sky rocket in price

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,188
Location
northern wis
‎For those of you who OC AR pistols



http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3257524/posts


2‎/‎14‎/‎2015‎ ‎11‎:‎38‎:‎50‎ ‎AM · by Reverend Saltine · 38 replies
NRAila.org ^ | February 14, 2015 | NRA

In a move clearly intended by the Obama Administration to suppress the acquisition, ownership and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives unexpectedly announced today that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” The decision continues Obama’s use of his executive authority to impose gun control restrictions and bypass Congress. It isn’t even the third week of February, and the BATFE has already taken three major executive actions on gun control. First, it was a major change to what activities constitute regulated “manufacturing”...
 

Whitney

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
435
Location
Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
M885 Ball is not the only ammo subject to this interpretation.

I have not seen too much discusion of the BATF move to ban M885 Ball ammunition. I am posting below my comments (unedited/unsent) to BATF on this issue. Perhaps it will be useful for others who wish to comment.
~Whitney

Links provided for resources.
Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide — 2014 Edition

BATF Framework / Premise for Ban

------------------------------------------------------
The ATF proposed ban of M855 ball ammunition is not consistent with 18 USC 921(a) 17C, the determination is based on the premise said ammunition can be used in a handgun that is other than single shot. There seems to be quite a bit of semantics surrounding the definition which could lead to some very unintended consequences.

This ammunition is popular because it is accurate and widely available, yet according to ARMY manual TM 43-0001-27, M855 ball ammunition is designed for use in the following applications; Machine Gun, 5.56mm, M249E1; and Rifle, 5.56mm, M16A2. This cartridge is intended for use against personnel and unarmored targets. Clearly the cartridge was never intended to be used for “sporting purposes” yet many modern cartridge larger than .22 rim fire has the potential energy to penetrate a protective vest.

The only limiting factor here is the attorney general has not deemed the AR-10 to be in the same field of firearms as the AR-15. It is completely possible to construct a pistol from the AR-10 platform and fire the aforementioned 30 caliber rifle cartridges. Firearms manufacturer Sig Sauer has developed a .308 Winchester pistol that utilizes the controversial stabilizing brace. This pistol is certainly capable of firing the M2AP cartridges that purportedly will remain exempt.

The popular .30 caliber M2 ball ammunition developed for use against personnel or unarmored targets very closely resembles many modern hunting and target projectiles. Compared using the ARMY cartridge specifications 50 grains IMR 4895 with 160 grain projectile equates to a velocity of 2740 feet per second with a chamber pressure of 50,000 psi. This is very close to the popular 30-06 and .308 loads used in the course of hunting and target shooting.

The .30 caliber M72 ball ammunition is considered match ammo yet it is also capable of penetrating of a protective vest when fired from a handgun.

Will the attorney general see fit to ban all .30 caliber ammunition because it has the potential to penetrate a vest?

Projectiles used in the M24 ball ammunition for .22 rim fire exceed the seemingly arbitrary rim fire limit set by BATF. This cartridge was developed for Sub-caliber Rifle M2A1; Caliber .22 Rifle; Remington Models 40X and M513T; Steven's Model 416-2; Winchester Models 52 and 75; Machine Gun Trainers M3 and M4; pistols for gallery practice and training purposes. The cartridge is intended for use against small game for survival purposes. Under the framework of this proposal even this rim fire cartridge would be banned. Further the CCI V-max WMR cartridges meet the BATF framework and still have the potential to penetrate a vest. AMT, Keltec, and Excel all sell semiautomatic pistols that fire the WMR cartridges and still the WMR is not banned.

Instead of infringing on the liberties of otherwise law-abiding individuals by banning this ammunition why don't we prosecute people who shoot cops with it. That is of course being the premise for the ban in the first place.
 
Last edited:

HPmatt

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
1,459
Location
Dallas
Breitbart picked it up

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/15/backdoor-gun-control-obamas-atf-proposes-ar-15-ammo-ban/

'The ATF’s notice makes clear the agency will be accepting “comments for 30 days” prior to finalizing ban. ATF says those comments will be received until March 16, 2015 at APAComments@atf.gov or via snail mail addressed to: Denise Brown, Mailstop 6N-602, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226: ATTN: AP Ammo Comments.'

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

sota

New member
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
14
Location
NJ
And the government again manages to cause another ammo crisis.
ATF guy: *ring* Hey cousin! how's it going.
ammo dealer: not so good. we over-ordered on M855 last month and the boss is PISSED.
ATF guy: huh. maybe I can do something about that. gimme a couple days.
ammo dealer: thanks! you're best!
 

OC4me

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
758
Location
Northwest Kent County, Michigan
The ATF Comment Period is now Open. Time to make your views known loud and clear, yet professionally.

APAComments@atf.gov

I've since been advised from another gun group that we should include our name and address in the comments send to the BATFE about their attempt to ban M855 ammunition.

If you forgot, resend the email again with your name and address this time.f

We can fight this!
 
Last edited:

xd shooter

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
337
Location
usa
Looks like I ordered one of the last 1000 rd boxes from CTD.... I hated to do it, but when the ATF piped up, I immediately checked price and availability...

I'm also reloading, but with 55 gn hornady bullets..
 

Kopis

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
674
Location
Nashville, TN
The ATF probably opened a comment section for their own amusement.

I noticed regular 223/556 is jumping up too. Crazy. I just like plinking but it's getting harder.
 

Kopis

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
674
Location
Nashville, TN
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has backed away from what first appeared to be an immediate plan to ban a popular type of ammunition, and now claims that some confusion was caused by a “publishing mistake.”
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,338
Location
Nevada
No. Their admitted "publishing error" is that they already released the document that officially reflects the change that is only now "pending comment." When you think about how long it takes for them to get around to changing a document, it shows how long they've been planning this covert "public process."
 

Kopis

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
674
Location
Nashville, TN
No. Their admitted "publishing error" is that they already released the document that officially reflects the change that is only now "pending comment." When you think about how long it takes for them to get around to changing a document, it shows how long they've been planning this covert "public process."
indeed, that article was updated later to reflect what you said. Comments are just for their amusement.
 

beebobby

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2008
Messages
847
Location
, ,
Because HPs just don't cause enough damage. How are folks supposed to overthrow the govt. without 855s? You can't even defend yourself without them. The NRA knows how to preach to the sheeple to get them to buy what they are pushing (this month). Good work sheeple.
 
Last edited:
Top