AR-15 Ammo Ban Shows How Ignorant Liberals Are About Guns

Barack Obama and the ATF are in the news again with their attempt to ban the M855 projectile.  The popular cartridge can be found in 5.56x45mm or .223 rifles, most notably the AR-15. The ATF claims their intent is to protect law enforcement. Of course, facts and logic, not to mention liberty, are insufficient deterrents for the agency.

Currently, the ATF has a ban on armor-piercing rounds for handguns. The standard handgun round, like the small calibers used in most gun crime, are incapable of penetrating body armor. However, due to the higher velocities, most rifle projectiles could easily pierce the vests worn by officers. According to the existing ATF ban, M855 ball ammunition does not meet the material qualifications to be labeled “armor piercing”, nor is it constructed the same way. [RELATED: Anti-gun Democrats Have No Clue How Guns Work]

In light of this misleading nomenclature, the ATF claims the ammunition could be used in “small, concealable handguns”. What handgun are they referring to? That would be the Sig Sauer SB15 and other AR-15 pistol variants. With a minimum 8” barrel and full size buffer tube, I would hardly describe it as concealable. Other than that, there are no semi-automatic handguns that use the 5.56x45mm round.

Technical details aside, the ATF’s supposed intent to “protect law enforcement” lacks factual support and can be easily discredited. According to crime statistics, assault rifles were used in about 3% of gun crime. The ATF would have to mobilize resources, financed by yours truly, to ban a projectile used in a firearm that accounts for a meaningless amount of crime.

Their claim to protect law enforcement implies that law enforcement needs more protection. In fact, police officers are not even in the top ten deadliest jobs nor are they close to it. Twenty-seven police officers were feloniously killed in 2013, which is the lowest number in over 50 years. Even according to the FBI, violent crime is at an all-time low.

For some reason, the ATF is convinced officers need more protection while on the street. If the ATF wants to protect officers, perhaps they should focus on their suicide rate. In recent years, more officers committed suicide than were killed in the line of duty.

By virtue of being human, we all have the right to our bodies, which includes self-defense of those bodies. When self-defense is criminalized, the effective legal precedent implies “only the government can protect your body and decide how you do so”. Pundits often cite polls of how many people are opposed to guns in certain places, such as college campuses. As if other people should decide, or are qualified to, the arbitrary boundaries and means of self-defense. If someone attacks you, I highly doubt you’re going to wish you had less effective ammunition.

In spite of glaring statistics and inconsistent legalese, the ATF and Barack Obama remain steadfast in pursuit of their ban. Given this readily available information, they are either completely incompetent, motivated entirely by political relationships, or there is an underlying sinister intent. I am no conspiracy theorist, but I think it’s worth mentioning.

I do not want to become a felon simply for possessing something that has been legal for a long time. Like all bans, the State will use their forceful tactics to confiscate ammunition. Considering the history of civil disobedience from gun owners, I highly doubt any of us will be lining up to turn in our ammunition.

You can sign a petition to oppose the ATF ban on M855 here.

 

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
5 comments

Latest Stories

5 Comments

  • BiscuitKingofSouthDakota
    March 4, 2015, 12:56 pm

    “I do not want to become a felon simply for possessing something that has been legal for a long time.”

    You wouldn’t. The ammo wouldn’t be illegal to own. It would be illegal to import or new manufacture in the US for the civilian market. Either way, the proposed ban is stupid. It makes even less sense than the ban on importation of 7N6 ammo considering m855 doesn’t have a true steel core.

    REPLY
  • ZumbaZombie
    March 4, 2015, 2:08 pm

    I tried to have a reasonable discussion on my local newspapers web site and it’s unbelievably frustrating. The level of dense-ness regarding firearms by the anti-gun people is staggering. I might as well just go outside and beat my head against a tree. It shows how we (the gun lovers) failed on the educating the public. It’s one thing to send money to “2nd amendment” defender special interest groups, but if we don’t combat the woeful understanding in the public mindset the second they see an “assault weapon” on TV or a movie, the cause will eventually be doomed. More people should have the opportunity to handle a firearm and shoot including an AR15. Maybe there will be less opposition if they held real AR15 ammo in their hands instead of frightening pictures on news TV of “cop killer” bullets.

    REPLY
  • Hello, per the ATF legalese, possession of M855 would be illegal and a 3rd degree felony. Read their proposed ban in detail (cited in article). In specifically says that unlicensed possession would be a crime. There are some differing interpretations on those grounds, but, from what I gathered, it would be illegal.

    REPLY
  • Grant Phillips@ZumbaZombie
    March 6, 2015, 4:20 pm

    Hello – You are very correct to say it is next to impossible talking with anti-gun extremists. They invoke so many logical fallacies it’s almost hard to keep up with. Instead of convincing them they’re wrong or banging my head against a wall, I just ignore them entirely. They are a typical “loud minority” special interests group.

    That said, I find it much more productive to convince moderates or opinionated people to be pro-gun, or at least not be anti-gun. It’s a lot less frustrating and our passion for firearms certainly helps them see the light, or at least be on our side.

    REPLY
  • BiscuitKingofSouthDakota@Grant Phillips
    March 9, 2015, 2:20 pm

    Which of the links state that possession would be illegal? The text of the ATF proposal (which you have linked to in your article) says the exact opposite.

    The second link in this article, which is the one that points to the ATF’s “ATF FRAMEWORK FOR DETERMINING WHETHER
    CERTAIN PROJECTILES ARE “PRIMARILY INTENDED FOR SPORTING PURPOSES” WITHIN THE MEANING OF 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C)” states on page 15 the following:

    “ATF recognizes that this ammunition is widely available to the public. Because it is legally permissible to possess armor piercing ammunition under current law, withdrawing the exemption will not place individuals in criminal possession of armor piercing ammunition. However, with few exceptions, manufacturers will be unable to produce such armor piercing ammunition, importers will be unable to import such ammunition, and manufacturers and importers will be prohibited from selling or distributing the ammunition. ATF is specifically soliciting comments on how it can best implement withdrawal of this exemption while minimizing disruption to the ammunition and firearm industry and maximizing officer safety.”

    Also, the LEOPA of 1985 states armor-piercing ammunition earns you a mandatory 5+ years if used/carried during the commission of a violent crime. There is no crime for simple possession of ammunition that has been defined as armor-piercing.

    REPLY
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
LIVE NOW! CLICK TO VIEW.
CURRENTLY OFFLINE