Obama to ban bullets by executive action, threatens top-selling AR-15 rifle

It’s starting.

As promised, President Obama is using executive actions to impose gun control on the nation, targeting the top-selling rifle in the country, the AR-15 style semi-automatic, with a ban on one of the most-used AR bullets by sportsmen and target shooters.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives this month revealed that it is proposing to put the ban on 5.56mm ammo on a fast track, immediately driving up the price of the bullets and prompting retailers, including the huge outdoors company Cabela’s, to urge sportsmen to urge Congress to stop the president.

Wednesday night, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, stepped in with a critical letter to the bureau demanding it explain the surprise and abrupt bullet ban. The letter is shown below.

The National Rifle Association, which is working with Goodlatte to gather co-signers, told Secrets that 30 House members have already co-signed the letter and Goodlatte and the NRA are hoping to get a total of 100 fast.

"The Obama administration was unable to ban America's most popular sporting rifle through the legislative process, so now it's trying to ban commonly owned and used ammunition through regulation," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA-ILA, the group's policy and lobby shop. "The NRA and our tens of millions of supporters across the country will fight to stop President Obama's latest attack on our Second Amendment freedoms."

At issue is so-called “armor-piercing” ammunition, an exemption for those bullets mostly used for sport by AR-15 owners, and the recent popularity of pistol-style ARs that use the ammo.

The inexpensive 5.56 M885 ammo, commonly called green tips, have been exempt for years, as have higher caliber ammunition that also easily pierces the type of soft armor worn by police, because it’s mostly used by target shooters, not criminals.

But now BATFE says that since the bullets can be used in semi-automatic handguns they pose a threat to police and must be banned from production, sale and use. But, as Goodlatte noted, offered no proof. Federal agencies will still be allowed to buy the ammo.

“This round is amongst the most commonly used in the most popular rifle design in America, the AR-15. Millions upon millions of M855 rounds have been sold and used in the U.S., yet ATF has not even alleged — much less offered evidence — that even one such round has ever been fired from a handgun at a police officer,” said Goodlatte’s letter.

Even some police don’t buy the administration’s claim. “Criminals aren't going to go out and buy a $1,000 AR pistol,” Brent Ball, owner of 417 Guns in Springfield, Mo., and a 17-year veteran police officer told the Springfield News-Leader. “As a police officer I'm not worried about AR pistols because you can see them. It's the small gun in a guy's hand you can't see that kills you.”

Many see the bullet ban as an assault on the AR-15 and Obama’s back-door bid to end production and sale.

“We are concerned,” said Justin Anderson with Hyatt Gun Shop in Charlotte, N.C., one of the nation’s top sellers of AR-15 style rifles. “Frankly, we're always concerned when the government uses back-door methods to impose quasi-gun control.”

Groups like the National Shooting Sports Foundation suggest that under BATFE’s new rule, other calibers like popular deer hunting .308 bullets could be banned because they also are used in AR-15s, some of which can be turned into pistol-style guns. “This will have a detrimental effect on hunting nationwide,” said the group.

Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at [email protected].

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2560750 

I'm a little confused by this. I'm cool with being upset with 5.56 ammo being banned (if it really is being banned by the ATF), but I don't understand what this has to do with Obama banning bullets by executive order. Is there an executive order he signed telling the ATF to ban the 5.56 ammo?

Here's the ATF notice on the topic:
http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Library/Notices/atf_framework_for_determining_whether_certain_projectiles_are_primarily_intended_for_sporting_purposes.pdf 

Looks like the 5.56 was technically "banned" a long time ago but has been allowed as an exempted ammunition. The ATF wants to remove the exemption because manufacturers have started producing multi-shot handguns in that caliber, the rationale behind the exemption had been that these didn't exist in 1986. Seems like a simple procedural item. If someone starts making multi-shot handguns in 30-06 they'll remove that exemption as well. Not sure how this is getting pinned on Obama necessarily.

Damn that Kenyan born Muslim communist!!!!!!!!!!

That Bassard..!! 😠

Victor you're out of your league .


They're using the pistol exemption wrongly and on purpose. The whole pistol ammo ban is asanine, ANY rifle cartridge with ANY bullet is more armor piercing than ANY pistol round (except MAYBE the FN 5.7). ARs are available without a butt stock and are extremely unruly to fire comfortably or remotely accurately. And that weapon has ZERO extra police deaths associated with it.

You're missing the trees through the woods.

Maybe he isn't using a butt stock and his aim is off.

Have I argued against that at all?

I'm just asking why the article is pinning this on Obama. That ammo was originally part of the 1986 ban, it apparently was provided a "sporting use" exemption for specific reasons. Their position in the paper is that there are now mass-market guns which use that ammo and don't fit under "sporting use", so the exemption doesn't stand. That's their position. I haven't stated whether the position is a good one or not. I do see a logical consistency to it (this is not the same as agreeing to it).

I just find it funny that this is being advertised as an "executive order" when I see no reference to such.

Oh he's using the butt stock!

:-"

freak

ATF Tries to Ban Common Rifle Ammo As "Armor-Piercing" Despite Its Own Statutory Definition
Gun rights community sees a disturbing ongoing crackdown on common ammo availability via ATF fiat.
Brian Doherty|Feb. 25, 2015 8:36 pm

Frank Miniter at Forbes' website has a good summation of a controversial new move by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms to ban further production and sale of some very common rifle ammo, by classifying it as "armor-piercing," something that, by statutory definition at least, it is not.

NRA-ILANRA-ILA

Excerpts:

The ATF says it wants to ban M855 ball ammunition, a .223 (or 5.56 mm) rifle bullet that has been used by American citizens for decades. The ATF says it wants to ban this popular bullet because it is “armor piercing.”

The law at the basis of this debate is the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA). As amended, the GCA prohibits the import, manufacture and distribution of “armor piercing ammunition” as defined by a few terms Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice (DOJ) is attempting to broaden.

The definition for what constitutes “armor piercing” reads: “a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely … from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.”

Now, to be as nitpicky as the law, the M855 ball ammunition the ATF wants to ban as “armor piercing” doesn’t have a core made of the metals listed in what legally makes a bullet “armor piercing.” The M855 actually has a lead core with a steel tip. Also, the M855 is traditionally a rifle cartridge and the ban only covers handgun ammunition. The DOJ argues this doesn’t stop them because the law stipulates they can ban a bullet that “may be used in a handgun.” And, after all, any cartridge may be used in a handgun.

The ATF allows a "sporting exemption" for certain ammo that would otherwise be legally considered armor-piercing, but they claim because now weapons they consider more handgun than rifle can or are using the same ammo, that they are withdrawing that exemption for the M855.

ATF acknowledges so many citizens who thought they were being law-abiding have this ammo, so mere possession will not be illegal going forward if this becomes settled policy, but making, importing, or selling it will be verboten. (GunsSavesLives website calls the ammo "arguably" the second most popular for AR-15s in the U.S.)

The NRA's action page about these new regs, which are still open for public comment; the NRA tells you exactly how to make your voice heard in the process by March 16.

Bob Owens at the Bearing Arms site explains in further detail why M855 ammo is not, by ATF's own definition, bannable as "armor-piercing," mostly because it is mostly made of lead. Because of this, a careful reader could see the ATF's new proposed "framework" for armor-piercing to be directly contradicting itself. On page one, it says:

It is important to note that only projectiles that meet the statutory definition of “armor piercing” – i.e., those made out of the specific listed materials that may be used in a handgun – are subject to the statutory restrictions. As a result, manufacturers are, and will continue to be, free to manufacture projectiles from non-restricted materials, completely independent of the application of this framework or any exemptions.

Yet later, even though that seems to exclude M855s made mostly of lead, the directive declares:

Some ammunition that was previously exempted as “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes,” specifically 5.56mm constituent projectiles of SS109 and M855 cartridges, will again be regulated as “armor piercing ammunition.” Except as provided by law, no person may manufacture or import such ammunition, and manufacturers or importers may not sell or deliver such ammunition.

Armor-piercing bullets are thus, by statutory definition, not made of lead, and ATF wants to control them more stringently moving forward, even ones they just want to declare armor-piercing despite being made of lead. At the same time, lead ammo is also a target of government bans on the state level. Hmm. Hard to use those guns without readily available ammunition.

By your comments I guess it's safe to assume that Obama has nothing to do with this even though he has been very vocal regarding his support for far reaching gun control legislation.

But, you're correct. It's impossible to trace this back to him. Kinda like we know he takes a dump every now and then. He probably even wipes his azz but, we can't prove it.

I'm guessing there's an azz-wiping czar... 😟

he may have one of those spray toilet thingies

Victor will also deny that the DOJ headed up by Obamas buddy also doesn't get his marching orders from Barry. And although it probably cannot be proven both are no doubt receiving $$$ from the Bloomburg anti gun group.

And as far as Obama wiping his ass.....he doesn't have to he has plenty of his water carriers to do that for him.

I think we all KNEW when it became apparent that Americans ARE NOT GIVING UP THEIR GUNS they would then go after ammunition!!!!! The closing of the LAST lead smelting plant in the U.S. should have been a BIG indication.

Gotta be a chitty job.

maybe we should make ammo out of something other than lead.

Dude... did you even read the statement I posted from the ATF?



Your entire article is irrelevant, they're just trying to get you riled up.

How is it impossible to trace an "Executive Order"??? They're listed. Come on Anthony, the article clearly states as its position that obama is using Executive orders to take away your 5.56 ammo.

Now we find that there is no Executive Order. That this is a removal of an exemption for banning 5.56 made from specific material.

I'm cool if you are upset they're banning certain 5.56. I think you should be allowed to buy any ammo you want, and put it in any gun you want. But the article is clearly using specific words "Obama" "Executive order" to get you riled up, even if they aren't true.

I'm still looking for 22LR - and at a reasonable cost.