Taurus Firearm Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,546 Posts
Very informative. Love Jerry Miculek
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
458 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I don't understand this new proposed ban on SS109 ammo. I am not very familiar with ARs or the ammo they shoot. I know I would love to have one. So the ATFE wants to ban the sale of this ammo to citizens even though they know that there are much more effective rounds available? They also know that the U.S. military put this particular round aside for more effective rounds? Aren't most rounds shot from any high powered rifle effective at penetrating soft body armor? So, if they want to ban the SS109 round, that could open the doors to banning all rifle rounds since most can penetrate soft armor. Doesn't make sense to me, but like I mentioned, I'm not really rifle savvy. Although next year in my state many rifle calibers are going to be legalized for deer hunting and I plan on getting some type. I see this proposed ban on SS109 as another way of targeting gun owners by banning a cheap and readily available type of ammo therefore making the price of other just as "deadly" ammo skyrocket.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,276 Posts
Very informative indeed. ......But, I don't love him!:D:D:p:p I do like to hear and watch him, I'm just not light in the loafers!:icon_ nono:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,915 Posts
I don't understand this new proposed ban on SS109 ammo. I am not very familiar with ARs or the ammo they shoot. I know I would love to have one. So the ATFE wants to ban the sale of this ammo to citizens even though they know that there are much more effective rounds available? They also know that the U.S. military put this particular round aside for more effective rounds? Aren't most rounds shot from any high powered rifle effective at penetrating soft body armor? So, if they want to ban the SS109 round, that could open the doors to banning all rifle rounds since most can penetrate soft armor. Doesn't make sense to me, but like I mentioned, I'm not really rifle savvy. Although next year in my state many rifle calibers are going to be legalized for deer hunting and I plan on getting some type. I see this proposed ban on SS109 as another way of targeting gun owners by banning a cheap and readily available type of ammo therefore making the price of other just as "deadly" ammo skyrocket.
I don't know anything about ARs, but listening to Jerry, I understand this: knowledge is power, and the people who want to ban this ammo lack the former but have the latter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,085 Posts
I don't understand this new proposed ban on SS109 ammo. I am not very familiar with ARs or the ammo they shoot. I know I would love to have one. So the ATFE wants to ban the sale of this ammo to citizens even though they know that there are much more effective rounds available? They also know that the U.S. military put this particular round aside for more effective rounds? Aren't most rounds shot from any high powered rifle effective at penetrating soft body armor? So, if they want to ban the SS109 round, that could open the doors to banning all rifle rounds since most can penetrate soft armor. Doesn't make sense to me, but like I mentioned, I'm not really rifle savvy. Although next year in my state many rifle calibers are going to be legalized for deer hunting and I plan on getting some type. I see this proposed ban on SS109 as another way of targeting gun owners by banning a cheap and readily available type of ammo therefore making the price of other just as "deadly" ammo skyrocket.
Banning this ammo opens the door to ban ANY rifle round that COULD be fired from a pistol (the backbone of the BATFE's argument) — start with ALL variants of .223/5.56 and run from there.

Public Comments Can Sway This Change!

ATF will carefully consider all comments, as appropriate, received on or before March 16, 2015, and will give comments received after that date the same consideration if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or before March 16, 2015. ATF will not acknowledge receipt of comments. Submit comments in any of three ways (but do not submit the same comments multiple times or by more than one method):

ATF email: [email protected]

Fax: (202) 648-9741.

Mail: 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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,283 Posts
You better hope nobody designs a 30-06 handgun! Or any other rifle caliber that has AP ammo available.
Anybody for a .50 BMG semi-auto pistol?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,861 Posts
You better hope nobody designs a 30-06 handgun! Or any other rifle caliber that has AP ammo available.
Anybody for a .50 BMG semi-auto pistol?

Magnum Research Lone Eagle [Single Shot & Other Pistols]:
Magnum Research is best know for their Desert Eagle line of automatic pistols but they also make the Lone Eagle, which is a single shot pistol which uses mostly rifle calibers. The Lone Eagle is primarily designed for hunting but in a role playing game environment would make a excellent sniper weapon as well. Magnum Research also produces a smaller aitomatic pistol and a hunting rifle design.

The Lone Eagle is designed starting from a polymer stock which then can have a variety of different barrels, sights,and scopes added to the weapon. The weapon can be quickly broken down and barrels can be switched quickly. The barrel is constructed from Military spec Chrome MolyVanadium. The weapon's barrel is available in a variety of different calibers including .22 Hornet, .223 Remington, .22/250 Remington, .243 Winchester., 7mm-08 Remington, 7mm B.R., .30-30 Winchester, 7.62 x 39, .308 Winchester, .30-06 Springfield, .357 Maximum, .358 Winchester, .35 Remington, .44 Magnum, and .444 Marlin. The weapon is available with or without Muzzle Breaks and in matte black or chrome.

Weight: 4.19 lb (1.90 kg) to 4.44 lb (2.01 kg) - Depending on caliber.
Caliber: .22 Hornet, .223 Rem., .22/250 Rem., .243 Win., 7mm-08 Rem., 7mm B.R., .30-30 Win., 7.62 x 39, .308 Win., .30-06 Sprfld, .357 Maximum, .358 Win., .35 Rem., .44 Magnum, and .444 Marlin
Barrel Length: 15.125 inches (38.42 cm).
Overall Length: 15.125 inches (38.42 cm).
Action:Single Shot.
Range: 880 feet (268 meters).
Payload:One shot.
Cost: Foundation Grip Costs $120. Each Barrel action costs $290 black / $320 chrome without Muzzle brakes or $370 black / $400 chrome with Muzzle brakes. A barrel must be purchased for each caliber.
Made in: USA.
Special: Very strong and dependable. Very accurate, and is made in powerful large calibers.
Magnum_Lone_Eagle.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sekol

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,283 Posts
How many of those calibers, except for 30-06 M2 have actual designated AP ammo?
P.S. Bet that pistol is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

P.P.S. Aren't single shot pistols that can shoot AP exempt?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,861 Posts
How many of those calibers, except for 30-06 M2 have actual designated AP ammo?
P.S. Bet that pistol is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

P.P.S. Aren't single shot pistols that can shoot AP exempt?
How much you betting? easy to find used $5-600. they are inexpensive.


On your pps... you still think obumna gives a flying monkey splat about what the law says? the current law already exempts the ammo they want to ban!
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
22,061 Posts
There are those in the government who would prefer then never miss any opportunity to ban anything related to firearms. They see it as one more bite out of the elephant that is the Second Amendment in today's America.

In any reasonable agency, the spate of recent court decisions establishing the second amendment as defending the people's right to defend themselves would lead that agency to scrub all their "sporting purposes" BS regulations. Have we seen such a scrub? No, we have not.


Having said all that, the previous poster who said "be polite!" is spot on. The regulators do listen, but if you sound angry and (therefore) irrational, whatever you're attempting to communicate will be greatly diluted or lost. Write or call, but be as polite as possible.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
22,061 Posts
Here's what I just sent to the ATF email address:

*****************************

Dear ATF personnel,


I am writing to oppose the proposed ban of commonly used .223 ammunition. The background information posted by the ATF on this issue states that "By the late 1970’s, however, law enforcement organizations began to voice concern that armor piercing ammunition was readily available to the general public and posed extreme safety risks to police officers when used by criminals."


No such extreme risk has ever materialized. Of 126 officer fatalities in 2014, only 47 were caused by criminals using guns. Other causes were responsible for nearly twice as many deaths. This proposed ban is not necessary to protect the valuable lives of the men and women of law enforcement. On the contrary, years of recent experience show that well-armed civilians are a valuable aid to law enforcement. The officers I know personally are very supportive of the armed, law-abiding civilian. That fact is entirely overlooked by your background information, which states "The application of the “sporting purposes” exemption must be consistent with the goals of the statute: to protect law enforcement officers. That is, the Attorney General4 must determine that a specific type of armor piercing projectile does not pose a significant threat to law enforcement officers because the projectile at issue is “primarily intended” for use in
shooting sports, and is therefore unlikely to be encountered by law enforcement officers on the streets." This statement is logical only if officers never encounter any armed civilians who are not criminals. Why does the ATF assume that officers will only encounter armed criminals? Can the ATF see that officers have, in fact, been aided on many occasions by law-abiding citizens who keep and bear arms? Will the protection of those officers and those law-abiding citizens be furthered by banning this ammunition?


Furthermore, the outdated idea of requiring "sporting purposes" for firearms is completely at odds with the bill of rights, common sense, and the overwhelming message of recent high court cases regarding the second amendment. The second amendment is not about sports. It is about defense of the population, against crime or governmental tyranny. As a federal agency, the ATF must abide by the laws that govern it's field of responsibility. But the ATF must also set priorities. Instead of pursuing the idea of banning this ammunition, would not the public and police interests' be better served by more aggressive pursuit of felons who have been caught by the NICS?


Thank you for your consideration of my remarks. I am sure all ATF personnel take the same oath I have taken several times; to support and defend the constitution of the United States.


Sincerely,
 

·
Supporting SuperModerator
Joined
·
14,886 Posts
Here's what I just sent to the ATF email address:

*****************************

Dear ATF personnel,


I am writing to oppose the proposed ban of commonly used .223 ammunition. The background information posted by the ATF on this issue states that "By the late 1970’s, however, law enforcement organizations began to voice concern that armor piercing ammunition was readily available to the general public and posed extreme safety risks to police officers when used by criminals."


No such extreme risk has ever materialized. Of 126 officer fatalities in 2014, only 47 were caused by criminals using guns. Other causes were responsible for nearly twice as many deaths. This proposed ban is not necessary to protect the valuable lives of the men and women of law enforcement. On the contrary, years of recent experience show that well-armed civilians are a valuable aid to law enforcement. The officers I know personally are very supportive of the armed, law-abiding civilian. That fact is entirely overlooked by your background information, which states "The application of the “sporting purposes” exemption must be consistent with the goals of the statute: to protect law enforcement officers. That is, the Attorney General4 must determine that a specific type of armor piercing projectile does not pose a significant threat to law enforcement officers because the projectile at issue is “primarily intended” for use in
shooting sports, and is therefore unlikely to be encountered by law enforcement officers on the streets." This statement is logical only if officers never encounter any armed civilians who are not criminals. Why does the ATF assume that officers will only encounter armed criminals? Can the ATF see that officers have, in fact, been aided on many occasions by law-abiding citizens who keep and bear arms? Will the protection of those officers and those law-abiding citizens be furthered by banning this ammunition?


Furthermore, the outdated idea of requiring "sporting purposes" for firearms is completely at odds with the bill of rights, common sense, and the overwhelming message of recent high court cases regarding the second amendment. The second amendment is not about sports. It is about defense of the population, against crime or governmental tyranny. As a federal agency, the ATF must abide by the laws that govern it's field of responsibility. But the ATF must also set priorities. Instead of pursuing the idea of banning this ammunition, would not the public and police interests' be better served by more aggressive pursuit of felons who have been caught by the NICS?


Thank you for your consideration of my remarks. I am sure all ATF personnel take the same oath I have taken several times; to support and defend the constitution of the United States.


Sincerely,
I plagiarized this!
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
22,061 Posts
I'm both flattered and glad to hear it! Feel free, folks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
922 Posts
Great vid. thanks for sharing


So, if they want to ban the SS109 round, that could open the doors to banning all rifle rounds since most can penetrate soft armor.
I know a little bit of AR15 knowledge from research and owning a few rifles. This is probably what they intend to do-- to ban the ammo since they were unsuccessful in banning the AR15 in general. Some states like New Jersey already have some very strict laws on owning AR15 rifles, but you can still own them in a "neutered" or feature-less form.

AR15 'pistols' which are AR15's with barrels shorter than 16inches and has no stock, have been quite popular lately. So the ATF/BATFE thugs are working overtime to try and kill its popularity and sale. Typical government oppression..
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top