|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 2, 2018, 01:48 AM | #51 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2013
Posts: 280
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
January 2, 2018, 12:50 PM | #52 | |||
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
|
We've drifted more than a bit from the OP. I think the question has been answered, to sum up, "Why is there no push to repeal the "Sporting Purpose" language in the law?"
#1) it is not important enough to the right people (at this time), nor is it a big concern of the public in general. #2) really tough, in today political climate to build public support for "relaxing" the restrictions on "military arms" which are "weapons of mass death flooding our streets", etc. After all, in the eye of the under informed public, the gun and ammo MUST be one or the other. It's either something "suitable for sporting use" or it's not, and if its not, then it MUST be something the military uses, and therefore, something we don't want in private hands, because of how dangerous that is to public safety. ITs not correct, but that is the way a lot of people think today (they've been trained to think that way for a few decades now), and those people have money and votes. Now, as to the M855 ammo "debate", the attempted ban is a good example of bureaucratic over-reach, and an arbitrary decision. Something that was once allowed, was to be banned, because of a change in the interpretation of existing rules and definitions. Quote:
Quote:
Described for many years as having a "steel penetrator insert" M855 ammo was designed with an enhanced AP capability (compared to regular ball ammo), the steel penetrator was intended to defeat the body armor seen worn by Warsaw Pact forces (at that time). SO, it has BOTH steel and lead in the core. Originally using reasonable judgement, it was not classified as AP, because the core was mostly lead, and it wasn't pistol ammunition. Later, some bright fellow at the ATF decides that since there are now some "handguns" made for it, and the steel insert is enough to make it AP, so it is now "armor piercing handgun ammunition" When this proposed change was put up for public comment, the debate began. Quote:
I am unaware of any change exempting .30-06 AP ammunition. It is the very definition of AP, has no "sporting use", its even called Armor Piercing and always has been! As far as I know, you can't buy any, sell any, trade any or even legally give it away, other than to a licensed dealer. As loaded ammunition. AP bullets (pulled from loaded ammo) are not restricted, (at the Fed level) and you can buy as many as your state allows. Other than as an example of over reach by changing their interpretation of already establish definitions, why are we even talking about this??
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|||
January 2, 2018, 03:15 PM | #53 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 3,062
|
Quote:
You keep calling it an arbitrary decision, yet refuse to read the ATF's explanation of why they considered M855 armor piercing and why it (and .30-06 M2AP) were exempted in 1986 and 1992 respectively. I posted the link, but I can't make you read it.
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers) Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|