DescentBB

Own a rifle that fires .223 ammo? Get ready for Obama to effectively make them unusable. How? He has the BATF looking at input to reclassify .223 standard ball ammo as ammo piercing. Why? Because there are some pistols that can chamber the .223 round (why not just ban that particular type pistol?) So unless there is just a mountain of negative input, consider this a done deal. Obama will use his magic executive order pen to sign it into law as he is a lame-duck president and will face no repercussions. I bet he thinks this will enhance his legacy.

Input will stop March 16.

Onoz, you can't use one type of ammo out of the several thousand out there! Such tyranny!

and, it's all Obama's idea. Amazing that he finds the time. And, how does this constitute a 'gun grab'?

Top Gun wrote:Onoz, you can't use one type of ammo out of the several thousand out there! Such tyranny!

A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.

I haven't checked this out thoroughly yet, but .223 is not just a round among a thousand many. It's America's military round--it's the M16 and the AR-15. It would be sort of like banning AK ammo in the middle-east. Whatever militias exist in the U.S., they are most likely predominantly using this round. This could be a low blow to the 2nd amendment.

EDIT: Except this law was purposed to cover only ammunition designed to be fired from a pistol, so I don't see how they plan to slide such a popular rifle round in.

The definition of armor piercing ammo is complex.
The .223 had been made exempt from the definition due to its popularity as a sporting caliber.

Recreational gun use is frowned upon by the left and 'scary looking black rifles', which is what AR's are, have always been the target of gun bans.
Attacking ammo is an old trick they use when the gun itself is too had to go after.

I think this will be challenged if he goes through with it. It smells of an attempt at infringement of the right but who knows what the court might say.
Congress could slap him down by making the .223 legal by law....but who knows what they will say.

I have two AR-15 platform weapons. A standard .223 rifle and a pistol built from AR-15 parts but I put a .300 Blackout barrel on it so the pistol, even though much more effective, deadly, scary, etc, will still be easy to buy ammo for. The rifle maybe not for a while. Time to order a few thousand rounds of .223.....

Will Robinson wrote:Time to order a few thousand rounds of .223.....

That's interesting. Propose reclassification for a gun or ammunition (knowing it won't likely succeed). Meanwhile, sales for the targeted gun or ammo skyrocket because of the news. I wonder who is really behind all of this? I think the thread should be retitled from "Gun Grab" to "Cash Grab."

Spidey wrote:

Top Gun wrote:Onoz, you can't use one type of ammo out of the several thousand out there! Such tyranny!

A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.

You realize that "slippery slope" is one of the most basic of all logical fallacies, right?

I wasn’t using the “slippery slope” concept, I was simply pointing out that you have to start somewhere.

Slippery slope concept implies some kind of “whoops” we started something we didn’t want to…like an avalanche.

Getting rid of ammo is not some kind of whoops…it’s a deliberate goal…we talked about it before.

callmeslick wrote:and, it's all Obama's idea. Amazing that he finds the time. And, how does this constitute a 'gun grab'?

By making rifles unusable that are owned by millions of Americans. Rifles that are used for hunting, target shooting and competition shooting. The owners will not be able to use them. They will not be able to sell them. At some point the govt. will offer to take them off their hands to dispose of them properly.

Will Robinson wrote:Time to order a few thousand rounds of .223.....

The problem may arise if the reclassification does not have a grandfather clause and thus makes even owning your prior ammo illegal.

vision wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Time to order a few thousand rounds of .223.....

That's interesting. Propose reclassification for a gun or ammunition (knowing it won't likely succeed). Meanwhile, sales for the targeted gun or ammo skyrocket because of the news. I wonder who is really behind all of this? I think the thread should be retitled from "Gun Grab" to "Cash Grab."

Ammo and weapons are as volatile a market as oil futures. Obama has sent the public into a buying binge a couple times now. I have an app on my iPad that was created precisely because of this. It tracks ammo price and availability from thousands of sources.

I suppose you could say it's a cash grab but then you are saying Obama is the one in on the grab....
I don't think he's that reckless in his greed.
I think he is the kind of guy that wants to shove as many camels noses under the tent as he can before his time is up, as well as being the kind that cashes in on pretending to do something about scary guns.

.223 is already classified as armor piercing but congress gave it a temporary exemption. All they have to do is vote to make it a permanent exemption.

I wonder if anyone will calculated the number of deaths caused by Obama's attempts to get rid of guns? Using their logic, that the availability of guns increases murders, he has increased gun sales a few times, so have deaths been increased due to the policy?
They broke all sales records I believe during one of those runs.

Policy aimed at unconstitutional seizures led to hoarding weapons. How many dead people does that policy decision rack up? If Republicans are trying to starve american school children with budget cuts then surely Obama is trying to kill kids with guns. Lol

How many AR's will get dumped into the used market (black market) as a result of any ammo scarcity? Is ammo harder to smuggle than cocaine? How many tons of .223 is already here in country about to 'fall of a truck' if the executive order stands?

I found the definition again.

Armor-piercing ammunition, sometimes referred to as metal-piercing ammunition, is ammunition that is designed primarily to penetrate metal or armor, including body armor commonly worn by police officers. Under federal law, armor-piercing ammunition is defined as any projectile or projectile core that may be used in a handgun and that is constructed entirely from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.15 In addition, armor-piercing ammunition is defined as a full jacketed projectile “larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.” Id. The Attorney General is required to furnish information to each licensed dealer defining which projectiles are considered armor-piercing ammunition as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(17)(B).16
The federal definition of armor-piercing ammunition, which is based on its content and weight, rather than on the ammunition’s actual performance against body armor, has been criticized because it fails to halt the manufacture and sale of all types of ammunition that can penetrate body armor.17

Armor-Piercing Ammunition - Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ...
smartgunlaws.org/federal-law-on-ammunition-regulation/

Basically any type of ammo made for a rifle has been used in a handgun so in theory all ammo over .22 cal can be made illegal by the executive order unless it has the core to jacket ratio to exempt it. Big game rounds are likely safe otherwise it will be a while before manufacturers create a new style projectile to fit outside the definition.

Same ★■◆●, different day.
The 'War on Guns' continues indefinitely. The political industrial complex profits indefinitely.

what if.......eventually........'they' want to......the same old scare BS that has been discredited on foreign policy, Obamacare etc, applied to guns.
Playing the rubes, the puppetmasters have them all worked up over what-ifs? Sounds like we have a couple or three here that fell for it.

Yea, we have to 'pass the bill before anyone gets to see what's in it'.

Until the results are in all comments are null right slick?
Now, does this only work on your side of the street or will you now shut up about all the commentary and rhetoric from your ideological counterparts that you have so far been so extremely outspoken about?

I think you have had plenty to say about projected outcomes.

Here, try this:

Until the sea levels rise and crops fail no more scare BS about a few degrees increase...

Until Ted Cruz et al ruins America you shut up about them....

Get it?

calling for comments is not taking one's guns away, Will. It's that simple. Anything beyond that is scare tactic BS. At least the warmers have FACTS to back them up. At least Cruz has been proven to be a bald-faced liar. And, so on.

I wonder if you really believe you have made a distinction or you are that shameless.

callmeslick wrote: At least Cruz has been proven to be a bald-faced liar. And, so on.

And I showed Hillary and Obama are almost as bad. Again...your point?

Just reading a bit more. Seems the ban might only be for M855 ball ammo and not for other types of .223. Will, how are you reading the proposed enactment?

<facepalm> some gun grab there

At least I'm willing to flesh out my threads instead of being a rah rah boy for the left like you.

Will Robinson wrote: Obama has sent the public into a buying binge a couple times now. .

no, stupid people went on buying binges(not the general public, the majority of which doesn't own one gun), after industry shills got them worked up with a pile of BS. Like I say, bring on the rubes, they fall for it every time.

And you know this how? Or is another one of your patented "It helps my argument so it must be true".

know which part? The majority of the public being non-owners? Documented fact. The fact that Obama didn't do a damn thing to justify a run on ammo? Easily seen by reading what has actually been done or said by him. The fact that the industry-funded interest groups spread the panic with 'facts' like you just suckered for in this thread? You demonstrate that often enough. Which do you want clarified further?

What part of March 16 the BTAF will decide on the reclassification do you not understand or is that just Media Hype?

Slick please give some proof of your claims. Nothing personal, just that you make this stuff up so much....
How do you determine groups of the public stop being a part of the public? Just arbitrarily as needed to support your proclamation? Lol!

As to limits to just ball ammo, I think the jacket to core ratio means almost all types but that data isn't out there where I can see for myself

woodchip wrote:What part of March 16 the BTAF will decide on the reclassification do you not understand or is that just Media Hype?

the part where this is an action of Obama whatsoever, or is a gun grab of any type.