Move to Ban a Bullet Adds to Its Appeal

[happyslug]

20. The key is what is an Armor Piecing bullets under US Law.

Last edited Fri Feb 27, 2015, 01:59 PM - Edit history (3)

18 USC 921(a)(17) Defines what is "Armor Piecing Ammunition"

(17)
(A) The term “ammunition” means ammunition or cartridge cases, primers, bullets, or propellent powder designed for use in any firearm.

(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means—

(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or

(ii) 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.

(C) The term “armor piercing ammunition” does not include shotgun shot required by Federal or State environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes, a frangible projectile designed for target shooting, a projectile which the Attorney General finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes, or any other projectile or projectile core which the Attorney General finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used in an oil and gas well perforating device.

The key wording is "may be used in a handgun". If the ammunition can NOT be used in a handgun it can NOT be banned. Thus till the recent introduction of Pistols capable of firing 5,56x45 ammunition, the M855 was legal for it was NOT usable in an handgun.

When an "Handgun" was introduced that could fire 5.56x 45 ammunition, then the first test of being an "Armor Piercing bullet" was met. Then and only then did the second test had to be even reviewed. That second test is in the list of materials that do NOT expand (tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium) or weight of the outside jacket of the bullet that exceeds 25% of its total weight (Common in Armor Piecing bullets NOT common even in Full Metal Jacketed bullets).

Thus the M193 bullet, bring a FMJ bullet but NOT a Core of banned materials OR an outer jacket that consists of 25% of the total bullet weight is NOT an "Armor Piecing bullet" as defined above, but the M885 having a steel core does meet that second test and can be banned but only once a pistol was made in that caliber.

Please note 18 USC 921(a)(17) (C) which gives the Attorney General the option of ruling a round is for MOSTLY sporting purposes, which can include target shooting. That is the law the NRA is trying to use to keep surplus M885 ammunition legal. Notice the statute uses the terms "Finds" thus it is up to the Attorney General to made a decision if the M855 is used mostly for sporting purposes.

The ATF report on banning the M855 ammunition:

http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Library/Notices/atf_framework_for_determining_whether_certain_projectiles_are_primarily_intended_for_sporting_purposes.pdf

Senator Moynihan comment on the above Law:

Let me make clear what this bill does not do. Our legislation would not limit the availability of standard rifle ammunition with armor-piercing capability. We recognize that soft body armor is not intended to stop high powered rifle cartridges. Time and again Congressman Biaggi and I have stressed that only bullets capable of penetrating body armor and designed to be fired from a handgun would be banned; rifle ammunition would not be covered.

The report also points out the differences between 17 (B) (i) and 17 (B)(ii), in that when it comes to ammunition banned containing metals cores, 17(B)(i), the key phase in that ban is any ammunition that "may be used in a handgun". In 17(B)(ii), the 25% weight rule, uses the phase "intended for use in a handgun". Thus M855 which was NEVER intended to be used in a Handgun does NOT meet the definition of Armor Piecing ammunition under 17(B)(ii) but it does meet the definition of 17(B)(i) for today we have AR-15 pistols chambered for 5.56x45 mm ammunition. i.e. MAY BE USED IN A HANDGUN is the proper test for a bullet with a Steel Core (the M855), but if the outer jacket is more then 25% of the weight of the bullet the test is "Intended for use in a handgun".

Thus this ban can ONLY apply to M855 ammunition and its steel metal core. The only possible exception would be "primary sporting purposes" and the report handles that to mean what the ATF says is "primary sporting purposes" and that is limited to handguns capable of two shots or less. I have problems with that definition, but the ATF does point out most ammunition are fired at shooting ranges NOT on human targets and thus if the test was where such ammunition was mostly used ALL ammunition would fit under the Sporting Purpose use and that was clearly NOT the intention of Congress Congress wanted to ban SOMETHING. The Report also points out the other extreme was ALSO not want CONGRESS intended, i.e. all ammunition that could be fired in ANY pistol was also NOT the intent of Congress.

THE ATF then decided by its own regulation what Congress intended and came up with the rule that pistols that fires two rounds or less was the rule that fulfilled what was the intention of Congress. i.e. ammunition that could be fired by such pistols is ammunition exempt UNLESS such ammunition can also be fired from pistols that could fire three or more rounds before reloading.

I have problem with that ban, but it relates to the issue of "Short barreled" rifles, which are weapon with a stock that has a barrel less then 16 inches long (18 inches if the barrel is smooth-bore i.e. a shotgun). Variations of the AR-15 has come out with 14 inch or shorter barrels, but without a stock and thus are "Pistols" not "short barrelled rifles". If you see one being carried you will quickly see it is NOT what most people call a Pistol. The better way to deal would be to drop the whole concept of "Short Barrel rifles and Shotguns", and rule anything with with a rifled barrel less then 16 inches or a smooth bore barrel less then 18 inches but barrels longer then 7 inches (The length of Pistols used by the US Cavalry in the 1870s) are "Carbines" and special rules apply to them whether they have stocks or no stocks (which can include the present ban on such "short barrel rifles&quot . This work around the ban on "Short barrel Rifles" is the heart of the REAL problem. Either BAN them completely or legalize them and get it over with. The ban on Short Barrel Rifles and Shotguns is NOT effective UNLESS you address the issue of pistols with barrels longer then 7 inches.

Here is an AR-15 PISTOL with a 7 inch barrel:



http://www.bushmaster.com/firearms/pistols.asp

The piece that looks like a short stock at the rear of the AR-15 "Pistol" is part of the action of the AR-15 (it is the "Buffer" system used in AR-15 actions). The short buffer is NOT intended to be used as stock. In a full length AR-15 rifle. that extension is inside the stock one uses on a AR-15/M16 rifle, but in these short barrel AR-15 "Pistols" the buffer is NOT considered a "Stock" and thus does not make these AR-15 with 7 inch barrels a "Short Barrel Rifle" as that term is used in Federal Law.