Obama to Outlaw .223 Ammunition (M855) Through Executive Action

It is doubtful that anyone reading this article will truly be surprised that Obama and his cronies in key government posts are trying to once again de facto suppress our Second Amendment rights. They were not able to make it happen through the legislature, but Obama has his phone and his pen. Currently, it seems the President is using both to target gun owners, specifically owners of AR-15s. If you can’t outlaw the guns, get rid of the ammunition.
The AR-15 platform, also commonly referred to as the Modern Sporting Rifle (MSR), has dominated the civilian market. I am not sure of the numbers, but it certainly runs in the millions. The logic flows like this. After any major war or conflict, the service rifle of the day becomes popular among the civilian market. With well over a decade of conflict in the Middle East, it logically flows that a civilian version of the rifle service members were trained with and relied on would become popular. It happened with the M1, M14, Winchester Model 70, Remington 700, 1911 and the list goes on both in eras spanning before and after this list.

.223 NATO Lake City M855 FMJ 62 Grain Steel Penetrator Ammo

The popularity of the AR-15/MSR is the reason it is a target of the Obama administration. The latest assault on the Second Amendment came after the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) unexpectedly announced on Friday the 13th that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” Instead of going through the legislative process as intended, President Obama is using his executive authority to once again impose gun control measures.

Three Major 2A Assaults in 2015 Already

Obama is a lame duck with nothing to lose. He will never run for office again and does not care about public opinion—at least not the public opinion of gun owners. We are not even two months into the year, and we have already seen three major assaults on the Second Amendment through executive action. The first came when the activities that constitute “manufacturing” firearms were changed. Next, was the flip-flopping decision of the BATFE regarding firing a shouldered pistol.
The most serious, or at least far reaching, is of course the BATFE’s “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c).” The new proposed regulation would eliminate the M855’s exemption to the armor piercing ammunition prohibition and make future exemptions nearly impossible.

The Backstory

Federal law imposed in 1986 prohibits the manufacture, importation, and sale by licensed manufacturers or importers, but not possession, of “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.”
We now have AR pistols, which of course are capable of shooting M855—i.e. handguns. On the face, this would seem to run afoul of the law… unless you actually dissect the bullet. The core is not made of any of the materials listed. The M855 uses a lead core with a steel tip, therefore, it is not, nor was it ever “armor piercing.” Not to be bothered by pesky facts or the letter of the law, the BATFE declared the M855 as armor piercing anyway, but granted it an exemption as a projectile “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.”

How Will this Affect You?

Perhaps Obama’s phone has made the BATFE “reconsider” its position. Going forward, the BATFE will only grant the sporting exemption in two categories of projectile:

Category I: .22 Caliber Projectiles

A .22 caliber projectile that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B) will be considered to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile weighs 40 grains or less AND is loaded into a rimfire cartridge.

Category II: All Other Caliber Projectiles

Except as provided in Category I (.22 caliber rimfire), projectiles that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition will be presumed to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile is loaded into a cartridge for which the only handgun that is readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade is a single shot handgun. ATF nevertheless retains the discretion to deny any application for a “sporting purposes” exemption if substantial evidence exists that the ammunition is not primarily intended for such purposes.

With his phone and pen, will Obama cause the next ammo crunch?

In essence, you can have AP rounds for a rimfire .22 or a wildcat cartridge in which the only handgun commonly available or used is a single shot handgun—what a joke!

Two Chances to do Something About it

The NRA-ILA and others are of course on the case and looking for ways to stop this latest assault. The BATFE is accepting comments until March 16, 2015 on this absurd attempt to restrict ammunition for the most popular rifle in America in an attempt to trample our Second Amendment rights once again. Early next week, we should have a follow up article with more in depth details as well as information regarding how you can submit comments and make your voice heard. For now, share this information with your friends and let’s start marshaling our pro 2A forces.
There is a lesson to be learned and this is your wakeup call. In the mid ‘90s when the Assault Weapons Ban was enacted, the prices of ARs skyrocketed. The same was true when the Obama administration banned Russian imports last year. The prices shot through the roof overnight. Who knows whether or not the BATFE will be successful or whether we are able to muster enough public support to thwart it efforts. Until then, I think I will stock up on some M855 while supplies are plentiful and the prices are good.

the BATFE of its plan to ban M855 ammunition—one of the most popular low cost options for AR-15s.

Last week, the Internet was abuzz after the announcement by the BATFE of its plan to ban M855 ammunition—one of the most popular low cost options for AR-15s.

The 2016 elections may prove a tipping point—for or against the Second Amendment.

Show the Administration that we have pens and phones as well!

Contact the BATFE via email at APAComments@atf.gov and express your opposition to the BATFE proposal to ban common rifle ammunition used by millions of gun owners. Remember to proofread your comment and ensure it is concise. Alternatively, you can use the suggested text I used or some of the bullet points from the NRA-ILA. Simply, copy and paste the following letter into the email address provided.

Re:  Ammunition Ban, M855 AP—Oppose
To Whom it may Concern:
I am writing to register my opposition to the proposed ammunition reclassification of the popular M855 ammunition.
Commonly accepted and used for 30 years, no significant abuses of M855 .223/5.56mm ammunition has been documented that warrants such action. There is no evidence of an increased risk today than there was nearly 30 years ago when the “Sporting Purposes Exemption” was enacted.
Recently, competing special interests have been attempting to prohibit or reduce lawful citizens access to firearms and ammunition through a series of legislation and actions that have all soundly been defeated through the legislative process, courts and the will of the majority.
Based upon my personal experience, the elimination of the “Sporting Purposes” exemption will not enhance public safety and does not serve the interests of the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA).
If you have any questions or require anything additional, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,

You can also print out a copy, add your John Hancock (signature) and deliver it via fax to (202) 648-9741. Many computer programs will allow you to scan the document and fax it electronically if you do not have a dedicated fax machine.
Of course if you want to go old school, you can send your opposition via the U.S. Mail to:

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

Pressure needs to be applied from all directions and elections are just around the corner. Don’t forget to contact your U.S. Senators and Members of Congress. Encourage them to oppose the BATFE’s proposed action to ban M855 ammunition and other rifle cartridges that are overwhelmingly used by law-abiding Americans for self-defense, sport shooting and other legitimate purposes. Use the “Write Your Lawmakers” feature on the NRA-ILA’s website or call the Congressional Switchboard at (202) 225-3121.

A few more points you may wish to include offered by the NRA-ILA:

• M855 ammunition should not be categorized as “armor piercing” in the first place, given that lead is the primary material beneath its copper jacket.
• BATFE’s framework does not clarify the “sporting purposes” exemption; it simply interprets it into irrelevance.
• The framework overturns nearly 30 years of settled law and the good faith expectations of gun owners and industry members.
• The framework is totally at odds with the intent of the law to ensure that restrictions on armor piercing handgun ammunition do not unduly restrict common rifle ammunition, most of which is capable of penetrating police body armor when used in a rifle as intended.
• BATFE incorrectly insists that it is required to establish an “objective” standard based on handgun design, yet it fails even to do that with the very broad “discretion” it retains to deny the exemption to projectiles that meet its “objective” test.
• The framework will suppress the development of non-lead rifle projectiles that offer increased performance for hunters, decreased lead exposure, and solutions for hunters in states that restrict the use of lead in hunting.
• The framework will likewise deter handgun development, as new designs could trigger bans.
• Coupled with increasing attempts to ban lead projectiles, the framework could drastically reduce the availability of lawful ammunition for sporting and other legitimate purposes.
• M855 ammunition in AR pistols is not a common threat faced by law enforcement officers.

 The .45 ACP Glock 21 Gen 4 Defender Scott_PP_Article_2-13-15 Scott W. Wagner | February 13, 2015 | 25 Comments inShare Recently, a Lieutenant at my police department was interested in downsizing from the Gen 4 Glock 21 he had been carrying on duty for several months, having supersized previously from his smaller .40 caliber Glock 23. While he liked the fact that the Gen 4 Glock 21 held 13 rounds of potent .45 ACP ammo in each magazine, he missed the somewhat lighter weight, controllability, and more compact dimensions of his old G23. I happened to have a Glock 32 in .357 SIG caliber that I’d carried on the SWAT team available. Having less recoil but more power than the .40 in terms of kinetic energy, he decided to trade after giving it a test drive. I ended up with the like-new “hardly ever been driven” G21 as a result. The G21 is a large handgun. The Gen 4 model comes with a somewhat smaller frame than the original version and includes two backstraps that can be added onto the existing frame to increase the grip girth to medium and large sizes. For my medium-sized hands, the out-of-the-box small size worked well enough, but it required the addition of an extended slide release to really make it fully functional for me. My G21 came equipped with factory three-dot night sights, which makes for a precise sight picture under daylight conditions, and of course assists with finding the sights for the first shot fired in a string in dark conditions. The G21 weighs in heavier than other full-sized Glocks at 29.3 ounces, but is still relatively lightweight for a .45. By way of comparison, the average full-sized 1911 weights in at 36 ounces, which gives the 1911 nearly a half pound more recoil-absorbing weight. I had in my possession some Winchester T-Series standard velocity JHP load. Even though this is a standard pressure round, it is still quite stout, with a distinctly higher muzzle velocity than standard .45 ACP ball ammo. Using a 230-grain JHP bullet, the published ballistics claim a muzzle velocity of 935 fps, with a muzzle energy of 446 foot-pounds. After my experience shooting the G21, I would advise new shooters to avoid +P ammo (or other loads in this power range). I began the test at a distance of 30 feet using a standard handgun qualification silhouette target. The Winchester T-Series ammo was attention getting, but not painful to shoot by any stretch. However, the larger-than-standard Glock grip circumference made the G21 harder for me to hold onto. I needed a firmer than standard grip (at least for me) for control and tight groups. My first six-shot group strung out a bit to the left, following the torque of the pistol. By tightening my grip, I was able to shrink my second six-shot string at 30 feet down considerably, keeping those six rounds within the 8-inch center circle. I moved back to 100 yards. Taking what I thought was a firm enough two-handed grip, I launched six rounds downrange from a standing position. I had five in the left side of the target, all within the silhouette, and one entirely off the paper. Not bad, but I wanted to see if more concentration would center the groups up. I tightened up and launched seven rounds downrange. I was rewarded by finding all seven rounds in the silhouette, with two in the aforementioned center ring, four centered in the body cavity, and one round at the lower left inside corner of the silhouette. I was much more pleased with the second string. Utilizing my new Glock as a carry or home-defense gun would require one little adjustment—different carry ammo. The Sig Elite 200-grain JHP .45 launches that lighter weight bullet at a more sedate 918 fps with a muzzle energy of 374 foot pounds. The Sig Elite ammo gave excellent performance in modeling clay, but with more controllability. The Glock 21 turned in great performance at the range. Just hold it firmly and watch what you feed it. Next week I will talk about carrying it concealed. Sources: Glock: us.glock.com Winchester Ammunition: www.winchester.com Sig Elite Ammunition: www.sigsauer.com

A Word About Warning Shots

inShare  Firing a warning shot is one of the worst ideas ever put forth in the area of self-defense training. You are personally responsible for every projectile that leaves your firearm. If you fire a warning shot blindly into the air, you have no idea where that round is going to impact. What if it hits an innocent person? How will you explain to a prosecutor that you were in imminent danger if you didn’t feel the need to fire at your attacker?
Don’t fire warning shots. If you feel like you should give a verbal warning, fine, do that. But do not be firing shots unless they are well aimed at someone you have clearly identified as an immediate threat.


Warning shots put bullets in places you don’t want them to go. If you’re going to fire a round, fire AT the imminent deadly threat, and keep firing until that threat stops. Don’t shoot anywhere else.
Don’t. As in don’t fire warning shots. Ever. Shoot at your attacker and keep shooting until the threat stops.

Federal judge stalls Obama's executive action on immigration

 HOUSTON (AP) — A federal judge in South Texas has temporarily blocked President Barack Obama's executive action on immigration, giving a coalition of 26 states time to pursue a lawsuit that aims to permanently stop the orders. Related Stories Judge who blocked immigration action had criticized policy Associated Press Texas judge blocks Obama plan to protect undocumented immigrants Reuters A federal judge just put the brakes on Obama’s immigration actions Vox.com The Texas Lawsuit Challenging Obama's Immigration Executive Actions Will Be Thrown Out -- If the Judge Follows the Law Huffington Post Judge delays Obama immigration order AFP U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen's decision late Monday puts on hold Obama's orders that could spare from deportation as many as five million people who are in the U.S. illegally. Hanen wrote in a memorandum accompanying his order that the lawsuit should go forward and that without a preliminary injunction the states would "suffer irreparable harm in this case." "The genie would be impossible to put back into the bottle," he wrote, adding that he agreed that legalizing the presence of millions of people is a "virtually irreversible" action. In a statement early Tuesday, the White House defended the executive orders issued in November as within the president's legal authority, saying the U.S. Supreme Court and Congress have said federal officials can establish priorities in enforcing immigration laws. "The district court's decision wrongly prevents these lawful, commonsense policies from taking effect and the Department of Justice has indicated that it will appeal that decision," the statement said. An appeal would be heard by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. View gallery In this Feb. 4, 2015, file photo, President Barack … In this Feb. 4, 2015, file photo, President Barack Obama meets with a group of "Dreamers" in the Ova … The first of Obama's orders — to expand a program that protects young immigrants from deportation if they were brought to the U.S. illegally as children — was set to start taking effect Wednesday. The other major part of Obama's order, which extends deportation protections to parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country for some years, was not expected to begin until May 19. Joaquin Guerra, political director of Texas Organizing Project, called the ruling a "temporary setback." "We will continue getting immigrants ready to apply for administrative relief," he said in a statement. The nonprofit says it promotes social and economic equality for low to moderate income Texans. The coalition of states, led by Texas and made up of mostly conservative states in the South and Midwest, argues that Obama has violated the "Take Care Clause" of the U.S. Constitution, which they say limits the scope of presidential power, and that his executive actions would be difficult to undo once immigrants started to apply for deferred action. They also say Obama's order would force increased investment in law enforcement, health care and education. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton called the decision a "victory for the rule of law in America" in a statement late Monday. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who led the state into the lawsuit when he was the state's attorney general, said Hanen's decision "rightly stops the President's overreach in its tracks." Hanen, who's been on the federal court since 2002 after being nominated by President George W. Bush, regularly handles border cases but wasn't known for being outspoken on immigration until a 2013 case. In that case, Hanen suggested that Homeland Security should be arresting parents living in the U.S. illegally who induce their children to cross the border. Congressional Republicans have vowed to block Obama's actions by cutting off Homeland Security Department spending for the program. Earlier this year, the Republican-controlled House passed a $39.7 billion spending bill to fund the department through the end of the budget year, but attached language to undo Obama's executive actions. The fate of that House-passed bill is unclear as Republicans in the Senate do not have the 60-vote majority needed to advance most legislation. Among those supporting Obama's executive order is a group of 12 mostly liberal states, including Washington and California, as well as the District of Columbia. They filed a motion with Hanen in support of Obama, arguing the directives will substantially benefit states and will further the public interest. A group of law enforcement officials, including the Major Cities Chiefs Association and more than 20 police chiefs and sheriffs from across the country, also filed a motion in support, arguing the executive action will improve public safety by encouraging cooperation between police and individuals with concerns about their immigration status.

Bloomberg's Comments Add to a Long Tradition of Racially-Charged Gun Control Rhetoric

Bloomberg's Comments Add to a Long Tradition of Racially-Charged Gun Control Rhetoric

Bankrolling ceaseless endeavors to dictate what Americans can eat and how they can defend themselves, all while exhibiting a devout support for the surveillance state, ex-New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is widely recognized as the country's foremost paternalist. However, recent comments suggest that his efforts on this front incorporate a disturbing racial component.

Legislation Introduced to Break Administrative Choke Hold on Firearm and Ammunition Vendors

Legislation Introduced to Break Administrative Choke Hold on Firearm and Ammunition Vendors

In January, we reported on encouraging news that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) had taken steps to reassure banks that they are not categorically prohibited nor discouraged from servicing customers in the firearms and ammunition industries. Of course, the very fact that this should be considered newsworthy demonstrates just how bad the politically-motivated abuses of federal banking regulators, including but not limited to FDIC and Department of Justice (DOJ), had become. The supposed "enforcement" program at the center of this scandal, Operation Choke Point (OPC), has been the subject of considerable congressional attention. Recently, bills were introduced that seek to put a definitive end to the administration’s squeeze of what it considers "immoral" businesses operating within the law.