ATF Moves to Ban M855 And SS109 5.56 Ammunition

[gryphon]

excerpt:

As explained above, in 1986, ATF held that 5.56mm projectiles in SS109 and M855 cartridges were exempt. Further, in 1992, ATF held that 30-06 M2AP cartridges were also exempt. In each case, ATF found that, “it is well documented” that the respective ammunition “has been recognized as being suitable for target shooting with rifles due to its accuracy.” Id. These cartridges were originally produced for the military and were only later adopted by civilians for sporting purposes. When assembled into a complete cartridge, the projectiles were exempt, but ATF did not exempt the projectiles before the cartridges were assembled.

Applying the sporting purposes framework set-forth above, the 5.56mm projectile that ATF exempted in 1986 does not qualify for an exemption because that projectile when loaded into SS109 and M855 cartridges may be used in a handgun other than a single-shot handgun. Specifically, 5.56mm projectiles loaded into the SS109 and M855 cartridges are commonly used in both “AR-type” rifles and “AR-type” handguns. The AR platform is the semi-automatic version of the M16 machinegun originally designed for and used by the military. The AR-based handguns and rifles utilize the same magazines and share identical receivers. These AR-type handguns were not commercially available when the armor piercing ammunition exemption was granted in 1986. To ensure consistency, upon final implementation of the sporting purpose framework outlined above, ATF must withdraw the exemptions for 5.56 mm “green tip” ammunition, including both the SS109 and M855 cartridges.

ATF recognizes that this ammunition is widely available to the public. Because it is legally permissible to possess armor piercing ammunition under current law, withdrawing the exemption will not place individuals in criminal possession of armor piercing ammunition. However, with few exceptions, manufacturers will be unable to produce such armor piercing ammunition, importers will be unable to import such ammunition, and manufacturers and importers will be prohibited from selling or distributing the ammunition.8 ATF is specifically soliciting comments on how it can best implement withdrawal of this exemption while minimizing disruption to the ammunition and firearm industry and maximizing officer safety. Under the proposed framework, the exemption for 30-06 M2AP cartridges would continue because ATF is not aware of any multi-shot handguns available in the ordinary channels of commerce that currently accept such ammunition.

...

Some ammunition that was previously exempted as “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes,” specifically 5.56mm constituent projectiles of SS109 and M855 cartridges, will again be regulated as “armor piercing ammunition.” Except as provided by law, no person may manufacture or import such ammunition, and manufacturers or importers may not sell or deliver such ammunition. ATF will maintain the exemption for 30-06 M2AP cartridges.

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

[Pond Scum]

Dang the Regulators!

I should have bought more of this in December.  It seems that all M855 is sold out or they have already raised the prices.   

https://www.wideners.com/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=100001434

[Xpiatio]

Nothing like gun control through ammunition control.

[gryphon]

I should have bought more of this in December.  It seems that all M855 is sold out or they have already raised the prices.

I have read reports of 5.56 NATO selling out quickly.  Great, another ammo shortage.

[bigt8261]

 

[SD40VE]

this isnt all .223 and 5.56 is it? just the steel core AP rounds right?

[bigt8261]

Think of it this way. On one side you have the BATFE trying to ban steel core, while on the other side you have the Sierra Club trying to ban lead core. Get it now?

[SD40VE]

im just wondering if all .223/5.56 will disappear after the 16th.. if so im going to stock up now lol

i use .223 for coyote hunting from a bolt action ruger.... want to ensure this isnt all .223/.5.56 or i will have a useless $700 rifle...

[bigt8261]

No, it is only the SS109 (Green Tip) bullet. That is what is loaded into the M855 NATO round.

[SD40VE]

thanks for clarifying

[jfmi87]

I have read reports of 5.56 NATO selling out quickly.  Great, another ammo shortage.

I noticed CheaperThanDirt claimed products such as the American Eagle 5.56 55 gr  and others were no longer available, then added it back at a higher price. Not cool. I am sure they had a ton left because if you enter something such as '999' for qty and they don't have 999, it'll change it to whatever they really have available. It was 999 then and 999 now.

[bigt8261]

I don't think anyone is surprised by CTD's gouging. I stopped shopping there completely after the last time. I can understand raising prices a bit, but not by that much.

[linux203]

In assessing the competing views of law enforcement and industry, ATF is bound by the plain language of the statute and the statutory framework, and guided by the courts.

But.... we will use the dictionary with the definition we like when interpreting the plain language of the statute. (Sig Brace)  Funny thing is that SS109 doesn't meet the definition of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B) to be armor piercing.  The core isn't constructed entirely of steel.  It is a lead core with a steel tip.  Seems like they are taking liberty with the definition of "traces of other substances."

ATF is specifically soliciting comments on how it can best implement withdrawal of this exemption while minimizing disruption to the ammunition and firearm industry and maximizing officer safety.

So.... they want input on how to withdrawal the exception, not whether or not there is a sporting purpose for M855.

Bureaucrats...

[gryphon]

Yep, as outlined in this letter.

BATFE does not have any statutory authority to prohibit civilian distribution or possession of U.S. M855 specification cartridges under 18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (17) (B), regardless of any ‘sporting purpose’ determination.  Nor does BATFE have any statutory authority to prohibit civilian distribution or possession of NATO STANAG 4172 specification cartridges under 18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (17) (B), again regardless of any ‘sporting purpose’ determination.  The statutory language supposedly authorizing such a prohibition, cited by Denise Brown on Page 3 of the BATFE text titled “ATF FRAMEWORK FOR DETERMINING WHETHER CERTAIN PROJECTILES ARE “PRIMARILY INTENDED FOR SPORTING PURPOSES” WITHIN THE MEANING OF 18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (17) (C)”, reads:

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

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
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.
I have highlighted the words ‘constructed entirely’ for a reason which will become clear.

The projectile specified in M855 specification ammunition, U.S. Army TACOM ARDEC Drawing 9342869, has a combined steel and lead metal core. 18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (17) (B) (i) applies only to projectile cores:

….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….

The core of the M855 projectile is not constructed entirely of steel, nor is the steel in the core of the M855 projectile combined with “tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium”. Rather, the steel in the projectile core of TACOM ARDEC Drawing 9342869 bullet is at the front of a lead metal component. These two components together, both within the projectile jacket, constitute the M855 projectile core. You can confirm this combination by reviewing U.S. Army TACOM ARDEC Drawing 9349656, which establishes the engineering requirements for the M855 projectile core.

Please note the English language definition of the adverb ‘entirely’, as taken from Merriam-Webster:

Definition of ENTIRELY

1 : to the full or entire extent : completely <I agree entirely> <you are entirely welcome>

2 : to the exclusion of others : solely <entirely by my own efforts>

By any correct reading of the English language, the core of the M855 projectile is not composed entirely of steel, or a combination of steel with any of the other metals specified in 18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (17) (B) (i).

18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (17) (B) (ii) applies only to projectiles larger than .22 caliber, designed and intended for a handgun, so the jacket weight percentage of the .22 caliber M855 projectile is not legally relevant to a determination of the M855 cartridge’s status as ‘armor piercing ammunition’. Also MIL-C-63989C (AR), the U.S. Army specification covering M855 cartridges, does not mention handguns. Further, the gas port pressure requirements established in Section 3.10.3 of MIL-C-63989C (AR) constructively exclude the ‘AR Type handguns’ cited in Denise Brown’s text as an application for M855 cartridges.

Before an 18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (17) (C) ‘sporting purposes’ exemption can be considered, BATFE must establish that the projectiles in M855 cartridges are indeed subject to ‘armored piercing ammunition’ regulation under 18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (17) (B). BATFE has not made this case, nor can BATFE make this case without abusing the clear statutory language.

Please withdraw Denise Brown’s “ATF FRAMEWORK FOR DETERMINING WHETHER CERTAIN PROJECTILES ARE “PRIMARILY INTENDED FOR SPORTING PURPOSES” WITHIN THE MEANING OF 18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (17) (C)” and terminate any further efforts to prohibit civilian possession or distribution of M855 projectiles and/or cartridges.  Please extend all of these comments to cover any and all cartridges conforming to NATO STANAG 4172, which are functionally and constructively identical to U.S. Army M855 cartridges.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/02/daniel-zimmerman/atf-accepting-comment-m855-ammo-ban-march-15/

[gryphon]

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2015/02/16/atf-trying-to-ban-ar15-ammo-under-guise-of-law-enforcement-safety-n1957622

[Jeff]

I don't think anyone is surprised by CTD's gouging. I stopped shopping there completely after the last time. I can understand raising prices a bit, but not by that much.

After I had a few 30 round .223 Pmags PRICE CHANGE IN MY CART during checkout.  I won't use them ever again.  Add to cart....I think they were like $20 each at the time.  I click checkout.....waited for about 5 minutes as it was processing to find that they all of the sudden were $60 each in my cart.  NOPE!!!! that is shady, price gouging AND changing the price tag on you during the transaction, is just so shady.  I was expecting my whole order to be $60, not that each magazine was going to cost $60 and I'm sure many people fell for that not realizing the total was $180 not $60.

[gryphon]

Second Amendment Foundation Authorizes Court Action If Ammo Ban Is Implemented



The Second Amendment Foundation has authorized court action if the proposed ban on .223-caliber ammunition is implemented by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the foundation’s general counsel has warned in a letter to BATFE Director B. Todd Jones.

Writing for SAF, general counsel Miko Tempski tells Jones, “This proposal is just an attempt to limit firearms rights because the President’s other such attempts have been blocked through constitutional checks and balances on his power.

“Should the BATFE lawlessly proceed on this path,” Tempski warns, “SAF intends to call on those checks and balances to stop the Administration’s executive overreach again.”

Tempski’s three-page letter dissects the BATFE proposal, noting repeatedly that M855 ammunition at the center of this controversy “is not armor piercing pursuant to the definition in the statute.”

http://www.ammoland.com/2015/03/second-amendment-foundation-authorizes-court-action-if-223-ammo-ban-is-implemented/

[linux203]

Something stuck me as odd while re-reading the request for comments....

ATF is specifically soliciting comments on how it can best implement withdrawal of this exemption while minimizing disruption to the ammunition and firearm industry and maximizing officer safety.

M855 doesn't meet the statutory requirements of "Armor Piercing," it doesn't need an exemption.  Withdrawing the exemption should have no bearing on the import, manufacture, or sale of M855.  If the ATF removes the exemption and doesn't then promulgate rules prohibiting import, manufacture, or sale we are good to go.

Promulgating rules that define M855 as AP would be grounds for a lawsuit.

Am I missing something?

[bigt8261]

My interpretation too.

[m.marino]

Having read the law (thanks for the links) I agree that the BATFE is way out of their authority and this is a lawsuit waiting to happen. Now which Federal court is this going to get shipped to? There are currently Judges (may their tenure be short) who would support the BATFE in this action. Stopping the erosion of the 2nd via this intentionally mis-reading of law and hoping that they can get away with it; is the foundation of those who wish to remove a persons right to self defense. I hope that IF it goes to court that a Judge without progressive ideology hears it.

Michael

[linux203]

If it goes to the courts, it will not be pretty for the BATFE. They had their butts chewed by a judge for the definition of deflagrate vs explosion. They lost because they presented no scientific testimony supporting their rule promulgation. Similarly, they will need to present evidence that the chemical composition of M855 meets the statutory definition. This means weighing the jacket, steel, and lead. Then attempting to argue that there are only trace amounts of lead.

[gryphon]

*** BREAKING NEWS ***

SS109/M855 ban off the table for now!

NOTICE TO THOSE COMMENTING ON THE ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION EXEMPTION FRAMEWORK

Thank you for your interest in ATF’s proposed 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 informal comment period will close on Monday, March 16, 2015. ATF has already received more than 80,000 comments, which will be made publicly available as soon as practicable.

Although ATF endeavored to create a proposal that reflected a good faith interpretation of the law and balanced the interests of law enforcement, industry, and sportsmen, the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and include issues that deserve further study. Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework. After the close of the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process (for example, through additional proposals and opportunities for comment) before proceeding with any framework.

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2015-03-021015-advisory-notice-those-commenting-armor-piercing-ammunition-exemption-framework.html

[linux203]

Now... if people can stop panic buying, I need the price of M193 to come down before a Carbine class in August.... 

[gryphon]

Has 193 gone up?  It was selling for $290/1,000 rd. not that long ago.  A few of us here stocked up.  Lake City and IMI were both plentiful.  Wow, looking around I see people are buying both 193 and 855.  Some places are sold out of both.

You taking carbine at MDFI?

[linux203]

Yes, misinformation that Obama is banning all rifle ammunition circulated. Panic buying of 5.56 and .223 has ensued.

I'm sitting on about 1,800 rounds of M193, but I shoot 250-300 a month.

I'm taking the class from ATHG in Adrian. 

[gryphon]

Why wait 'till August?  Take the class earlier and tell me how it is.

[linux203]

Why wait 'till August?  Take the class earlier and tell me how it is.

I'm taking Defensive Carbine II, which is only in August September.  I'm also signed up for the Defensive Handgun II in August.  I took both the level 1 classes last fall.  Obviously, I liked them enough to sign up for more.  The two classes were very similar, just different weapon systems.  Started with basic weapon manipulation, moved to BSA drills, shooting positions, use of cover, moving off line of attack, malfunction handling, etc.

The carbine class was a blast and Glenn was really cool about it.  There were three other students that had a schedule conflict, so he pushed the class back a weekend.  They had another scheduling issue and the second instructor had to work, so it was just Glenn and I.  He gave me the heads up and checked if I was cool with 9 hours of one-on-one.

I burned through ~360 rifle and ~75 pistol rounds during the class.  BSA causes rounds to disappear fast.

[gryphon]

Had I known that I would have asked you to write an article about the Handgun I class for the MOC Newsletter!

I took Handgun I and II at MDFI.  I'd like to take a carbine class, maybe I'll check out ATHG.

[gryphon]

[linux203]

THAT IS AWESOME!!!!

I needed a good laugh today.

[Jeff]

Where do I order the T-shirt!

[Xpiatio]

This administration is only making the cost of ammunition and firearms more expensive.  If he does that, then people with low economic standing will not be able to afford it.  I do wonder in the big picture, "if we over tax them and boost up the cost of gun industry products, that will then get guns off the street. In a way have gun control."

This could have race discrimination ties about what Bloomberg was thinking: getting guns out of the hands of "gangsters".

[gryphon]

  If he does that, then people with low economic standing will not be able to afford it.

While true, it is also true that people with low economic standing are often disproportionately anti-gun.