ATF Looking to Ban XM855 / SS109

[DMCakhunter]

Was looking to replace some I had shot and couldn't find any. Then I came across the following articles at Ammoland from Feb 14th.
http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/atf-calls-for-comments-on-ban-of-ar-ammo/#axzz3RoqMdZZi

http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/obama-atf-to-ban-common-ar-15-rifle-ammo/#axzz3RorJQVEp

[WhiskeyJack]

Wtf. These useless humans dont let up. 

[brat]

another article..........

http://controversialtimes.com/news/atf-is-attempting-to-ban-popular-ar-15-ammo/

[JohnyMac]

Yeah, I read this too. No worries, there will be plenty of dead bodies to pull XM855 off of when the time comes.

Remember shoot for hips, groin and thorax/neck area.

[DMCakhunter]

I just wonder how much of an impact it will have on the price of ammunition. In the 5.56 market, does the penetrator have 20%, 30%, 50% or 75% of the affordable ammo market? With it gone I assume what is left will go higher.
So if a ban takes place, with no avenue to the public, what will the ammo contractors do with all of the the military rejects? I would guess pulled bullets will be available.
All in all, this all started the day someone created and sold a 7.62x39mm AK pistol. Then steel core ammo was banned because of the way the feds wrote the definition for AP ammo.

[Nemo]

So everyone needs to file a comment opposing it.  Join the NRA and Second Amendment Foundation.  Get INVOLVED in the fight.  Don't just bitch and gripe about it.  DO Something!!

Below is a link on one way to get started.  Click the link and read the whole page.

Nemo

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150213/batfe-to-ban-common-ar-15-ammo

[Nemo]

So everyone needs to file a comment opposing it.  Join the NRA and Second Amendment Foundation.  Get INVOLVED in the fight.  Don't just bitch and gripe about it.  DO Something!!

Nemo

And this is another reason to Get Involved.

Nemo


https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150212/nra-backs-constitutional-concealed-carry-bill-in-us-senate

NRA Backs Constitutional Concealed Carry Bill in U.S. Senate
Thursday, February 12, 2015

Bill Would Require States to Honor Other States’ Concealed Carry Permits

Fairfax, Va. – On behalf of its five-million members, the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) announced its support for The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015, which was introduced today by U.S. Senator John Cornyn (TX). The legislation would respect the rights of individuals who possess concealed carry permits from their home state or who are not prohibited from carrying concealed in their home state to exercise those rights in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry.
 
“The current patchwork of state and local laws is confusing for even the most conscientious and well-informed concealed carry permit holders. This confusion often leads to law-abiding gun owners running afoul of the law when they exercise their right to self-protection while traveling or temporarily living away from home,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA-ILA. “Senator Cornyn’s legislation provides a much needed solution to a real problem for law-abiding gun owners.”
 
This legislation wouldn’t override state laws governing the time, place or manner of carriage or establish national standards for concealed carry. Individual state gun laws would still be respected. Concealed carry reciprocity would simply ensure that states honor permits issued by other states, just as they do with driver’s licenses. Importantly, if under federal law a person is prohibited from carrying a firearm, they will continue to be prohibited from doing so under this bill.
 
“Our fundamental right to self-defense does not stop at a state's borders.  Law abiding citizens should be able to exercise this right while traveling across state lines,” continued Cox. “This is an extremely important issue to our members and we thank Senator Cornyn for leading the fight to protect our right to self-defense,” concluded Cox.

[Erick]

Am not  a huge fan of M855 as its expensive ( now more so) doesnt have very good effect on soft tissue and is not particularly accurate.

Interestingly other 62 gr is selling out fast too.

I think there are lots of guys out these that think 2 things: 
– M855 is code word for very good ammo
– All 62gr is M855 or  a M855 clone.

Maybe that is why completely unrelated 62 gr ammo is starting to sell out as well. 

I like Wolf Military Classic in 62 gr (non penetrator) and i always thought of it as “the poor mans Mk318 SOST” since it shares the 3 main advantages SOST ammo has over M855 (albeit to lesser degrees)

– more accurate than M855, better than 2 MOA out of a 1 in 7 barrel
– good penetration due to harder bullet case (bi metal) which doesnt make it really barrier blind ammo but certainly significantly less affected than M193 and similar 55gr style bullets.
– significant improvment in effects on soft tissue over M855 (as can be had as hollow point)

So I just ordered a case of the Wolf Military Classic, 62 gr in HP.
The steel case is a very minor disadvantage in my experience. I never, not once, had a problem with this ammo in my LWRCi

For those who just cant live with anything but brass case at 50 cents a round, this is another poor Mans SOST IMO:

http://www.sgammo.com/product/223-556mm/1000-round-case-223-rem-69-grain-hpbt-match-prvi-partizan-ammo-pp57

– HP = good effects in soft tissue
– very accurate (better than Mk 318 SOST and MUCH better than M855)
– The large bullets greatly lessens deflections thru barriers as well

[Grudgie]

Even though I disagree with this ban, I will to the death make sure the law is carried out and obeyed. Will of the republic be done!


















 

Fucking statist pigs with your laws and regulations. This is your glorious fucking republic at fucking work.

[JohnyMac]

  Erick!

[DMCakhunter]

Around here, the m855's and clones were the second cheapest with wolf being about a penny or 2 cheaper.

[Reaver]

A lot of AR loving douches in here are going to bitch at my answer but here it goes.


Back in the day. When we used 55 grain and 1/12 twist barrels we used to fuck people up. Really really bad. The 1/12 would just barely stabilize the bullet so it would give similar result to the 545.

Later on, when we ( Americans ) become bitches we went to this idea of " modern forces use armor so we must penetrate "( funny because since then we havnt fought anything with armor ) so we grab 62 grain "AP"

I have one AR left in my house.
It's a Colt Retro 1/12 inch. Pencil Thin.

I've rebuilt it and ruined the "Retro" look if it with KNS pins and a geissele trigger. Out with the old in with new EXCEPT if it ain't broke don't fix it.

yeah it sucks that the ATf even exist and yeah it sucks cause though yeager is a douche he's probably right, but have some foresight and this isn't an issue. We're preppers and anti government men for a reason. Make shit happen. 

The quote above is direct from what I said over on another forum.

[DMCakhunter]

Good point, the 55 grain bullet is far more destructive.

[Nemo]

It may be far more destructive and do such horrible things.  Which make it inhumane.  So it needs banned also. 

First they came for the M855 . . ..

Nemo

[CJS06]

BATFE did the same thing with the 7N6 5.45 not even a year ago. Now they are coming after ss109/m855 because it is "armor piercing" ammo being used in a pistol.  The regulation that bans AP in pistols specifically states that it is for pistol ammunition, not for rifle ammunition that is being used in pistols. 

Go to  https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/.../stop-batfe.../XrvVh1cj  and sign the petition.  For email/letters to ATF use APAComments@atf.gov

To use officer safety in the reasoning for why they want to ban this ammo is ludicrous. Any and I mean any rifle ammunition in .223/5.56, .300Blk, 7.62x39, etc.... will easily defeat the typical body armor worn by officers. It is not rated for rifle rounds, but that doesnt make them more deadly when fired from an AR pistol.

Personally I am not a big fan of M855 and own and shoot very little. Like Erick I prefer the "poor mans M318 SOST" of a couple of different types.  Most place I shoot dont allow people to use green tip on their steel, and it has terrible accuracy for use at distance.

That said there is NO way that BATFE should be able to carry out random restrictions. They are an enforcement agency that is being used to create policy that they are not authorized to do.

[JohnyMac]

I ran across this post on Survivalblog.com this morning and I thought I would share.

   

Letter to BATF Re: Armor Piercing Ammunition Exclusion Comments

To Whom It May Concern:

It appears that much has come up regarding the legislation and regulations applied as a result of legislation relating to Armor Piercing Ammunition.

The definition of “Armor Piercing Ammunition” per 18 U.S. Code § 921(a)(17)(B), identifies two definitions:

The first definition is: “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”

While SS109 / M855 contains steel, it does not contain any of the other materials as enumerated within the statute. Further, it is not “constructed entirely” of steel. In fact, by volume, steel is second to lead (Pb) in this round.

Unless the plain language is being interpreted some other way, this definition does not apply to SS109 / M855 ammunition.

The second definition is: “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.”

.22 vs. .223 are different by less than the width of a human hair. As such, while the round is technically “larger than .22″, the difference is so small as to be statistically irrelevant.

Further, the round was not “designed and intended for use in a handgun”; it was designed for use in rifles (specifically, the FN Squad Automatic Weapon), and the AR Pistol (the handgun adaptation of the AR15 rifle) did not come about until long after the design of the SS109/M855 round.

While it *is* a jacketed round, the jacket does not comprise more than 25% of the projectile’s overall weight.

With all three points considered, SS109 / M855 does not meet the definition of the second criteria.

This should suffice to put an end to the issue, as the round is not subject to the the U.S. Code statutes concerning armor piercing ammunition.

When reviewing TM43-0001-27 (the latest version, released in I believe April of 1994), it clearly identifies M855 as “Ball Ammunition”.

Instead, the round designated M995 is listed as “Armor Piercing” and has the qualities as described in 18 U.S. Code § 921(a)(17)(B).

Upon review of all of the documentation released by the ATF, it appears to me that the largest concern is protection of law enforcement officials which I wholeheartedly approve of.

However, standard soft body armor for Law Enforcement tends to be 3a which is only rated for “pistol” rounds and, as previously noted, the 5.56 ss109 / m855 round is not one designed for pistol use.

If this is, in fact, your desire, then a more appropriate solution is not to try to ban the round but instead to recommend that law enforcement officers use level 3 (not to be confused with 3a) armor, which is designed to stop not only pistol but also rifle rounds.

I suspect this isn’t too likely, however, as rifles are not commonly used in the commission of a crime, including AR Pistols. This does occur, I’m sure, but it, like the difference between .22 and .223, is statistically insignificant.

Regards,

Darryl Hadfield

Now, who will challenge BATF&E in a court of law. IMO this restriction was a "trial balloon" to see if anybody is paying attention and whether they will fight it.

[DMCakhunter]

Good post. Time will tell if this will stick, but in the interim, it is playing havoc on availability of low cost ammo.

[DMCakhunter]

With the frenzy having run for 2 weeks, prices for PMC, Federal, Fiocci 55 gr fmj went from $.31 /round to $.49 to $.52 / round. Penetrators are between $.52 & $.69 each. Tul Ammo is still available at $.315 to $.335.
What is anyone else seeing?

[Nemo]

Has everyone here filed a comment objecting to this ban yet?

If no, why dahellnot?

Nemo

[Erick]

Even tonite I still found ammo for 25 cents a round ( albeit steelcase 55gr) 

But yes a panic is clearly upon us.

So I unchached lots of M855 and will sell it if the prices keep going up.

I'll try not to rape any good patriots, but there are a lot of 1%ers in my town who are probably discovering a love for M855 just about now... I will make some profit to invest in economy ammo for training. 

[JohnyMac]

Here is the letter I wrote Denise Brown. It is not a writing master piece by any means. Have you taken the time to compose and send your comments?

John Mcxxxxx
xxx Riverside Drive
xxxxxx RI 00000
johnymac@xxxxx.com

Agent Denise Brown
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives
99 New York Avenue, NE,
Washington, DC 20226

February 26, 2015

Dear Agent Brown;

It has come to my attention that you are soliciting public input on your proposed restriction of 5.56 M855 “ball ammunition.”

My wish is to let you know that I, a law-abiding American citizen, do not support the Bureau’s proposed restriction.

I have used M855 ball ammo for decades in all of my sporting long guns. Being a law-abiding American citizen I feel that the Bureau’s proposed restriction will limit my rights while doing nothing to make it safer for our Law Enforcement Officers. It is my experience that the criminal element in this country, are not looking to buy or steal SBR weapons; to purposely shoot Kevlar vested LEO’s with M855 ammo while participating in an illegal activity.

In point, I have taken some time to research before writing your office to see if any LEO was in fact shot with a M855 round with a standard long gun or a SBR. I have yet to find one let alone hundreds which would justify in my mind, this proposal. It might help the Bureau’s position if you were to report all of the instances where this indeed happened over a period of years.
 
Inclosing, I urge the BATF&E to either prove to the law-abiding American citizens that there is a need of this restriction or to permanently drop the Bureau’s proposed restriction of 5.56 M855 ball ammunition.

Sincerely,
JohnyMac
John Mcxxxxx

The email address to send your comments to is: APAComments@ATF.gov