Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

My phone won't do PDF. (It hasn't acted right since the last major update; there's a few things my phone won't do anymore.)

What was the main idea of that ATF link?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Hold on... I'll paste it.

EDIT:
So, basically, it says... sorry, it should not have been omitted from the 2014 ATF Regulation Guide. They're still legal and we'll fix the guide.

Cool. Thank you.

That's what I was assuming from the response; I just wanted to be sure.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Notice of Publishing Error
On Feb. 13, 2015, ATF released for public comment a proposed framework, including legal and technical analysis, to guide its determination on what ammunition is "primarily intended for sporting purposes" for purposes of granting exemptions to the Gun Control Act’s prohibition on Armor Piecing Ammunition. This proposed framework is posted for public comment only; no final decisions have been made as to its adoption.

Media reports have noted that the 2014 ATF Regulation Guide published online does not contain a listing of the exemptions for Armor Piercing Ammunition, and concluding that the absence of this listing indicates these exemptions have been rescinded.

Please be advised that ATF has not rescinded any Armor Piercing Ammunition exemption, and the fact they are not listed in the 2014 online edition of the regulations, was an error, which has no legal impact on the validity of the exemptions. The existing exemptions for armor piercing ammunition, which apply to 5.56 mm (.223) SS 109 and M855 projectiles (identified by a green coating on the projectile tip), and the U.S .30 - 06 M2AP projectile (identified by a black coating on the projectile tip), remain in effect.

The listing of Armor Piercing Ammunition exemptions can be found in the 2005 ATF Regulation Guide on page 166, which is posted here

The 2014 Regulation Guide will be corrected in PDF format to include the listing of Armor Piercing Ammunition exemptions and posted shortly. The e-book/iBook version of the Regulation Guide will be corrected in the near future. ATF apologizes for any confusion caused by this publishing error.

They will ban the sale of steel-core bullets, so no reloading components either. Then they will claim that copper jackets are "armor piercing" and ban M193 also.

If they had their way, slingshots would have to be registered.

After further consideration...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03 ... -proposal/

Next up (in no particular order):

Gun Control Advocate Outrage
Hate on the NRA
M855 prices stay up
22lr prices stay up
Credit card bill payments because you bought 10000 rounds M855 at .80/rd because...ammo ban.

Mokey, thanks for the link. Just heard on the radio that the ATF waived the white flag. I guess after you get caught cheating, you have no choice but to concede.

Win for the Good Guys.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I believe there has to be something else other than "gun advocate pressure" that caused them to do a 180.

There must be a component to this that we don't know about. No way Obama or the ATF give a rats ass about public sentiment. Since when has that happened?

Two words: PURSE...STRINGS!

When CONGRESS got involved in a MAJORITY!?!? Yeah, don't piss off the guys who FUND YOU!

I have to say I'm shocked that they changed direction but thrilled that it's over for now. I heard that they might look at this again later. Any truth to that?

I doubt that any of this would prevent Dear Leader from banning ammo via executive fiat.

Nah, I think its worse than that. I'm not a conspiracy theory kind of guy, but what if all the major "mass shootings" were orchestrated by the federal government to force gun control down our throat, as some had claimed? Even though it didn't work on those occasions, would it confirm those theories if, in the weeks/months to come, for the first time ever a cop gets killed with an AR pistol loaded with green tips?


Not saying I agree with the theory, just askingg if it would prove anything if, God forbid, it does happen?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Reverenddel wrote:Two words: PURSE...STRINGS!

When CONGRESS got involved in a MAJORITY!?!? Yeah, don't piss off the guys who FUND YOU!

I wish I could believe the GOP in Congress would follow through on the power of the purse, but Boehner and McConnell have both proven they don't have the spines. Both of them promised to defund the illegal amnesty programs and they both folded like wet cardboard.

"The Justice Department will make a final decision when all of the comments are reviewed."

Anyone else think Holder will enact it anyway as a final middle finger to all of us?

scott9050 wrote:"The Justice Department will make a final decision when all of the comments are reviewed."

Anyone else think Holder will enact it anyway as a final middle finger to all of us?

Very likely. They have around 700 days left to do it.

As I suspected ATF is really looking at all 5.56 ammo not just M855. http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/atf-rai ... le/2561422

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

That's it. I've had it. If the ATF bans 5.56 ammunition, I'm hiring the Heritage Foundation or some other pro Constitution law firm and I will sue the US Federal government for violating my Constitutional Rights.

There is no such thing as "less lethal" rifle ammunition. Guns and ammunition are lethal. Less lethal is not lethal. Every rifle since the flintlock musket is capable of penetrating level 2 and 3 bady armor. That step would be the next step in disarming Americans and I am not going to stand for it.

And frankly, I have the right to ammo capable of penetrating body armor. If someone with body armor is trying to kill me, including a soldier who lost sight of his Constitutional Oath, don't I have the right to defend myself?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I'll just leave this here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZo4hbGJjVI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZo4hbGJjVI

Due to the fact that I don't want to violate any copyright laws, here's a link to another forum post that I think is very relevant to this whole debate.
The author seems to be quite knowledgeable on the subject and debunks several much used arguments for the ban.

A discussion of rifle ammunition bans and .223/M855 murders, by the numbers.

I was 100% behind the guy, until about half way through, he started making numbers up for "hypothetical" worse case. We need facts.

The first half with the facts he posted is the same info I have been looking at. It is very strong to make an argument and a good post to get source material. Just don't try to argue his made up numbers with a politician. They often ignore real data. They will give zero weight to made up stuff.