Banning rifle ammo?


PDA






Igloodude
November 1, 2004, 02:31 PM
All,
I just saw a link to the Senate bill (S.1805) that someone said would (as amended by Ted Kennedy) ban most hunting ammunition. The amendment 2619 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r108:4:./temp/~r108VBwIRP:e0:) is as follows:

SA 2619. Mr. KENNEDY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1805, to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others; as follows:

On page 11, after line 19, add the following:

SEC. 5. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.

(a) EXPANSION OF DEFINITION OF ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.--Section 921(a)(17)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in clause (i), by striking ``or'' at the end;

(2) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor; or

``(iv) a projectile for a centerfire rifle, designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability, that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber.''.

(b) DETERMINATION OF THE CAPABILITY OF PROJECTILES TO PENETRATE BODY ARMOR.--Section 926 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(d)(1) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Attorney General shall promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor Exemplar.

``(2) The standards promulgated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall take into account, among other factors, variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired and the amount and kind of powder used to propel the projectile.

``(3) As used in paragraph (1), the term `Body Armor Exemplar' means body armor that the Attorney General determines meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers.''. (bold added by me)

I'd really like to be able to point to an instance where Kerry voted for restricting hunting rifle ammo, to sway hunters that have temporarily lost their minds and are considering voting for him, but I need better ammo than this - my reading of this amendment is that it would not ban "normal" hunting ammunition.

Does someone have a less recent bill that Kerry voted for that has more obvious application to general hunting ammo?

If you enjoyed reading about "Banning rifle ammo?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ctdonath
November 1, 2004, 02:44 PM
They're not going to ban hunting ammo by saying "hunting ammo is hereby banned." What you quoted is lawyer/legislator-speak for "if it can penetrate body armor, which we all know all hunting ammo can do, the AG may ban it." IIRC, Kennedy specifically referenced the .30-30 when presenting this amendment.

At some point you must recognize that no amount of explaination can convince some people of the obvious.

The above-quoted bill is about as plain as bills get. Kerry voted for it. What more do you want?

halvey
November 1, 2004, 02:55 PM
Yeah, so anything the AG determines that can penetrate body armor can be banned. At what range? What kind of body armor?

Kennedy ammended and Kerry voted for it.

foghornl
November 1, 2004, 02:57 PM
"And which, exactly 'Assault Weapon' uses the .30/30 ammo?" Foggy asks, while installing asbestos bloomers & nomex suit, and running at better than 3,500 feet per second . . .

Can anyone remember the last time something like a Marlin or Winchester lever gun used in something like the famous LA Bank Robbery Gone Bad Shootout...or those 2 characters (Platt & Matix) in the Miami FBI shootout?


What a bunch of maroons. . . . .

45Cal
November 1, 2004, 03:08 PM
Quote,
What a bunch of maroons. . . . .
Yes, those Democrap's are a bunch of anti-gun morons.

Bartholomew Roberts
November 1, 2004, 03:09 PM
``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor; or

Here is a handgun:
http://www.tcarms.com/encpistol/index.php

It comes in the following calibers, making these calibers illegal "armor-piercing" projectiles under the Kennedy bill:

.223 Rem, 44 mag, 454 Casull, 480 Ruger, .45-70, .22-250, .243, .25-06, .270, 7mm-08, .30-30, 7-30 Waters, .308, .30-06, and .450 Marlin

Ask your hunting buddies if they use any of those calibers to hunt with. For that matter, read them this excerpt by the bill's author during the introduction of the bill:

"Another rifle caliber, the 30.30 caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers' armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating.

It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America." (Page S1634 of the Congressional Record, February 26, 2004)

It seems to me like Sen. Kennedy is being quite forthright about what he intends to do. Some have tried to make the argument that the sections you highlight mean rifle ammo won't be affected; but obviously th bill's author intends for it to affect rifle ammo as evidenced by his comment and even without the section I quoted, there is ample vagueness in the law that would allow rifle ammo to be banned.

Igloodude
November 1, 2004, 03:23 PM
Thanks, Bartholomew, I'd completely forgotten about the Thompson Contender aspect, restricting the ammo on the basis of it being armor-piercing in a handgun as opposed to "to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber."

That, along with the fact that a Kerry AG would certainly go down that path should be sufficient proof even for pro-Kerry hunters.

Excuse me while I wander over to a certain pro-Kerry "sportsmen's forum" to present this info...

R.H. Lee
November 1, 2004, 03:24 PM
How old is this guy? Isn't it time for him to retire or have a stroke or something?

Sindawe
November 1, 2004, 03:25 PM
How old is this guy? Isn't it time for him to retire or have a stroke or something?

Even better would be for him to drive off a bridge into the water, only with just him in the car this time.

buzz_knox
November 1, 2004, 03:33 PM
We've had this discussion before. The Kerry supporters come on and say we don't understand the bill, that it wasn't meant to do this. When you trot out ATF's historical crusade against the Thompson Contender and Kennedy's statements, they just say it's your (mistaken) interpretation and slink away.

NEtracker
November 1, 2004, 03:41 PM
We cannot "Hunt" with rifles in MA, so the rest of the country should be the same. That's their message! (of course, here it's largely due to dense population, not enough open space). I can see our rights at the National level eroding already. Soon it will be hunting with shotguns & muzzleloaders only, as in MA. Then it will be no semi-auto shotguns, pump & break-open only. The majority of the liberal & soccer Mom crowd don't believe there is any other purpose to own a firearm (only for Hunting), and then there's the Liberal crowd which is anti-hunting..... Sorry.. I'm ranting...:rolleyes:

Igloodude
November 1, 2004, 03:57 PM
Is "dense population" supposed to be a pun, by the way? ;)

raz-0
November 1, 2004, 04:35 PM
a projectile for a centerfire rifle, designed or marketed

the only element of design needed ina centerfire rifle for ammo to go through soft body armor is for it to push a certain weight projectile at the right speed. Physics takes care of the rest. If it didn't have the word designed in there, it might not be a threat to the average rifle round. However, it does. You tell me how the design of the .308 is NOT to have a this here 168gr projectile leave a 24" barrel at 2600fps+, and thus due to this design criteria, it will go through 90% of the soft body armor issued to law enforcement.

just because it isn't some wierd handgun ammo with teflon goo and a bronze core doesn't mean it isn't "designed" to penetrate soft body armor. Heck, look at the mini cartridges by FN and H&K, they are just little high velocity rounds with FMJ, unless someone is failing to mention some hardened core element. From the descriptions, it would seem the only difference between the armor piercing round and the practice rounds are FMJ vs HP, and velocity.

But anything that will go through the hide of something like a cape buffalo is going to go through a vest, and that will be because of the design of the cartridge to send a big old bullet that is very solid that way at a certain rate of speed.

TooTaxed
November 1, 2004, 05:01 PM
Kennedy specifically referred to the .30-30 as abhorent when introducing his bill. Has anyone seen anything other than normal hunting cartridges in .30-30? At a minimum, we can assume that every cartridge As powerful and MORE powerful would be banned...

And, what body armor would be tested? Likely the weakest commercial model. I don't suppose they'd simply develop more protective body armor. And even then, what about parts of the body not protected by armor?

NEtracker
November 1, 2004, 05:09 PM
30-06, gone!
.308, gone!

Sleeping Dog
November 1, 2004, 07:01 PM
Is "dense population" supposed to be a pun, by the way?

Haha, good one, igloodude. I guess you can judge by who they keep electing.

308, 30-06, gone!

No, NETracker, Kennedy was only worried about the all-powerful devastating WMD, the 30-30. He might throw in the similarly powered, block-leveler, armor-destroying Russky equivalent, the 7.62x39.

Hopefully he won't notice the nice, sweet, sportsman-like, gentle hunting rounds like 30-06, 308, or the Russian 7.62x54R.

He might change his mind if someone would inform him that "Kalashnikov" is now a brand of vodka. Great with Tonic and a twist of lime, makes the driving more enjoyable.

Regards.

txgho1911
November 1, 2004, 07:40 PM
Is restricted to muzzleloaded rifles and some pistols.
I am shopping for a Marlin1895g for when I move home to TX. I am aware of some rare exceptions that allow the use of a centerfire rifle.

benEzra
November 1, 2004, 08:23 PM
Paragraph (iv) is pretty much a red herring; it's paragraph (iii) that potentially bans any rifle ammunition the AG wants to ban. Practically ANY centerfire rifle ammunition will go through a level II or IIIA vest like it's not there. If a criminal shoots an officer with a .30-06, it doesn't matter WHAT kind of bullet is being used; if the officer is wearing a level II, IIIA, or III vest, the bullet WILL penetrate even if it is a softpoint hunting load, and if the officer is wearing level IV armor the bullet WILL NOT penetrate even if it is military tungsten-core armor piercing.

FWIW, 7.62x39, .223, and .308 are already covered by a construction-based standard under the 1986 law banning "cop-killer bullets" (since a 1994 BATF administrative ruling), but since it requires the bullet in question to actually have an AP core, it can't be used to ban regular ammunition. Kennedy would change that, of course, as well as cover pretty much any rifle caliber.

Here's one incident Kennedy was citing: Murder in hindsight: Fatal bullet pierced Kevlar vest (http://www.pressrepublican.com/Archive/2002/02_2002/021320023.htm).

Harry Tuttle
November 1, 2004, 11:54 PM
SEN. KENNEDY: Another rifle caliber, the 30.30 caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers' armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating.

It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America. Armor-piercing ammunition for rifles and assault weapons is virtually unregulated in the United States. A Federal license is not required to sell such ammunition unless firearms are sold as well. Anyone over the age of 18 may purchase this ammunition without a background check. There is no Federal minimum age of possession. Purchases may be made over the counter, by mail order, by fax, by Internet, and there is no Federal requirement that dealers retain sales records.

Page: S1635 of the Senate Congressional Record for February 26, 2004
http://thomas.loc.gov/r108/r108.html


heres Kerrys Senate speech at the hearing on Gun Maker Immunity:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68771

cracked butt
November 2, 2004, 03:14 AM
It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America.

Its outrageous and unconscionable that idiots in massachusetts keep electing this scumbag to the senate.:fire:

71Commander
November 2, 2004, 07:02 AM
Even better would be for him to drive off a bridge into the water, only with just him in the car this time

He would float. Fat is positively boyant.:D :what:

ID_shooting
November 2, 2004, 08:11 AM
"Kennedy specifically referred to the .30-30 as abhorent when introducing his bill. Has anyone seen anything other than normal hunting cartridges in .30-30? At a minimum, we can assume that every cartridge As powerful and MORE powerful would be banned..."

Man, if he is this uptight about 30-30, what would he think about my 300WM, LOL

This whole subject is what finally got my local gun shop actively involved. They have had anti-Kerry and the "liberal menace" signs up all over the store since this last summer.

The best one is a huge poster of Kerry, Edwards, Fienstien, ect. laghing it up after the law-suit bill got killed with the quote "What is #$%^% funny about banning hunting ammo."

That one alone converts many of the "Kerry wont take away my deer rifle/duck gun" crowd.

TCW
November 2, 2004, 11:25 AM
Well, I guess it's .50 cal for everyone! ;)

foghornl
November 2, 2004, 11:42 AM
He would float. Fat is positively boyant. Even fat as alcohol-diluted as Sen Ted "Where are my pants, my car & my pregnant secretary?" Kennedy's blubber ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

S Roper
November 2, 2004, 12:33 PM
"to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber."

Wouldn't this logically mean that at least one type of ammunition of each caliber could not be banned?

ctdonath
November 2, 2004, 01:10 PM
How do you get "more likely to penetrate" when standard rounds have full through-and-through penetration? keep piling on the Kevlar until it works, then decide that penetrating 910 layers of Kevlar is "more likely to penetrate" than 900 layers?

nomadboi
November 2, 2004, 01:26 PM
From factcheck.org (http://www.factcheck.org), which has been pretty good at catching fibs and exaggerations on both sides... I discovered it after Dick Cheney mistakenly tried to reference it as factcheck.com.

Anyway, here's their take on it:
http://www.factcheck.org/article296.html

benEzra
November 2, 2004, 02:09 PM
FactCheck blew it. They claim
Ignored both by Craig and the NRA, however, is the plain language of the amendment itself, which referred to ammunition that could penetrate body armor and is designed or sold as "armor piercing." Both conditions would have had to apply for the ammunition to fall under the proposed ban.
But guess what; the amendment didn't say "and." It said "OR."

I sent the following letter to 'Editor@FactCheck.org' (formatted text in the email; I apologize for the lack of format here). Thanks to a previous poster in this thread who put the idea in my head.

'Editor@FactCheck.org'

I was surprised to find a rather glaring error in the article http://www.factcheck.org/article296.html. The article states that

"Ignored both by Craig and the NRA, however, is the plain language of the amendment itself, which referred to ammunition that could penetrate body armor and is designed or sold as "armor piercing." Both conditions would have had to apply for the ammunition to fall under the proposed ban."

But in the language of the bill in the sidebar at the left (and verified by a look at thomas.loc.gov), the conjunction at the end of paragraph (iii) is clearly "or", not "and." This means that if ammunition meets the criteria of either paragraph (iii) OR (iv), it can be banned at the Attorney General's discretion.

Paragraph (iii) bans a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor.

So there are only two criteria to meet before ammunition can be banned:

(1) it can be used in a handgun, and

(2) it can penetrate body armor.

The firearm in the following link is a moderately common hunting handgun: (http://www.tcarms.com/encpistol/index.php). Therefore, any ammunition that can be used in this firearm meets criteria (1) above, including such common rifle calibers as .223 Remington, .45-70, .22-250, .243, .25-06, .270 Winchester, 7mm-08, .30-30 Winchester, .308 Winchester, .30-06, and .450 Marlin.

Every single cartridge I have listed will penetrate level II or IIIA body armor--the kind most police officers wear--as if it's not there, thereby satisfying criteria (2).*

So, ipso facto, any of the above calibers can be banned by paragraph (iii), and there is no legal reason why an Attorney General could not declare any of the above calibers "armor piercing," based on a close reading of the amendment. Doing so would be politically unwise, but it would indeed be fully authorized by the text of the proposed amendment.

It is unclear whether Senator Kennedy meant to give the Attorney General such broad powers; he summarizes the bill as excluding hunting rifles, but the only rifle caliber he mentions in the floor debate that is not already covered by the 1986 construction-based standard** is the .30-30 Winchester, a relatively low-powered deer hunting cartridge dating from the late 1800's and typically chambered in lever-action "cowboy style" rifles.

BTW, I am not in any way a professional spokesperson on this issue, just a gun enthusiast who has been following the issue for some time.

Thank you for your time, and I would welcome further correspondence on this issue if you wish.

[benEzra]

*Concealable body armor is designed to stop the most common handgun rounds, not rifle rounds; Mach 1.4 is a very high velocity for a handgun bullet, whereas Mach 3 is not unusually high for a rifle bullet, and some hunting rifles are capable of throwing a projectile at Mach 4. To stop rifle rounds, Level IV armor is ordinarily required, though a level III (not IIIA) vest will suffice for some relatively low-powered rifle rounds like 7.62x39.

**Per a 1994 BATF administrative ruling, .223 Remington, 7.62x39mm (.30 Russian Short), and .308 Winchester are subject to the same construction-based design standards as handgun rounds, under the 1986 law prohibiting steel- or tungsten-core handgun bullets.

buzz_knox
November 2, 2004, 02:10 PM
``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor; or

This is the real killer. Given the TC's availability in rifle calibers, it pretty much allows for banning all centerfire ammunition, as all but the weakest rounds will penetrate some level of armor.

If you enjoyed reading about "Banning rifle ammo?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!