5.7x28 "too fast for our backstops"

[Sam Cade]

Armor Piercing defined:

(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means—
(i) 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
(ii) 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.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/921

 

[Trent]

Sam, you left out 18 USC 921 17 (C), which allows for the Attorney General to make exceptions on armor piercing ammunition.


ATF specifically exempted SS109 (green tip 5.56) as armor piercing here:

http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/newsletters/ffl/ffl-newsletter-1992-vol-2.pdf

My understanding is that SS109 is exempted, regardless of rifle/pistol use, because it was a dual metal core (lead and steel, with a copper jacket).

The ATF took letters last April and the entire firearms industry (as far as I know) is still waiting on a ruling on how they are going to classify armor piercing projectiles which now have handgun chamberings. Mainly thanks to T/C, virtually every rifle caliber can be found in a "handgun" now.

As far as I'm aware they haven't issued a ruling on this.

Attorney General Eric Holder is the only person in the United States who can de-list an armor piercing projectile (that's the (C) part you didn't copy in above).

(Also somewhere on the Internet back in 2009 I remember seeing a letter circulating from ATF tech branch which said the SS109 is OK to reload in 5.7x28mm cartridges, even if intended for hand gun, because the core was bi-metal and not entirely made of one of the restricted metals...)