ATF Director to Congress: All 5.56 Ammo Poses A Threat To Officer Safety

I am completely sick and tired of the whole "officer safety" thing. The world is NOT a safe place and no matter how many rights we as Americans surrender it's not going to make it any safer. It IS going to make us into slaves. Molon labe.

 

They have stated their purpose, to make war on the American right to bear arms.

Those who continue to equivocate or question the right to "those" rifles, may your chains rest lightly upon you and history forget that you were our countrymen.

They have laid the choice openly. Make it, one side or the other. Either admit an anti-liberty stand or get busy writing your reps.

 

It was the Clinton appointed Surgeon General Joycelin Elders who called for "safer weapons and safer bullets."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GircMluiO94

 

..."Give em the ammo first"...

 

This^^^ lots of governing agencies making law that goes against the spirit of a republic. The ATF is only a small part. It is their nature.

As it stands congress can not, or will not, defund them.

 

Just what we need. Ive been fighting crowds for 5.56. I thought the dust was settling, and this comes. The flippers will still be buying all the ammo.

 

And they can ramp up the troubles (planted amongst the crowd) in Ferguson so giving the chills to the lawmakers that they need to ban more guns and ammo.

 

No surprise. Jones was 0bama's hand picked boy.

 

Exactly. They've about worn out the old "Do it for the children" mantra.

Nobody forces them to take the job.

 

Officer's safety is a buzzword to take away more of our gun rights. Its classic cloak and dagger strategy . For a poor and defenseless society is easy to be ruled over ---- this is the ideal Orwellian Society in the making.

 

It was actually the Commerce, Justice, etc. Subcommittee so Sen. Shelby was chairing it. I would note a distinctly different tone in Jones testimony during Shelby's questioning vs. His tone while Sen. Murphy of CT lauded him for trying to ban M855.

 

I keep reading it's all the fault of the AR pistol.

We've had rifle caliber handguns for 50 years or more, since before the '68 GCA. Nobody worried about them then. A Remington XP100 in a rifle caliber is not a problem.

A Ruger in .30 Carbine is not the problem.

But an AR in 5.56 is?

The problem is that the anti gunners HAVE done a good job of demonizing the AR and now we see feedback from GUN OWNERS who bought the lies hook line and sinker. And a lot of them use milsurps or manual action guns derived from military designs.

Don't like the AR? Fine. Blame the AR for what's happened, no. If it wasn't the AR, it would be something else. If it wasn't Officer Safety, it would be something else. In the past, IT WAS something else, this is the current gambit to play the disarmament game, and in a few years it will be some other lie.

If this is allowed to pass, it will be our own fault - same as the citizens of Ferguson who allowed the city council to push the PD into becoming a revenue enhancing agency. Where were the protests to the City Council in meetings years ago? Apparently they decided to suffer rather than direct their council members to fix it.

We aren't that bad off, I hope. We are getting in the face of the ATF and this Administration. We are trying to get them to understand it's them who are wrong. The .Gov is OUR EMPLOYEE, we need to quit drinking the koolaid of those who we appoint to govern us as a peaceable society that they have to protect us. They AREN'T, they are just consolidating more power to dominate and rule us.

Quit blaming the AR pistol, this action to outlaw all 5.56 means millions of AR RIFLES become worthless if it passes.

It's a bait and switch con game. They are trying to outlaw ALL of them, and the next ones on the list after that are all self loading actions regardless.

 

They're baaaacck!! Just as expected.

 

"Officer Safety", like Vehicle safety, is a term that was useful in the beginning. Once co-opted by politicians, it quickly became used toilet paper.

As for "taking the job" that is patent idiocy. There are a LOT of jobs with inherent dangers. Those who choose them do so expecting that the employer will do everything possible to mitigate those dangers. Officer Safety was the impetus for increased training to handle violent situations, to develop and issue Body Armor, and to increase marksmanship training, and implement "shoot-don't shoot training. Not only does this make the officer safer, it also makes the Public safer. Some states have just passed legislation that makes attacking a nurse on duty a felony. Wouldn't that also fit into the "well, they knew going in" BS, as well?

ALL ammunition is a danger to LEOs. Automobiles, trucks, trains, and other forms of transportation kill far more of them than guns. Yet, BATFE doesn't mention them. Could it be yet another case of a man with a hammer seeing every issue as a nail?

 

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=9823978&postcount=124

 

Part of me finds this little dust up rather amusing. For the last couple of years, the left has been largely spinning their wheels on the issue of gun control in the face of public sentiment. I believe this ban was intended to be a done deal before anyone noticed and leave us gun owners and shooters crying in our brass. Only thing is, word got out and something had to be done to answer the public outcry. Now, the Executive Branch doesn't know which way to go as they scramble and try to save face.

I'm not saying we're out of the woods by any stretch. But the way I see it, if the ATF is directly appealing to Congress, we have a better chance than we did before.

 

Well said.

 

Did anyone see the snake in the woodpile from 5 days ago?

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/perez-v-mortgage-bankers-association/

They "misprinted" the rules at the beginning of the year. Now, with this one, they can say it's an "interpretive rule change", sit back and not change a thing and you won't even KNOW about it until supplies dry up. Watch ATFE like a hawk now, because they will exploit this decision to the farthest stretch past imaginable. Then tie it up in court wrangling over what 'interpretive" means.

Edit to add - I REALLY hope someone with more legal experience than I can step in and tell me that I'm barking up the wrong tree...would be nice to be wrong here, but I don't think so.

 

The push is on to disarm us. Makes me wonder what the panic is that has caused them to accelerate their efforts. Are the gun banners falling behind the schedule? With so many advances by the liberals/progressives in other areas they must control to effectively destroy capitalism and institute socialism, it would appear to be so.

I like being a thorn in their side.

Woody

 

These.

 

The Perez v. Mortgage Bankers thread in Legal addresses this exact subject in more detail.

 

"They "misprinted" the rules at the beginning of the year. Now, with this one, they can say it's an "interpretive rule change", sit back and not change a thing and you won't even KNOW about it until supplies dry up. Watch ATFE like a hawk now, because they will exploit this decision to the farthest stretch past imaginable. Then tie it up in court wrangling over what 'interpretive" means."

"Interpretive rules" don't involve something nearly this drastic. We're talking millions of people affected, 100's of thousands possibly becoming felons at the drop of a hat (due to state AP possession laws, or simply by using it in AR pistols). Especially now that majorities of both houses are on record as vehemently opposed to the proposed framework, the ATF can't now claim they were innocently minding their own business when they slipped and banned-all-jacketed-ammunition-outright. "Oops"

I understood the court ruling pertained to rules that themselves do not carry the force of law (i.e. the ATF couldn't just unilaterally interpret all sear-based disconnectors as 'readily convertible to full auto' because they can be adjusted to jar-off, and effectively ban most semi-automatic weapons). If the effect of the rule change would be to have very little effect (ideally none, apart from increased regulatory clarity), no comment period is necessary.

Otherwise, we would be able to sue for a comment period for every single original question asked of the ATF; hate to side with them, but that is a preposterous burden. The ATF trying to count a small part of a core as the entire regulated projectile was just them trying to be clever; they hoped that people would be too dense to see the obvious consequences, and write it off as mere minutia (or maybe Jones honestly thought it was mere minutia since he doesn't know anything about guns?)

TCB

 

unfortunately, safety and security has always been the lure to convince people to give up liberty.. at this point youre no longer free to farm your own food and sell the extra, USDA says no, we created them out of FEAR of rancid food, though it seems to happen more often now than before.. we created the EPA to protect us from another boogieman, allowed the patriot act to pass for another, and everytime they try to pass gun laws they claim its for public SAFETY or "for the children"

im getting pretty tired of it too

 

If safety is really the thing why is there no talk of better body armor? This battle of rifle power vs handgun armor was lost when the existing armor was developed.