The last page of the document in the OP says ATF website: and has an email address not a web link, and says follow the instructions. Anyone know where the instructions are? And are we supposed to write in to that email address or was that supposed to be a web link?
ATF proposes to reclassify M855/SS109 green tip as armor-piercing ammo
- Thread starter Bartholomew Roberts
- Start date
- Status
Ryanxia,
Look at the Activism thread on fighting this. There are several ways to respond highlighted in it from the NRA-ILA's webletter to the ones on other sites. The most important thing for us is to fire up our elected officials and get them to counter this through their power in Congress and put BATFE on notice that they'll face Congressional action if they go through with this proposed ban.
***
Forbes picked the story up on the 24th and gave some very good points that we've been talking about. Fox has picked it up, but other than the broader audience and giving Rep. Goodlatte a forum and providing a link to the letter over 100 Congresscritters have signed and sent to the head of the BATFE I'm not sure how much of a favor they did us since they didn't do as good a job in the accompanieing print piece as the Forbes piece in presenting our case.
Still, the more that the public sees that BATFE failed to properly solicit comments through the CFR and their fractured reasoning on M855 the better.
Look at the Activism thread on fighting this. There are several ways to respond highlighted in it from the NRA-ILA's webletter to the ones on other sites. The most important thing for us is to fire up our elected officials and get them to counter this through their power in Congress and put BATFE on notice that they'll face Congressional action if they go through with this proposed ban.
***
Forbes picked the story up on the 24th and gave some very good points that we've been talking about. Fox has picked it up, but other than the broader audience and giving Rep. Goodlatte a forum and providing a link to the letter over 100 Congresscritters have signed and sent to the head of the BATFE I'm not sure how much of a favor they did us since they didn't do as good a job in the accompanieing print piece as the Forbes piece in presenting our case.
Still, the more that the public sees that BATFE failed to properly solicit comments through the CFR and their fractured reasoning on M855 the better.
Last edited:
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
On a related note, the letter that Hso mentions above now has over 172 co-signers in just two days - and it looks as if the Senate will take up the matter also. So it looks like all those constituent letters are getting some attention in D.C.
yzguy87
Member
If a ban happened, when would it most likely go into effect?
The more we responsibly and respectfully insist our elected officials stop this proposed ban the more we can expect BATFE to withdraw the proposed change.
Usually letters to Congresscritters should be kept short and to the point (I struggle against being a wonk and can get very technical and long winded
) instead of listing every detail. The reason being the staffers that review letters lecturing the Congresscritter don't count the long winded ones any differently than the brief focused ones. Also, any vulgarity, profanity, threats of violence or vandalism do not get counted, so keep it clean and rational.
If we can keep the message going out to the public that BATFE suddenly is planning on banning common rifle ammunition that has been on sale for decades and there's no reason for it we might get more people fired up to fire up their elected officials.
Usually letters to Congresscritters should be kept short and to the point (I struggle against being a wonk and can get very technical and long winded
) instead of listing every detail. The reason being the staffers that review letters lecturing the Congresscritter don't count the long winded ones any differently than the brief focused ones. Also, any vulgarity, profanity, threats of violence or vandalism do not get counted, so keep it clean and rational. If we can keep the message going out to the public that BATFE suddenly is planning on banning common rifle ammunition that has been on sale for decades and there's no reason for it we might get more people fired up to fire up their elected officials.
Fraternal Order of Police have come out saying the ban is not needed.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...ded-ar-15-round-isnt-a-threat/article/2560964
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...ded-ar-15-round-isnt-a-threat/article/2560964
W.E.G.
Member
M855 ammo ban - 236 Representatives challenge ATF
House Letter to the ATF
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/gun-l...n-sign-letter-opposing-atf-5-56-m855-ammo-ban
Look for your reps signature.
If it's not there, light up the phones.
(ink signatures omitted for forum post)
House Letter to the ATF
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/gun-l...n-sign-letter-opposing-atf-5-56-m855-ammo-ban
Look for your reps signature.
If it's not there, light up the phones.
(ink signatures omitted for forum post)
Imagine that! :banghead: It's really amazing to me that the ATF is so confident in the stupidity and ignorance of the American people that they try to pass this off as being "for officer safety". I can't think of a single necked down center fire rifle round that won't go through soft armor. They know that and anybody that has the slightest bit of experience or has spent ten minutes researching with google knows that. I'm pleasantly surprised that the FOP has come out and said it.
Thompson9494
Member
Sorry if this sounds dumb but can't Congress just pass an exemption on M855 and make it a permanent law?
Also, is there any way to see which of our Congressmen/Senators are among those opposing the ban? I would very much like to know if my Congressmen opposes it. Seeing as she is a Texas Republican I am fairly certain that she does, but you never know until you know.
Thanks.
Also, is there any way to see which of our Congressmen/Senators are among those opposing the ban? I would very much like to know if my Congressmen opposes it. Seeing as she is a Texas Republican I am fairly certain that she does, but you never know until you know.
Thanks.
What exactly do you guys think Congress can do about this?
Passing a bill still has to be signed by Obama. Ain't gunna happen.
Pressuring ATF Directer Jones will do, what? He does what he is told and not by Congress.
Sorry, but this is a done deal. The only hope this has is in the courts, and that takes time and money.
Passing a bill still has to be signed by Obama. Ain't gunna happen.
Pressuring ATF Directer Jones will do, what? He does what he is told and not by Congress.
Sorry, but this is a done deal. The only hope this has is in the courts, and that takes time and money.
Actually Congress has a lot of power. They're just too scared/dumb/paid off/like how things are going/whatever it is to actually wield their power.
Rick R
Member
Actually, I believe that Congress could vote to defund the ATF and this silliness pretty effectively strangling the ban and it's authors.
Personally, I'd like to see a federal bill mandating that adult non-prohibited members of the public could purchase M855 (or what ever the current duty round is at the time) directly from the federal arsenal. Lets say each citizen could order 1,200 rounds per year at the same cost as the government, no FET, plus shipping. Just to help maintain the well regulated militia. If there's a war on the government could opt to refuse orders, but if peace reigns the little people working at Lake City gotta eat, pay mortgages and send kids to college too.
Personally, I'd like to see a federal bill mandating that adult non-prohibited members of the public could purchase M855 (or what ever the current duty round is at the time) directly from the federal arsenal. Lets say each citizen could order 1,200 rounds per year at the same cost as the government, no FET, plus shipping. Just to help maintain the well regulated militia. If there's a war on the government could opt to refuse orders, but if peace reigns the little people working at Lake City gotta eat, pay mortgages and send kids to college too.
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
"Actually Congress has a lot of power. They're just too scared/dumb/paid off/like how things are going/whatever it is to actually wield their power."
Precisely. Congress will never defund anything, let alone the "Bureau of It's For The Children." The trick is to con them into putting the Bureau under the oversight of a group that doesn't like dealing with their fallout. I've often wondered if putting the Tech Branch area (which comes up with these determinations that don't involve licensing/tax payment) under the auspices of the Patent Office, with consequences for non-gun patent law should they try to interpret reality as different than it actually is, wouldn't put the kibosh on a lot of this nonsense. Guns would at last be playing by the same 'intent' and design rules as other patentable inventions, and would be approached from the same bureaucratic mindset.
Then drop enforcement operations under the FBI, whose ivory-tower political leaders absolutely hate being embarrassed (due to having closer congressional oversight than the BATFE), and the most ugly of sting/enforcement disgraces will disappear as well --along with the letterhead
But as it stands now? The "rogue" agency is very useful; they can/do pull stunts that would get other agencies burned to the ground and politicians fired. But there's enough bureaucratic separation and plausible deniability (and low expectations) that the accountability never quite soaks into the right spots. And that's useful for a government, the same way a crooked "Dirty Harry" cop who gets results is useful.
TCB
Precisely. Congress will never defund anything, let alone the "Bureau of It's For The Children." The trick is to con them into putting the Bureau under the oversight of a group that doesn't like dealing with their fallout. I've often wondered if putting the Tech Branch area (which comes up with these determinations that don't involve licensing/tax payment) under the auspices of the Patent Office, with consequences for non-gun patent law should they try to interpret reality as different than it actually is, wouldn't put the kibosh on a lot of this nonsense. Guns would at last be playing by the same 'intent' and design rules as other patentable inventions, and would be approached from the same bureaucratic mindset.
Then drop enforcement operations under the FBI, whose ivory-tower political leaders absolutely hate being embarrassed (due to having closer congressional oversight than the BATFE), and the most ugly of sting/enforcement disgraces will disappear as well --along with the letterhead
But as it stands now? The "rogue" agency is very useful; they can/do pull stunts that would get other agencies burned to the ground and politicians fired. But there's enough bureaucratic separation and plausible deniability (and low expectations) that the accountability never quite soaks into the right spots. And that's useful for a government, the same way a crooked "Dirty Harry" cop who gets results is useful.
TCB
I'm sure Obama would be happy to sign that.
Or that a bi-partisan vote in Congress would override a presidential veto.
ha
lilguy
Member
FOP states ammo not a threat to them.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...ded-ar-15-round-isnt-a-threat/article/2560964
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...ded-ar-15-round-isnt-a-threat/article/2560964
Robbins290
Member
Looks like susan colins and angue king did not sign. I will call them when i get out of work
TimSr
Member
Yes. An even better solution would be for congress to completely repeal the entire act that targeted AP ammo to begin with, is there was no more rationale for it then than there is now.
Yes, the president would veto, but I'd love to see an override vote on the record. A lot of dems start getting real scared when forced to make a vote on 2nd amendment issues.
I don't think there are enough R's, even, to vote for such a thing. The two are not all that different, really.
You could get a record of people to for sure not vote for next election. And then actually not vote for them.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
Congress can do something and we can do something as well. Whether that "something" will ultimately be successful remains to be seen; but we should attempt it because it is low cost and even if we fail, the work we put into it can be used during litigation as well.
For example, look at this 9th Circuit opinion denying a preliminary injunction on Second Amendment grounds: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/04/14-15408.pdf (pgs. 10-20 in particular)
The court notes that there is a lack of evidence (since the trial hasn't actually happened yet) on some of the key information they would need to make a determination regarding the Second Amendment.
When we write ATF and outline how this ban effects us personally, when Congress weighs in (especially with a majority and both Committee chairmen) directing ATF as to how they intend the regulation to be interpreted, those are pieces of evidence that can be used later on if litigation becomes necessary. Is M855 in common use? 100,000 comments to ATF on a "policy change" that didn't even get published in the Federal Register would be a pretty big anomaly arguing that it is.
Likewise, a letter signed by an overwhelming majority of Congress spelling out how they intended the statute to be interpreted is still powerful evidence even if vetoed by the current President.
Just because a course of action may ultimately not be successful doesn't mean it has no use.
For example, look at this 9th Circuit opinion denying a preliminary injunction on Second Amendment grounds: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/04/14-15408.pdf (pgs. 10-20 in particular)
The court notes that there is a lack of evidence (since the trial hasn't actually happened yet) on some of the key information they would need to make a determination regarding the Second Amendment.
When we write ATF and outline how this ban effects us personally, when Congress weighs in (especially with a majority and both Committee chairmen) directing ATF as to how they intend the regulation to be interpreted, those are pieces of evidence that can be used later on if litigation becomes necessary. Is M855 in common use? 100,000 comments to ATF on a "policy change" that didn't even get published in the Federal Register would be a pretty big anomaly arguing that it is.
Likewise, a letter signed by an overwhelming majority of Congress spelling out how they intended the statute to be interpreted is still powerful evidence even if vetoed by the current President.
Just because a course of action may ultimately not be successful doesn't mean it has no use.
P5 Guy
Member
ConstitutionCowboy
member
Just remember why this proposed ban is likely going to happen. It is the goal of those in power in this country to disarm the people to make way for their nefarious ends. Follow the means, dispel the rhetoric they use, and there is only one end that all this points to.
Agencies like the ATF were created out of thin air(unconstitutional means) in order to have that afore mentioned goal easier to achieve. The rule making power invented for these agencies and the lack of any effective means to hold these agencies in check by Congress is designed purposefully to take the measures necessary to accomplish those nefarious goals out of the hands of our representatives that can be held accountable by the votes of We the People. We have unelected, untouchable government agencies with impunity doing the dirty work of those in power.
The brilliance in forking over those unpopular means to unelected officials is not even half of what was achieved by those dictatorial dictator wannabes. How they sold it to the elected officials and justified it to the People is the real brilliance. That's what happens when people who seek power instead of to serve are elected. You see, power doesn't corrupt. The corrupt seek power.
So, don't believe any of the rhetoric(lies, damn lies, demagoguery, dissembling, and phony statistics) these disarmers are using. It has nothing to do with "the safety of law enforcement" and everything to do with turning us into impotent subjects of their utopian state. Let them know that you know what they are up to and will not stand for it.
Back when the Constitution was written and ratified, a constitution was defined as a government - like a monarchy is a government, or a dictatorship is a government, or an oligarchy, or a theocracy. Those we elect are not our government - the Constitution is! Those we elect are only supposed to serve the government! Keep that in mind when you write your letters as well.
Let them know that we know that a disarmed populace is nothing more than villein, subjects, and serfs - and if not in the beginning, certainly in the end! Let them know that we have more than the freedom of speech and the ability to assemble and petition for a redress of our grievances. We also are equipped to defend our rights and freedoms. Yes, we have the power to be defiant. Let them know before the foreseeable "long train of abuses" we are disposed to suffer becomes insufferable.
Woody
Agencies like the ATF were created out of thin air(unconstitutional means) in order to have that afore mentioned goal easier to achieve. The rule making power invented for these agencies and the lack of any effective means to hold these agencies in check by Congress is designed purposefully to take the measures necessary to accomplish those nefarious goals out of the hands of our representatives that can be held accountable by the votes of We the People. We have unelected, untouchable government agencies with impunity doing the dirty work of those in power.
The brilliance in forking over those unpopular means to unelected officials is not even half of what was achieved by those dictatorial dictator wannabes. How they sold it to the elected officials and justified it to the People is the real brilliance. That's what happens when people who seek power instead of to serve are elected. You see, power doesn't corrupt. The corrupt seek power.
So, don't believe any of the rhetoric(lies, damn lies, demagoguery, dissembling, and phony statistics) these disarmers are using. It has nothing to do with "the safety of law enforcement" and everything to do with turning us into impotent subjects of their utopian state. Let them know that you know what they are up to and will not stand for it.
Back when the Constitution was written and ratified, a constitution was defined as a government - like a monarchy is a government, or a dictatorship is a government, or an oligarchy, or a theocracy. Those we elect are not our government - the Constitution is! Those we elect are only supposed to serve the government! Keep that in mind when you write your letters as well.
Let them know that we know that a disarmed populace is nothing more than villein, subjects, and serfs - and if not in the beginning, certainly in the end! Let them know that we have more than the freedom of speech and the ability to assemble and petition for a redress of our grievances. We also are equipped to defend our rights and freedoms. Yes, we have the power to be defiant. Let them know before the foreseeable "long train of abuses" we are disposed to suffer becomes insufferable.
Woody
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
