Rescue 5.45x39mm 7n6 surplus

[sharpcoolman]

folks I know by now that most of you have heard of the ban on this ammunition. For this of you that haven't this ammunition has been banned from import because it is supposedly armor piercing and it can be fired from pistols. This ammunition should not be categorized as armor piercing because non of it's characteristics support this claim. This "armor piercing" law for lack of a better words does not apply to this round as it is 5.45 or .214 diameter, and not .22 this ammunition has been unlawfully banned and I suggest you contact your representatives and give them grief over this They may ignore one of us but present enough numbers and something will get done. Thank you for your help I do not personally use this ammo but I believe if we let the ATF do as they please they will keep acting unlawfully against responsible gun owners.

 

[Sam Cade]

(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.

Note the "or"
Per the first item 7n6 is AP. It need not meet both criteria.

 

[akv3g4n]

Sam's post is spot on; that's a very important "or".

I have contacted my representatives and am hoping against hope that they can add 7N6 as an exemption similar to M855. I'm not sure what other recourse there would be.

I did find this letter interesting. A little background on how the law was meant to be written and enforced.

The letter was found under the second bullet point under Government Relations here:http://nssf.org/bulletpoints/view.cfm?Iyr=2014&Bissue=041414.htm

 

[sharpcoolman]

(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;

the core of this ammo also contains lead and is not entirely made of steel. Am i missing something?

 

[Carl N. Brown]

The Boolean logical operator words and and or and not have a deep impact in laws which is easy at times to overlook in a casual reading.

 

[atblis]

Yes, but it doesn't meet the first definition either. The core is not entirely steel, nor is it made out of a combination of the listed materials. It's a combination of steel and lead. Lead is not listed.

(False or False) or False = False

 

[Sam1911]

Yup, but I'm still not sure I see how 7n6 fits either category. I know going by precise definitions isn't what the cool kids are doing these days, but NEITHER is the core of the 7n6 round composed entirely of any of those metals listed under "i", NOR is the jacket of the 7n6 round responsible for more than 25% of the weight, so it seems like they've added a double negative to come up with a positive. Hey, it works in algebra, right?

Still, it's going to be a while before this gets rectified, if it ever does.

Breathed a small sigh of relief when this showed up...

 

[Sam Cade]

Yes, but it doesn't meet the first definition either. The core is not entirely steel, nor is it made out of a combination of the listed materials.

It has "a" core made of homogeneous steel.



It doesn't matter that that core is surrounded by lead.

 

[Sam1911]

So if any part of THE core of the bullet is made of a single piece of one of the verboten metals, then that is A core that is homogeneous, if only to itself?

Funny use of the word "entirely."

 

[Sam Cade]

When ATF tested the 7N6 samples provided by CBP, they were found to contain a steel core

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2...and-classification-7n6-545x39-ammunition.html

Core-a central and often foundational part usually distinct from the enveloping part by a difference in nature

It would be hard to twist the meaning of the word "core" in such a manner that the 7n6 projectile wouldn't have one made of steel.

 

[Sam1911]

Well, yes, that's so. Guess somehow getting 7n6 attached to the M855 exemption is our greatest hope.

 

[nathan]

Its sad this is happening. The 5,45 is a great round proven in Afghanistan, Chenchnya and Georgian conflicts. The Russians know their stuff and they stick by it.

 

[sharpcoolman]

it is clearly not armor piercing. even coming out of a rifle it has not enough force capable of body armor penetration. shooting it out of a PAP or AK or AR style pistol looses alot of potential energy. my $.02

 

[atblis]

It would be hard to twist the meaning of the word "core" in such a manner that the 7n6 projectile wouldn't have one made of steel.

No twisting needed. The wording of the law exempts it. The wording of the law also makes it clear that the core can have different parts

"which is constructed entirely" -->It is not made entirely of steel. Part of the core is lead.

"or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium;" --> A combination of lead and steel is not a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium;

Seems pretty clear cut to me.

 

[zdc1775]

Even in the picture Sam provided I see a steel jacket, a lead core, and a steel penetrator. That is just a piece of steel inside the lead core, so I don't see how it can fall under 18 U.S.C. 921 (17)(B)(i) since it is not a solid core, unless BATFE has now decided that if a bullet's core contains anything on the list, even if it isn't a combination of the list, it is AP. If that is the case then they have basically just reinterpited the law to mean what they want it too on their own.

This all assumes that the linked drawing of the round is correct and it does actually contain lead.

 

[akv3g4n]

Even in the picture Sam provided I see a steel jacket, a lead core, and a steel penetrator. That is just a piece of steel inside the lead core, so I don't see how it can fall under 18 U.S.C. 921 (17)(B)(i) since it is not a solid core, unless BATFE has now decided that if a bullet's core contains anything on the list, even if it isn't a combination of the list, it is AP. If that is the case then they have basically just reinterpited the law to mean what they want it too on their own.

The parts that you are referencing including the lead make up the whole of the projectile, however, the true core of it is comprised entirely of steel.

As Sam referenced from Webster, the steel and lead envelope the steel core of the bullet. The central most part (core) is entirely steel. It stinks and I think that the law is poorly written, but it does seem to meet the definition.

 

[sharpcoolman]

i still believe it is an infringement on our rights and we should protests it. trying to get under the 5.56 m855 is our best bet.

 

[Tirod]

We are arguing semantics, the Administration isn't. They are exercising any possible measure it impact our 2A rights.

It's not about the "or," much like the motto let no crisis go unused, they are not going to let any wording go unused. It was ignored in the past, now, by stroke of pen or any means available, tightening the screws on gun ownership won't be.

As time goes by, there will be more enforcement such as the Ares Armor takings, reviews of interpretations on the import of ammo and firearms, and in every case, the result will be to further restrict the sales and imports.

Easy sell to the non shooting public, it's armor piercing by the final authority's interpretation, if you disagree, then it stereotypes your response into the "gun nut" pigeon hole. Expect other shooters to support the administrations decision, because what do you need armor piercing ammo for? Gonna shoot a cop?

It's all win for them. What Congressman is going to face that kind of media play?

Aside from the legal interpretation, if the ammo could come back on the market at a higher price, would it still sell in the same amount? No - the #1 attraction was that it was cheap. And that will be spun by the Administration, too. Cheap cop killer bullets that let shooters blast away in "hi cap" magazines for no good reason.

I'm not saying don't oppose this decision, just suggesting that we be aware how the dice are loaded. Go into it with your eyes open, it's harder to surprise you.

There's nothing morally wrong with inexpensive ammo, but times change, and guns that shoot specific cartridges can and will fall by the wayside as availability and marketing work their way over the years. I sold off my .308 15 years ago, and the .22 sits in the safe taking up space. We may eventually get 7n6 back, what are you going to shoot in the meantime?