Gun Control CrowdJeff Soyer on 11 Dec 2012 04:36 am
ATF Could Ban Ammo Without Act of Congress
The challenge is that there are handguns designed to fire certain rifle calibers and that rifle ammunition wasn’t designed for anything other than sporting purposes. That means you could have a rifle caliber ammunition type outlawed on the basis that it can be fired in a handgun and pierce armor. That covers a wide range of rifle ammunition that could be outlawed under a stricter interpretation of this law.
According to the NRA representatives who attended the meetings, the ATF “suggested that it believes that the armor piercing ammunition law was intended to affect all ammunition capable of penetrating soft body armor worn by law enforcement officers.”
More at the link.
6 Responses to “ATF Could Ban Ammo Without Act of Congress”
Leave a Reply
(Be sure to answer the anti-spam question!)
on 11 Dec 2012 at 7:30 am # MichigammeDave
Throw in the pistol-caliber carbines, and you’ve got the makings of a real cluster-ex.
on 11 Dec 2012 at 8:49 am # Jay Dee
Let’s not forget either that the law does not contain a precise definition of exactly what soft body armor is. The ATF is quite free to declare that the minimum level of soft body armor is a single sheet of copy paper.
on 11 Dec 2012 at 1:21 pm # Sigivald
More accurately, there’s already been an “Act of Congress” authorizing them to do that.
They just haven’t treated “could be fired in a hand gun” as strictly as the language might allow.
Congress should clarify the statute, or better yet remove it entirely, as the entire bugbear of “armor piercing/cop killer bullets” was ludicrous from the start.
(Nor is there any need for “dirty tricks” like Mr. Dee suggests - and a court would likely reject such a ploy, as “a sheet of copy paper” has never been in use as “soft body armor” in the United States, and the term has a general usage and meaning, both now and at the time the statue was drafted.
The Courts don’t like it when the Executive plays cute little games like that, and the Executive knows it.)
on 12 Dec 2012 at 8:13 am # comatus
…as “a sheet of copy paper” has never been in use as “soft body armor” in the United States
Hello, Bibles, spectacles cases, and silicone implants!
on 12 Dec 2012 at 12:30 pm # ron
30-06 was for sporting purposes? I think not.
on 13 Dec 2012 at 9:25 pm # SPQR
I think what’s being missed is that the bullets at issue are the all brass or bronze ones. They are the ones covered by the statute at question and currently allowed on the market via the “sporting purposes” exception.