Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Stock up muthafuggaz...

http://www.nssfblog.com/oppose-atf-556- ... ition-ban/

http://www.cabelas.com/browse.cmd?categ ... b=SUBFEAT1

Ridiculous. They banned 7n6 ammo a few months back and now this.

I have 1,000 rds of green tip 5.56 and just over 3,000 rds of 7n6 for my AK-74. I guess I'll have to keep them around as collectors items.

Why just them?

By the way, here is the model for what they are proposing to do with green tip:

https://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2014 ... ition.html

So any steel core ammo in a caliber that has a single handgun in that caliber, according to ATF brilliance, should be banned.

Basically, kiss steel core ammo goodbye.

93henfan wrote:So any steel core ammo in a caliber that has a single handgun in that caliber, according to ATF brilliance, should be banned.

Basically, kiss steel core ammo goodbye.

Don't believe for one minute this was initiated by the ATF.
You can pretty much take it to the bank that a phone and a pen were involved in this decision.

93henfan wrote:So any steel core ammo in a caliber that has a single handgun in that caliber, according to ATF brilliance, should be banned.

Basically, kiss steel core ammo goodbye.

What is the rationale behind this?

OK. I'm familiar with 5.56 and 7.62 ammo having lugged an M-16 and an M-14. Just looked up that 7n6 designation. Apparently, it applies to a 5.45 mm bullet that's tied to the AK-74 93 cites.

So how does it work? How does the stopping power compare to the 5.56? Obviously, it's much less than the 7.62. I read a story once about the backlash over the changeover from the M-14 to the M-16 in Vietnam. Junior guys with the new rifles couldn't get this VC courier crossing their T, but their SNCO stopped him in his tracks with his 7.14....

dbackjon wrote:

93henfan wrote:So any steel core ammo in a caliber that has a single handgun in that caliber, according to ATF brilliance, should be banned.

Basically, kiss steel core ammo goodbye.

What is the rationale behind this?

If you can't ban the guns, ban the ammo?

Baldy wrote:

dbackjon wrote: What is the rationale behind this?

If you can't ban the guns, ban the ammo?

Then the guns become clubs.

SuperHornet wrote:OK. I'm familiar with 5.56 and 7.62 ammo having lugged an M-16 and an M-14. Just looked up that 7n6 designation. Apparently, it applies to a 5.45 mm bullet that's tied to the AK-74 93 cites.

So how does it work? How does the stopping power compare to the 5.56? Obviously, it's much less than the 7.62. I read a story once about the backlash over the changeover from the M-14 to the M-16 in Vietnam. Junior guys with the new rifles couldn't get this VC courier crossing their T, but their SNCO stopped him in his tracks with his 7.14....

Here's all you need to know. I have shot thousands of rounds of steel core ammo at a steel gong target I own. The gong is made of AR-550 steel, which I assume (CID, Ibanez set me straight if I'm way off) is comparable to modular paramilitary body armor. I shoot it from 200 yards usually, which is slightly less impact energy than point blank, but after all those steel core rounds, the surface is only slightly pocked. Nowhere close to even 10% penetration. My steel core rounds are not getting through plated armor.

I am highly confident that this legislation is 100% political crock of shit.

AR500/550 is used in body armor.

I thought only Congress could pass gun control laws? This sounds like Obama trying to play King again like he is doing with immigration.

BDKJMU wrote:I thought only Congress could pass gun control laws? This sounds like Obama trying to play King again like he is doing with immigration.

There is nothing about guns in here.


And, what is at issue is whether a certain type of bullets fall into a prohibited category - the type of rule making AUTHORIZED by Congress, and signed into law by PRESIDENT REAGAN in 1984.

The ATF is still taking comments, and have not yet issued a ruling, as authorized by Congress.

BDKKKJMU fail.

Why am I getting tagged in this thread?

grizzaholic wrote:Why am I getting tagged in this thread?

Settle down Clyde.

93henfan wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:Why am I getting tagged in this thread?

Settle down Clyde.

You just lost out on....

AZ is the next Montana recipient.

A different take on this...

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2015/02/ ... minds.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It all starts with bureaucracy, of course. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, which has "Firearms" right there in its name, regulates ammunition based on laws passed by Congress. One of those laws, the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1986, which passed 400-21 in the House and 97-1 in the Senate and was signed by God Reagan, says that any ammunition that "may be used in a handgun," is made of certain materials, like steel, and can pierce body armor can be banned. That's in the actual law. In fact, if the ATF didn't seek to ban those kinds of bullets, it would be violating the law. Pretty simple, no? Pretty cut and dried, no? If Congress doesn't like it, it can change the law. So now there's this ammo, 5.56mm constituent projectiles of SS109 and M855 cartridges, which had been exempt from the law because they weren't used in handguns. This was the "sporting purposes" exception to the law. But now there are handguns that can fire these steel-tipped, armor-piercing bullets. The ATF is proposing banning the manufacture, sale and import of them. You can keep all the ones you have or will buy in your hording frenzy. But after that, the law says, the safety of police officers comes before your desire to hunt deer wearing bulletproof vests. -

I think I already covered the fact that the round doesn't penetrate body armor. These aren't anti-tank rounds.

dbackjon wrote:A different take on this...

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2015/02/ ... minds.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It all starts with bureaucracy, of course. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, which has "Firearms" right there in its name, regulates ammunition based on laws passed by Congress. One of those laws, the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1986, which passed 400-21 in the House and 97-1 in the Senate and was signed by God Reagan, says that any ammunition that "may be used in a handgun," is made of certain materials, like steel, and can pierce body armor can be banned. That's in the actual law. In fact, if the ATF didn't seek to ban those kinds of bullets, it would be violating the law. Pretty simple, no? Pretty cut and dried, no? If Congress doesn't like it, it can change the law. So now there's this ammo, 5.56mm constituent projectiles of SS109 and M855 cartridges, which had been exempt from the law because they weren't used in handguns. This was the "sporting purposes" exception to the law. But now there are handguns that can fire these steel-tipped, armor-piercing bullets. The ATF is proposing banning the manufacture, sale and import of them. You can keep all the ones you have or will buy in your hording frenzy. But after that, the law says, the safety of police officers comes before your desire to hunt deer wearing bulletproof vests. -

Violating the law by not enforcing the law?

Pretty novel concept for the Obama Regime.

Thanks for the "edjumacation," 93....