ATF intends to reclassify and ban "armor piercing" ammo including M855

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yea, the NRA emails do center around legislation. I think we need just as many phone calls and emails to the NRA as we do to the ATF and congress.

This ^^^^^^

The NRA is a good tool but never forget that the NRA is also a money making and influence peddling machine that DOESN'T always have defending RKBA as its primary goal.......if you want evidence of this do a little digging into NH's current ILA rep with a last name of Hohenwarter.......he's got a long history of undermining good pro liberty pro rkba legislation and undermining/circumventing legislative processes and threatening legislators with bad grades from the NRA if they dont do what he wants.....he was one of the primary reasons we didnt pass good legislation in NH a couple years back......Pa has had similar experiences with him and there are others

http://pgnh.org/heave_ho_hohenwarter
 
Not surprised. I definitely have a love/hate attitude toward the NRA. On the one hand, people in the NRA have done yeoman work to maintain the RKBA. On the other hand, others in the same organization have done the opposite. If it weren't for them, we could still buy new FA at the hardware store.

But sitting on the sidelines and letting others do the work for us is again the root of all our problems. Don't like what the NRA does? Get involved. It's YOUR NRA folks, not the BOD's.
 
Not surprised. I definitely have a love/hate attitude toward the NRA. On the one hand, people in the NRA have done yeoman work to maintain the RKBA. On the other hand, others in the same organization have done the opposite. If it weren't for them, we could still buy new FA at the hardware store.

But sitting on the sidelines and letting others do the work for us is again the root of all our problems. Don't like what the NRA does? Get involved. It's YOUR NRA folks, not the BOD's.


Agree. The NRA isn't perfect, but in the last 5-10years I think they have moved away from compromising with antis (their response to Newtown was perfect, IMHO).

Without a thriving NRA, I think we would have seen a new federal AWB under Obama. The fact Obama has had to resort to back door bans (like 855), is a testament to the power of the NRA.

Again, not perfect, but still worth supporting.
 
Boehner in particular likely realizes that his head is figuratively on the chopping/ballot box in 2016

Wishful thinking I'm afraid..if they couldn't get rid of him last time he's in for life. He runs the Congress with an iron fist and has the members scared $hitless.
 
Agree. The NRA isn't perfect, but in the last 5-10years I think they have moved away from compromising with antis (their response to Newtown was perfect, IMHO).

Without a thriving NRA, I think we would have seen a new federal AWB under Obama. The fact Obama has had to resort to back door bans (like 855), is a testament to the power of the NRA.

Again, not perfect, but still worth supporting.

Dont forget though that it wasnt the NRA that did that......it was SAF and people like Robert Levy at CATO who pushed the envelope......NRA didn't want to touch Heller case and was dragged kicking and screaming into it.....

Personally I still think that Heller and Incorporation will ultimately bite us i the butt because we're never more than 1 political appointee away from the whole house of cards coming crashing down around us but thats a different discussion entirely

NRA has been FORCED to take a more aggressive position because others have DEMANDED it.......NRA follows, it doesnt lead.
 
attachment.php




atf.jpg
 
Dont forget though that it wasnt the NRA that did that......it was SAF and people like Robert Levy at CATO who pushed the envelope......NRA didn't want to touch Heller case and was dragged kicking and screaming into it.....

Personally I still think that Heller and Incorporation will ultimately bite us i the butt because we're never more than 1 political appointee away from the whole house of cards coming crashing down around us but thats a different discussion entirely

NRA has been FORCED to take a more aggressive position because others have DEMANDED it.......NRA follows, it doesnt lead.

I disagree, as time goes on there will be institutional reluctance to not upset the apple cart. The antis are too ****ing dumb to spoil a 2a case and pro 2A forces will not bring another 2a case if the court has an unfavorable composition.

-Mike
 
That fax/letter posted by edmorseiii is GREAT!!!

We need something like that set up ahead of time (NOW!) for all the New England states and maybe all states, to populate with the data for state representatives and state senators. GOAL, are you paying attention?

;-)

Thanks.
 
I disagree, as time goes on there will be institutional reluctance to not upset the apple cart. The antis are too ****ing dumb to spoil a 2a case and pro 2A forces will not bring another 2a case if the court has an unfavorable composition.

-Mike

If this were an issue like gay marriage it would be "Settled Law" to the left

But its not.

Its an issue that upsets the very foundation of their desired goal to control people in the same manner they do in the UK, Australia and many other places in the world

You cannot subdue or control an armed population

And they will not relent on this nor will they hesitate to overturn it the first chance they get.
 
Dont forget though that it wasnt the NRA that did that......it was SAF and people like Robert Levy at CATO who pushed the envelope......NRA didn't want to touch Heller case and was dragged kicking and screaming into it.....

Personally I still think that Heller and Incorporation will ultimately bite us i the butt because we're never more than 1 political appointee away from the whole house of cards coming crashing down around us but thats a different discussion entirely

NRA has been FORCED to take a more aggressive position because others have DEMANDED it.......NRA follows, it doesnt lead.

Actually, it was worse than that... the NRA tried to derail Heller on at least two occasions...

National Rifle Association

Attorney Alan Gura, in a 2003 filing, used the term "sham litigation" to describe the NRA's attempts to have Parker (aka Heller) consolidated with its own case challenging the D.C. law. Gura also stated that "the NRA was adamant about not wanting the Supreme Court to hear the case".[53] These concerns were based on NRA lawyers' assessment that the justices at the time the case was filed might reach an unfavorable decision.[54] Cato Institute senior fellow Robert Levy, co-counsel to the Parker plaintiffs, has stated that the Parker plaintiffs "faced repeated attempts by the NRA to derail the litigation."[55] He also stated that "The N.R.A.’s interference in this process set us back and almost killed the case. It was a very acrimonious relationship."[6]

Wayne LaPierre, the NRA's chief executive officer, confirmed the NRA's misgivings. "There was a real dispute on our side among the constitutional scholars about whether there was a majority of justices on the Supreme Court who would support the Constitution as written," Mr. LaPierre said.[citation needed] Both Levy and LaPierre said the NRA and Mr. Levy's team were now on good terms.[6]

Elaine McArdle wrote in the Harvard Law Bulletin: "If Parker is the long-awaited "clean" case, one reason may be that proponents of the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment – including the National Rifle Association, which filed an amicus brief in the case – have learned from earlier defeats, and crafted strategies to maximize the chances of Supreme Court review." The NRA did eventually support the litigation by filing an amicus brief with the Court arguing that the plaintiffs in Parker had standing to sue and that the D.C. ban was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.[56]

Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, had indicated support of federal legislation which would repeal the D.C. gun ban. Opponents of the legislation argued that this would have rendered the Parker case moot, and would have effectively eliminated the possibility that the case would be heard by the Supreme Court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller#National_Rifle_Association
 
I agree and will send it off. However, that's an awful lot of words (and some of them big) for your average legislator to read let alone understand...

None of it gets ready, but gets binary bucketed on one side or the other. Some intern simply reads enough to determine PRO or CON on an issue and they count them up.
 
Sent individual letters to ATF, Rep. Guinta, Sen Ayotte, and Sen Shaheen. Easy to do, and hopefully it'll have some impact.
 
Agree. The NRA isn't perfect, but in the last 5-10years I think they have moved away from compromising with antis (their response to Newtown was perfect, IMHO). Without a thriving NRA, I think we would have seen a new federal AWB under Obama. The fact Obama has had to resort to back door bans (like 855), is a testament to the power of the NRA. Again, not perfect, but still worth supporting.

Well said
 
Well said

Agreed. The NRA is a political organization, not a philosophical organization, which is why they should stay out of the SCOTUS stuff (luckily, Gura kept them out with Heller), and focus on battling legislative and grass-roots anti activity (what they are doing to the Nonsense moms is brilliant, I think. They've gone from the defensive over background checks to the offensive re: abolishing GFZ [particular campus carry] and Open Carry). Well played.
 
Last edited:
“It would be fair to say, as we are looking at additional ways to protect our brave men and women in law enforcement, and believe that this process is valuable for that reason alone,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest told TheBlaze during the press briefing. “This seems to be an area where everyone should agree that if there are armor-piercing bullets that fit into easily concealed weapons, that puts our law enforcement at considerably more risk.”

[rolleyes]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-trying-to-ban-certain-ammo-without-congress/
 
It would be fair to say, as we are looking at additional ways to protect our brave men and women in law enforcement, and believe that this process is valuable for that reason alone

Thanks in advance for all of the LEO leaders, union leaders, and cops everywhere for coming out to explain how this is nonsense... right?
 
Regardless of the veracity of his statements, what seems clear is he thinks the lives of police are more important than the lives of everyone else. Seems to hold their lives above the rest. He literally said it is important for their lives alone. Not your life. Not my life. Heck, not even his life! But the lives of cops alone are a "valuable" reason to infringe on the people's rights. How not surprising.
 
Obama is costing lives with his stupidity. Obama is costing us our liberties. Obama is not protecting the Constitution and is a traitor, Obama has violated his oath to the people of this country, he needs to swing from a tree.
 
Great... A letter.

Seeing as the ammo is going away anyway there isn't even a point in a lawsuit. Unless this starts effecting other ammo, isn't the entire freakout basically... pointless?
SS109 isn't going away, is it?
 
Great... A letter.

Seeing as the ammo is going away anyway there isn't even a point in a lawsuit. Unless this starts effecting other ammo, isn't the entire freakout basically... pointless?
Then you aren't paying attention.

The statement by the ATF is that the law does not matter - if it can be fired from a pistol and will go through soft armor, it can be banned.

As there is no monetary, tax, fee or safety issue at hand with this ban, there is only one motive left.

Pay attention. There will be a test at the end.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom