Shooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 54 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,508 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This came up AGAIN Today!

"
ATF and Some Democrats Already Looking at Ways to Revive Ban on AR-15 Ammunition
Katie Pavlich | Mar 13, 2015
Katie Pavlich

Share on Facebook 450
509 SHARES

Earlier this week the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms announced it would temporarily delay a ban on AR-15 M855 "green tip" ammunition.

"Although ATF endeavored to create a proposal that reflected a good faith interpretation of the law and balanced the interests of law enforcement, industry, and sportsmen, the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and include issues that deserve further study," an ATF press release stated. "Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework. After the close of the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process (for example, through additional proposals and opportunities for comment) before proceeding with any framework."

But according to testimony given by ATF Direct B. Todd Jones yesterday to the Senate Appropriations Committee yesterday, the Bureau is already looking at ways to ban the ammunition and went a step further by claiming "all" 5.56 ammunition poses a special a threat to law enforcement. From the Washington Examiner:

In a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, ATF Director B. Todd Jones said all types of the 5.56 military-style ammo used by shooters pose a threat to police as more people buy the AR-15-style pistols.

"Any 5.56 round" is "a challenge for officer safety," he said. Jones asked lawmakers to help in a review of a 1986 bill written to protect police from so-called "cop killer" rounds that largely exempted rifle ammo like the 5.56 because it has been used by target shooters, not criminals.

His agency's move to ban the 5.56 M855 version was condemned by the National Rifle Association and majorities in the House and Senate and as a result was pulled back though not abandoned. At the hearing Jones said that nearly 90,000 comments on the proposal were received, many negative.

As a result, he said that the ATF will suspend rewriting the "framework" used to exempt armor piercing ammo from sale or use. "It probably isn't going to happen any time soon," he said. Jones also said, "We are not going to move forward."

Meanwhile, Democrats are pushing ATF to move forward with the ban, despite more the majority of the 80,000 comments submitted to the Bureau being opposed to the ban.

Congressional Democrats are pressuring the Obama administration to move ahead “swiftly” with a proposal that would ban a form of armor-piercing ammunition.

In a draft letter first obtained by The Hill, Democrats are urging the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to use his “existing authority” to keep “dangerous ammunition out of our communities.”

“We hope that the Bureau will swiftly review comments on the proposed framework and issue a revised proposal that will address the danger posed by handguns that fire 5.56mm and other rifle ammunition,” Democrats write in the letter.

Last week more than 200 members of the House, including Republicans and Democrats, sent a letter to ATF opposing the ban on AR-15 M855 "green tip" ammunition. Fifty-two Senators did the same. The head of the Fraternal Order of Police has stated AR-15 "green tip" ammunition doesn't pose a special threat to law enforcement and there is zero evidence to show AR-15 pistols are being used against police."

It seems "an Independent Regulatory Agency, The BATF&E, none elected officials are still moving Forward with the Executive Action directive to ban 5.56mm/.223" Ammo and by extension the Vast majority of "AR" Platform Firearms in Civilian/Citizen hands.

Best Regards,
Chev. William
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,920 Posts
They who abhor Freedom never wain nor quit in their efforts to destroy it...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,668 Posts
ALL high power jacketed hunting ammo such as .308 and .30-06 150 grain JSP ammo will defeat all Level III bulletproof vests. If ATF is looking to ban ammo that will defeat a lawman's vest, then ALL jacketed centerfire ammo is at risk and not just the "Green Tip" 5.56mm ammo.

Webley
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
I can only say.. again: It is NOT the ATF deciding to look at ways to ban the ammo. This attempt to ban comes from no less than the very top authority (and I don't mean the agency head Director (spokesperson), although he is charged with accomplishing it.)

The stories about ATF "trying to reduce officer deaths from armor piercing ammo" are silly, just to be kind and respectful. This attempt to ban comes from no less than the very top authority.

ATF legal counsels, technicians, admin. assistants, and special agents are only doing what they're told to do, which is what "we" pay them to do. Trust that most are doing it begrudgingly.

The other day, the oh-so-great news of the day was "ATF, in the face of public outcry, has decided not to ban the sale of "armor piercing ammunition" [note wording] at this time". To the casual observer, this was solid evidence that it was, in fact, the ATF's brainchild in the first place. The second message that the casual observer noted was that this was "armor piercing ammo" (which, put that way, is bad. See?) But WE are not the casual observer, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
The saddest part about this is that the media sources we trust will either gloss over the fact that this comes from the very top or at least concentrate the story so much on ATF that the reader can reach no other conclusion.

Bill Oreilly, Sean Hannity, a slew of columnists from Townhall dot com - all will either fail to see through this or wimpify their reporting so they don't.... insult anyone (any one)

So anger will be directed toward police, just like the new upsurge in Ferguson. It has to be the police's and ATF's fault, right? Right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MZ5

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,143 Posts
I think you're reading too much in the "armor piercing ammunition", at least in the context of the above statement.

----

But in the big picture, yes, AP ammo is not the issue. ATF was attempting to construct what amounted to a logical outgrowth from the 1986 ban on "cop killer" bullets, and did so as a means to set the stage to eventually ban all .223 ammunition as all of it will penetrate Class IIIa body armor, whether it was designed to be "armor piercing" or not.

In 1986 ban clearly meant bullets specifically designed for use in semi-auto pistols and revolvers, AND that were also designed to penetrate Class IIIa body armor.

What ATF tried to do recently was to construct a logical argument that since AR-15 pistols are now common, and fire M855 ammo that is "armor piercing", that it should be banned as it is now fired in a semi-auto pistol.

The first flaw in this logic, is that while M855 ammunition is commonly referred to as "armor piercing", it does not actually meet the ATF definition of armor piercing ammunition.

The second flaw in this logic is that in 1986 single shot pistols and the ammo fired in them (including such common hunting rounds as the .30-30) were exempt because they were not firearms that criminals used. ATF defined this along the lines of semi-auto and revolvers, exempting single shots, but the overarching intent was to exempt pistols that were not commonly used by criminals. Criminals were then, and are not, not nearly as concerned with action type as they are with the ability for the weapon to be concealed. And in that regard AR-15 pistols are not used by criminals as they are large, heavy, difficult to conceal, have a muzzle flash that makes them impractical at night, and a muzzle blast that is painful outdoors and deafening indoors.

In that regard, while AR-15 pistols meet a narrow legal interpretation of the regulations that stemmed from the 1986 law, they fail to meet the intent of that law as they are not in fact used in crimes with any significant frequency, and I am not aware of any officers who have very been shot by a criminal with an AR-15 pistol.

----

Where this logical outgrowth argument gets scary is that if ATF makes this stick now, with regard to M855 - which is in fact not strictly speaking "AP" ammo, per ATF's own definition - then they would be free to extend the argument to all FMJ .233 rounds, and eventually all types of .223 projectiles. At that point, they will effectively "ban" all .223 caliber AR-15s.

The predictable response of many, or at least some .223 AR-15 pistol owners would of course be to re-barrel them for another similar cartridge, that would then also be banned. Rinse and repeat, until all suitable cartridges are banned, and you've pulled off a substantial gun control coup.

----

ATF is still taking public comments until the 16th, but I think this statement is intended to influence people not to continue submitting comments, as ATF will have to respond to all of them, individually or grouped.

https://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2015-03-021015-advisory-notice-those-commenting-armor-piercing-ammunition-exemption-framework.html

That is essentially BS as a federal agency is not allowed to make comments or render interpretations on what it has out for public comment in a manner that may influence the public comments.

So feel free to continue submitting negative comments articulating why this proposed removal of the M855 exemption fails to meet the intent of the law, that there have been essentially zero LEOs shot with AR-15 pistols, and why the proposed ban on M855 fails to meet ATF's own AP definition.

You can read through the ATF's framework on their website, and then comment on the specific parts that just don't make any sense, are not legally consistent with the intent of the 1986 law, or are inconsistent with ATF's other definitions, such as the legal definition of AP ammo.


Submit comments in any of three ways (but do not submit the same comments multiple times or by more than one method):

1. through the ATF website: [email protected], then follow the instructions for submitting comments

2. By fax: (202) 648-9741.

3. By mail: Denise Brown, Mailstop 6N-602, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226: ATTN: AP Ammo Comments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,861 Posts
ALL high power jacketed hunting ammo such as .308 and .30-06 150 grain JSP ammo will defeat all Level III bulletproof vests. If ATF is looking to ban ammo that will defeat a lawman's vest, then ALL jacketed centerfire ammo is at risk and not just the "Green Tip" 5.56mm ammo.

Webley
This is the main point in all of this. Once they get away with using the "armor piercing" idea and the NRA as well as the rest of us unthinking jackasses have said OK to their "reasoning", they will then move against all other ammo capable of the same thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
Did ATF write the 1986 law? And this ATF man, what is his last name? (Correct Answers: 1)No, and 2) it has nothing to do with the ATF)

Let's not lose out by confusing ourselves. This nothing to do with the ATF except that they are the tool of the user. Clarity, not confusion, is what is needed if ever we are going to stop or properly hinder the progress of these assaults.

It is fine to write to them. Make pen pals too if that is important to the process. But please don't be misled or mistaken. Government process is very simple to understand, and it is our innate desire to blame the closest thing to us at the moment, that leaves us two steps behind... all the time. And at this moment, the closest thing to us is "the ATF", and news story after news story will not let (some) of us forget that. Please don't be fooled.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MusgraveMan and MZ5

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
Let me try to illustrate this with a corollary example: ONLY those with limited understanding of government place blame on the DHS for letting criminal aliens out of detention, just to roam the street and create more havoc. I have insider information - the level of order and authority goes so high that there is no higher.... eh, not in this country anyway.

So now, to place the blame on ATF for "dredging up this obscure law and trying to ban ammo and save police officers" is very revealing. It's ok because it's "taught to us" day in and day out, but at some point we need to look at problems from where they originate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MusgraveMan and MZ5

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,143 Posts
Did ATF write the 1986 law? And this ATF man, what is his last name? (Correct Answers: 1)No, and 2) it has nothing to do with the ATF)
Reagan signed the LEOPA in 1986, and the cop killer bullet provision was part of it. He also signed into law the ban on new machine guns as an 11th hour addition that he none the less fully supported.

In the big picture Reagan did more damage to gun rights than any other president - including the current POTUS.

----

Is there some pressure from the POTUS? Probably. Will it accomplish anything? Probably not. The larger threat is still from democrats in congress, if not now, then in the future.

You've failed to recognize that the bureaucracy in Washington holds sacred the belief that it exists to ensure no single administration ever really gets much accomplished.

The fact that the ATF has bungled this so badly suggests that the people who came in under other administrations are still alive and well and throwing wrenches in the works as needed.

Another sacred bureaucratic belief is that all political appointees are just "summer help".

-----

The real threat here is democratic sponsored legislation that could force ATF to operate under new legal definitions - like this proposed legislation:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/its-back-dems-to-push-bullet-ban/article/2561494


When you read the statement below taken from the article, and place it in the context of the LEOPA of 1986. This legislation would clearly impact all .223 ammunition as well as all rifle rounds chambered in AR-15 pistols, and it would also extend to any rifle round chambered in an AR-15 pistol.


Unfortunately, it won't stop there as Magnum Research makes a revolver than fires .30-30 ammunition.

As most of you know, since 1894, there have been a combined total of about 13 million Winchester Model 94 WInchester and Marlin Model 36 and Model 336 rifles and carbines sold in the US to deer hunters. We'd probably all agree that the .30-30 is probably the most common hunting cartridge in the US, but because it can be fired in a revolver, this proposed legislation in conjunction with the LEOPA of 1986 will outlaw all .30-30 ammo.

That would happen just because someone chambers a revolver in .30-30, and because .30-30 will cut through class IIIa body armor like a hot knife through butter, with no concern that criminals are not running around carrying Magnum Research .30-30 revolvers given their size, weight, expense, and lack of conceal-ability.

The bad news however is that the .30-30's Class IIIa armor penetrating capability is true of ANY hunting round with a velocity over about 1800 fps, even 120 year old rounds like the .30-30.

This will mean no more .22 Hornet, or .30 Carbine as they have been chambered in Ruger Single Sixes, or .45-70 or the ballistically similar .450 Marlin as it is also fired in a Magnum Research revolver.

Here's the alarming text:

"Additionally, Rep. Israel is announcing legislation with Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) that would require the attorney general to modify the definition of armor-piercing ammunition to conform to the performance of the bullet."

Like most legislation it makes perfect sense to folks who know almost nothing about firearms, but it has the potential to outlaw a number of common hunting rounds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
Model 52 said:
Reagan signed the LEOPA in 1986, and the cop killer bullet provision was part of it. He also signed into law the ban on new machine guns as an 11th hour addition that he none the less fully supported.

In the big picture Reagan did more damage to gun rights than any other president - including the current POTUS.

----

Is there some pressure from the POTUS? Probably. Will it accomplish anything? Probably not. The larger threat is still from democrats in congress, if not now, then in the future.

You've failed to recognize that the bureaucracy in Washington holds sacred the belief that it exists to ensure no single administration ever really gets much accomplished.

The fact that the ATF has bungled this so badly suggests that the people who came in under other administrations are still alive and well and throwing wrenches in the works as needed.

Another sacred bureaucratic belief is that all political appointees are just "summer help".
Model 52, make no mistake, I (for one) appreciate all the effort in those two posts. Yet, except for the quoted part above, the extra is irrelevant and certainly ignoring the warning I'm trying to give.

In the quote above, you answered correctly. So you see that it was not "the ATF" that passed the laws or regulations. Of course they cannot - I asked rhetorically just to make the point. So again, the ATF is no more than one of several "tools" (no disparagement intended) to enforce the laws, regulations, and directives of those above them.

By the news reporting, and by your commentary, some might be led to believe that a law enforcement agency is going to seek old law or regulation in order to protect other law enforcement officers. No, this is only what we are led to believe. I will never tire of restating this: it is NOT the agency, it is the management. Remembering the definitions of administration, cabinet, political appointee, and "at will" employment, should we believe that department heads are appointed for anything other than to enforce the will of the President? No, we won't believe that.

Sure Congress has some say. But to think either party has any control in these particular days is wishful thinking. Add to that the fact that appointees are not chosen by Congress (except by suggestion) and, even if they were, does that change my mind about the agency (ATF) not being the problem? No, it helps prove the fact that the ATF is doing this at the behest of their superiors, NOT because this ammo can pierce armor.

I hope I've stayed on point. Blame the lowest levels of government IF you must, and explain it all away with theory, but to do this is folly and is exactly what the higher superiors want from the fallout - buffering. AND.... it does nothing to solve the problem because it does not involve the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MZ5

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
OK a different tact:

Imagine the Chief Counsels or other legal beagles at the ATF surfing away at the computer one day, and then suddenly realizing that there is ammo out there that can pierce body armor and, by golly, there are some pistols shooting that stuff too! (Yes, I am trying to make this sound as silly as it is.) So they go to their bosses and say "Hey Bill, Frank and I were just thinking, with all this piercing and dying going on, shouldn't we try to bring back this old law and regulate some of this ammo?" ANd Bill goes to his boss, and him to his, and on and on until it gets to the Director who says "Hmmmm. Never thought of that. Let's get some stuff out there and see what the people think"

No. ALL of the above is just an illustrative joke. It does NOT work that way. It's backwards. Do you know what my agency would say IF they believed that "ATF" was bringing back obscure regulation just to protect them (my agency)??? They'd say "What? WHO are YOU? We can decide for ourselves when there is danger and when there's not. Since when is it ATF's job to be the caretaker of the health and welfare of the workforce of other agencies?" (And all of this is not even to mention what the FBI would think or say, having been left out of something so vitally important). C'mon.

No, ATF special agents nor legal beagles nor group supervisors nor agents in charge did NOT, not in any fashion, come up with this idea from the bottom up.

My warning is simply this: Give the news reports the credibility they deserve. ANd don't apologize to them because you didn't give them any. Ditto for the highest authorities whose mission is always, always, to buffer themselves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
If they were truly concerned with pistols that could fire ammo capable of piercing vests, they would have written or would seek to rewrite the current ignorant laws regarding sbr's. Instead of worrying about grips and stocks and whatever other idiotic thing they come up with, just write a law banning rifle cartridges in firearms with barrels under 16". Or define a ratio of bullet diameter vs. velocity and say that anything with a barrel under 16" that fires a round that exceeds this ratio is an sbr.

The bigger concern is that you have an agency that appears to be tinkering with the idea of skirting the constitution, congress, and our entire legal system upon the will of "those in charge". Kind of reminds me of:

Third Reich: An Overview

While it may be true that the batfe is being pressured by the current administration, those who work for the agency need to determine for themselves if they are going to jump off the proverbial bridge because someone told them to.

Dictators are powerless without those who will follow orders either mindlessly or out of fear. I also have no recollection of any history text that defends the nazi soldiers who lit the furnaces as being soldiers " just doing their jobs" or "just following orders". To say that the foot soldiers are not resposible for their own actions... Nah,,, I would submit that they bear more responsibility.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
As I predicted when this came up, the sky didn't fall did it?

Now......I also predicted that if we freedom loving people don't find a way to start winning the elections that matter, the 2nd Amendment will someday get desecrated in an inevitably loaded court system by the socialist agenda and its followers that read the main clause of the 2nd, and see the world, much differently that we do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
BD, you were right when you said the sky wouldn't fall. However, when the news broke about "ATF has decided not to ban the ammo...... yet", let's remember this is far from over. The seed has been planted and it may take time to germinate. When the previous thread was closed, it closed with a yawn, as if the "ammo ban" was no more than a joke that finally ended. Well, it isn't a joke and it isn't over, whether it's a real attempt to ban or just a parry.

Another thing to remember is that, in each and every case in the last 6 years when there has been great consternation over an issue, something else happens out of the blue. It's like dangling a carrot with one hand "Look over here. Look this way. That's good" While the other robs and pillages. Have you noticed........ that the biggest consternation is raised by defenders and supporters of the 2nd Amendment? All the "left" has to do is sneeze and we've got every media figurehead and their brother whining 24 hours a day. It's like faking a blow at someone - it's the flinch the faker wants, and it's what they get.

I believe we constantly lose ground in this battle over 2nd Amendment rights (is there anyone, anyone, who would say that we've been winning this battle, at any time since 1800???), simply because we're always busy pining for the carrot.... or ice cream... or whatever. They don't falter from their quest, and they won't from banning guns and ammo. They can fake and parry all they want. Meanwhile you better believe something is happening in the background.

Look. This isn't about the banning of armor piercing ammo, so much as it is WHO is presenting it. I am convinced, big time politics is big time tactics, and they pop lots of smoke to fool "the commoners".

Regarding the soldiers in battle... following orders. You really can't compare that to the police officers or agents doing their job. What they enforce is legal, whether we like it or not. This is why cutting through the fog and attacking the real problem (legislators) is so important. They make legal what they will soon tell the police to do. The policeman cannot "act on his conscience", that's not what they're paid to do. They're not paid to rescue us from ourselves, that's our job, and it starts with who we put into office and what we allow them to do while they're there.

- Frederic Bastiat said:
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
 
  • Like
Reactions: MZ5 and Bird Dog II

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,865 Posts
This came up AGAIN Today!
.......
ATF and Some Democrats Already Looking at Ways to Revive Ban on AR-15 Ammunition
Katie Pavlich | Mar 13, 2015
.........
Earlier this week the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms announced it would temporarily delay a ban on AR-15 M855 "green tip" ammunition
......
include issues that deserve further study," an ATF press release stated
.......
. "Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework
........
After the close of the comment period..... ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process ....before proceeding with any framework."
.......
ATF Director B. Todd Jones yesterday...the Bureau is already looking at ways to ban the ammunition and went a step further by claiming "all" 5.56 ammunition poses a special a threat to law enforcement.
........
ATF Director B. Todd Jones said all types of the 5.56 military-style ammo used by shooters pose a threat to police as more people buy the AR-15-style pistols.
........
"Any 5.56 round" is "a challenge for officer safety," he said.
.......
Jones asked lawmakers to help in a review of a 1986 bill written to protect police from so-called "cop killer" rounds that largely exempted rifle ammo like the 5.56 because it has been used by target shooters, not criminals.

His agency's move to ban the 5.56 M855 version was condemned by the National Rifle Association and majorities in the House and Senate and as a result was pulled back though not abandoned.
......
At the hearing Jones said that nearly 90,000 comments on the proposal were received, many negative.
........
ATF will suspend rewriting the "framework" used to exempt armor piercing ammo from sale or use. "It probably isn't going to happen any time soon," he said.
........
Meanwhile, Democrats are pushing ATF to move forward with the ban
........
Congressional Democrats are pressuring the Obama administration to move ahead “swiftly” with a proposal that would ban a form of armor-piercing ammunition.
......
use his “existing authority” to keep “dangerous ammunition out of our communities.”
......


POSTED AGAIN JUST IN CASE WE MISSED THE WORDING USED. JUST READ THE BOLDED PARTS

Does anyone find it funny how the Democrats were pushing ATF to move forward and then had to turn and pressure the Obama administration? only ONE authority tells his hand-picked man what to do. Only one. Here's the thing - the Director has the authority to revive legislation that's been suspended or put on hold. But he does NOT have the authority to do on his own something that would displease the President. The president can fire any cabinet official on the spot, rendering him powerless in mere seconds.... and then transplant him with someone who will do what he says.

The sky may not fall but the controversy continues. Why?

Why doubt the news media that reports that ATF only wants to ban the "dangerous" ammunition (see last line in quote)? Is this ironic or am I just twisted?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MZ5 and Walt45

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,881 Posts
Do not look past what Stretch is saying about the most dangerous individual in the loop.

Even the term "armor piercing" is deceptive. The uninformed civilian quite rightly thinks "what do hunters want to do with armor piercing ammunition? They are not attacking armor plated vehicles?" Body bullet protective materials do not come to mind immediately.

Another thing. The 2nd Amendment will never go away - however, merely making it a bureaucratic nightmare to get ammunition or reloading components, selling and buying firearms, making all military firearms illegal, background checks which is a registering process for you and your new firearms, ID to buy ammo and those records, all will serve the purpose for US "subjects" and not citizens of the autocracy to throw in the towel. Military firearms are the .223, 7mm and 8mm Mauser, .308W, 30-40 Krag 30-06, 6.5x55 to name a few. Then come all the derivatives from these cases.

I think too much hope is placed on the NRA and too little democratic pressure is exerted on elected representatives.

The other day the girl at the Cabela's check out insited to see my ID when I bought caps for my Kentucky muzzle loader and a set of snap caps. She tried her best to be as difficult as possible and eventually called some senior manager. His tactic was to ask "What's the deal to refuse to show an ID? What difference does it make (sound familiar?) to just show her your ID?" I just left the parcel on the counter and walked out an got it elsewhere.

ATF is merely the pawn in this issue - of course they are the willing pawns, do not think they are going about it under duress. They were just so in a hurry or under such pressure to get it going that the language was hastily compiled. The pressure is on them to get their act together and spin it better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MZ5 and StretchNM

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
The sky may not fall but the controversy continues. Why?

Why doubt the news media that reports that ATF only wants to ban the "dangerous" ammunition (see last line in quote)? Is this ironic or am I just twisted?
1. Some people don't think the "sky is falling" till the cops kick-in the door, hold a gun to their wife's head, and shoots their dog while demanding that they handover any guns. Until things get that bad they think we should be grateful that we can buy any ammo.

2. No Stretch your not twisted and its not ironic. Its just the willful ignorance of people.
 
1 - 20 of 54 Posts
Top