OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO BAN AR-15 AMMO

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Should the private citizen be able to purchase ammo that can pierce a law enforcement officer's vest? I would say no. The courts have said no. There's still plenty of ammo that will shred a deer and/or target, your choice.

What Ammo are you talking about that will penetrate a Ballistics vest? Other than rifle Ammo like 30-06.

Jim

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Should the private citizen be able to purchase ammo that can pierce a law enforcement officer's vest? I would say no. The courts have said no.

Do you have a court opinion cite that says "no" to a "private citizen" being "able to purchase ammo that can pierce a law enforcement officer's vest"?

Please provide it: Like names in case, state/federal court, case number, and date.

I will say this. The integrity of a "vest" can depend upon a lot of variables, not the least of which is age and treatment, aside from the original quality and rating. I would seriously doubt that a court decision to uphold a ban on any ammunition that can penetrate ANY LE vest would remain intact "as the law." Generally speaking "the rule of thumb" is that the officer wears a vest that is "rated" for the weapon the officer is carrying, in case the weapon is taken from the officer.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

What Ammo are you talking about that will penetrate a Ballistics vest? Other than rifle Ammo like 30-06.

Jim

There are "vests' and there are "vests."

http://njlawman.com/Feature%20Pieces/Body%20Armor.htm

Check the 6 levels and the highest level on the chart ... and then ...

"No Body Armor Protects From All Ballistic Threats"

[CuteOldGuy]

If the 2nd Amendment does not permit ammo that can be used to protect ourselves from government, it is meaningless. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment is to insure that the people CAN protect themselves from government.

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

What Ammo are you talking about that will penetrate a Ballistics vest? Other than rifle Ammo like 30-06.

Jim

The ATF claims that is why this particular type of ammo should be banned. It's in the article.

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

If the 2nd Amendment does not permit ammo that can be used to protect ourselves from government, it is meaningless. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment is to insure that the people CAN protect themselves from government.

They wear vests, not full body armor...

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

There are "vests' and there are "vests."

http://njlawman.com/Feature%20Pieces/Body%20Armor.htm

Check the 6 levels and the highest level on the chart ... and then ...

"No Body Armor Protects From All Ballistic Threats"

Nice little article. You may have heard of the Pistol Ammo that was taken off the market back in the late 90's Winchesters Black Talon. The claim was that it could penetrate ballistics material effortlessly. Later ballistic tests showed although it had superior penetration and stopping power it still couldn't penetrate a vest. I will add this wearing a ballistics vest doesn't mean you'll go unscathed. You may still experience bruising of internal organs and in severe cases even broken ribs. Incidentally Winchester still makes the Black Talon, they just changed the name and made a few minor appearance changes to the bullet.

Jim

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Do you have a court opinion cite that says "no" to a "private citizen" being "able to purchase ammo that can pierce a law enforcement officer's vest"?

Please provide it: Like names in case, state/federal court, case number, and date.

I will say this. The integrity of a "vest" can depend upon a lot of variables, not the least of which is age and treatment, aside from the original quality and rating. I would seriously doubt that a court decision to uphold a ban on any ammunition that can penetrate ANY LE vest would remain intact "as the law." Generally speaking "the rule of thumb" is that the officer wears a vest that is "rated" for the weapon the officer is carrying, in case the weapon is taken from the officer.

Court opinion? There's actually a law. Been in effect since 1986. If you had read the yahoo article I linked in my post, you would know that.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

The ATF claims that is why this particular type of ammo should be banned. It's in the article.

The ATF's "claim" is an ex post facto restriction placed on an ammunition type that has been commercially available for some thirty years now, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. Nothing about the ammunition has changed except for the Odumbo administration's "definition" of the ammunition.

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The ATF's "claim" is an ex post facto restriction placed on an ammunition type that has been commercially available for some thirty years now, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. Nothing about the ammunition has changed except for the Odumbo administration's "definition" of the ammunition.

Then why not ban the 168 other types of this same ammo that will remain legal after this ammo is made illegal? I could believe you if they were banning them all but they're not.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Then why not ban the 168 other types of this same ammo that will remain legal after this ammo is made illegal? I could believe you if they were banning them all but they're not.

What's not to believe, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion? Check the facts, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. FACT: the M855 round has been on the market for over 30 years, but now -- all of a sudden -- the ATF wants to designate it illegal, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. FACT: other rounds still on the market have greater armor piercing capabilities than the M855, and there are other, more lethal rounds than the M855 round, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

The ATF claims that is why this particular type of ammo should be banned. It's in the article.

M855 is Rifle Ammo. A 30-06, 30-30, 270 all those will penetrate the typical vest a Police Officers wears. Modern vests however are equipped with an extra compartment so a ballistics panel can be inserted in front of the Kevlar material for extra protection from high velocity Rifle ammo. Another note that is often over looked is Kevlar doesn't last forever. It breaks down rapidly reducing it's ballistic capabilities. The Average vest is good for about two years with continuous use. At which time it may no longer be reliable.

Jim

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

What's not to believe, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion? Check the facts, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. FACT: the M855 round has been on the market for 30 years, but now -- all of a sudden -- the ATF wants to make it illegal, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. FACT: other rounds still on the market have greater armor piercing capabilities and are more lethal than the M855 round, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion.

You still didn't answer my question. If they truly want to ban armor piercing rounds then why ban this one and leave 168 others on the market, some of which you claim do the same thing. Why? There's no answer that makes sense in that scenario.

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

M855 is Rifle Ammo. A 30-06, 30-30, 270 all those will penetrate the typical vest a Police Officers wears. Modern vests however are equipped with an extra compartment so a ballistics panel can be inserted in front of the Kevlar material for extra protection from high velocity Rifle ammo. Another note that is often over looked is Kevlar doesn't last forever. It breaks down rapidly reducing it's ballistic capabilities. The Average vest is good for about two years with continuous use. At which time it may no longer be reliable.

Jim

A level IV vest, as illustrated in this video, is good only for protection from ONE shot. After that, the vest is compromised. If they were trying to take your guns, wouldn't they be banning this ammo as well?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRGuAvdXQ6I

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

You still didn't answer my question. If they truly want to ban armor piercing rounds then why ban this one and leave 168 others on the market, some of which you claim do the same thing. Why? There's no answer that makes sense in that scenario.

To create the "slippery slope" of precedent, you Kool Aid blinded and "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion.