# Proposed ban on 'armor piercing' 'assault rifle' ammo **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 9, 2015, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639 "2015-03-09T21:31:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/1 "2015-03-09T21:31:41Z")
Was wondering what folks think of the proposed ban by the ATF on the M855 round. The thinking seems to be that this round is ‘armor piercing’ since it has a steel core, and that this move will save many police officer lives since it can penetrate armor. [Here](http://money.cnn.com/2015/03/09/news/assault-rifle-ammo-ban-sells-out/index.html) is a ‘balanced’ article from CNN on this vital issue: > [@](#): > > If you want to buy armor piercing ammo, it’s probably too late. > > The assault rifle bullet M855, known popularly as the “green tip” ammo, has flown off the shelves of gun stores in the last couple of weeks. The bullets can pierce vests and body armor worn by police officers. > > “It’s gone,” said Jesse Bonner, owner of Jesse’s Gun Shop in Corsicana, Texas, who had 2,000 rounds in stock recently. “It went pretty quick.” > > The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives recently announced a proposal to include M855 in its long-standing ban on armor piercing ammunition in order to better protect police officers. It’s true that the bullet can in fact pierce armor. What the CNN guys seem to be leaving out is that all rifle ammo can pierce armor, since body armor is designed to mitigate damage from hand guns and shrapnel, not stop rifle rounds. They also seem to have failed to explain WHY people want these rounds…it’s not to stock up on cop killers, but because the rounds are better for longer ranged shooting in heavy brush (the round was originally developed for light cover shooting by the military when it was noted that a standard ball M-16 round tended to tumble if it hit a leaf or branch). The irony, to me, is that this round is actually less lethal, since unlike ball ammo it doesn’t deform in the body, dumping it’s kinetic energy into a life target. Anyone have any thoughts on this? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/2 "2015-03-09T21:40:49Z")
There is body armor that can stop 5.56 rounds. Level III is rated to stop NATO 7.62x51 rounds. [Body armor performance standards.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_armor#Performance_standards) And frankly, I do not wish to be pierced by _any_ bullet. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/3 "2015-03-10T00:42:12Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > There is body armor that can stop 5.56 rounds. Level III is rated to stop NATO 7.62x51 rounds. Yes, but that is not the type a LEO will routinely wear. Level 3A tends to be the highest standard for “soft” armor with the heavier stuff stored in a squad trunk for tactical incidents. This is another “plastic guns” the sky is falling crap from the antis. How hypocritical that they always drag out the “protecting our police officers” chant when they want to ban something. But when multiple police organizations came out in favor of concealed carry Sarah Brady and her ilk basically said cops don’t know what they’re talking about. The bottom line is, they don’t give a rip about police safety but only about new ways to infringe on the rights of the general populace. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/4 "2015-03-10T00:57:19Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > The bottom line is, they don’t give a rip about police safety but only about new ways to infringe on the rights of the general populace. I, for one, am terrified that without this ammunition, a rogue army of deer wearing the latest in body armor will mount their horrific and bloody assault. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/5 "2015-03-10T01:01:18Z")
> [@XT](#): > > They also seem to have failed to explain WHY people want these rounds…it’s not to stock up on cop killers, \*\*but because the rounds are better for longer ranged shooting in heavy brush \*\*(the round was originally developed for light cover shooting by the military when it was noted that a standard ball M-16 round tended to tumble if it hit a leaf or branch). The irony, to me, is that this round is actually less lethal, since unlike ball ammo it doesn’t deform in the body, dumping it’s kinetic energy into a life target. > > Anyone have any thoughts on this? Oh, good. Let’s shoot at something that can’t be seen well enough to be a verifiable target. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/6 "2015-03-10T01:05:36Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > I, for one, am terrified that without this ammunition, a rogue army of deer wearing the latest in body armor will mount their horrific and bloody assault. ALL rifle ammo can pierce soft body armor. I saw a demo once of a .22 coming out of a Springfield Model 15 defeat a level 2A which used to be standard issue. Also, this isn’t the only rifle ammo that can be used in handguns. There are revolvers that accept 7.62mm ammo. Why no fuss over that? ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/7 "2015-03-10T01:09:46Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > ALL rifle ammo can pierce soft body armor. I saw a demo once of a .22 coming out of a Springfield Model 15 defeat a level 2A which used to be standard issue. > > Also, this isn’t the only rifle ammo that can be used in handguns. There are revolvers that accept 7.62mm ammo. Why no fuss over that? If there was a “fuss” over that ammunition also, would you suddenly support it? From your rhetoric, I thought it clear that you would have a problem with any of those regulations also. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/8 "2015-03-10T01:14:14Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > ALL rifle ammo can pierce soft body armor. I saw a demo once of a .22 coming out of a Springfield Model 15 defeat a level 2A which used to be standard issue. > > Also, this isn’t the only rifle ammo that can be used in handguns. **There are revolvers that accept 7.62mm ammo.** Why no fuss over that? Got a link? Because that sounds as useful (and painful) as a Barret .50 for home defense. [Found this “pistol”](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubS4WPjr0qU). Not exactly something you can tuck in your waistband. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/9 "2015-03-10T01:16:36Z")
> [@XT](#): > > They also seem to have failed to explain WHY people want these rounds…it’s not to stock up on cop killers, but because the rounds are better for longer ranged shooting in heavy brush . . . You seem to be defending people who shoot where the target, and thus what’s behind it, is obscured by vegetation. Aren’t those people violating a basic principle of gun safety? EDIT: I see running coach made this point previously. ---
**Author:** ![DinoR](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dinor/32/2821_2.png) [@DinoR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DinoR)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/10 "2015-03-10T01:27:13Z")
The M855 **A1** (aka “green tip”) was developed to replace the M855. The program to develop it was initially to produce a training only round without using lead. In a case of mission creep that got managed superbly, the PM created a round that was pretty much superior in every way except price (and still reasonably priced while avoiding the need to stock separate service and training rounds). It does have enhanced armor penetration. It’s also **more** lethal in squishy targets on average because it tumbles more consistently. It’s more accurate. It still doesn’t have the penetration of many rounds used for large game that aren’t “armor piercing.” More accurate and more consistent wounding are great selling points for hunting usage. Some may like the idea of not throwing heavy metals around their hunting areas. I can see a market. Butt… COP KILLLLLLLLERSSSSS!!! :smack: ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/11 "2015-03-10T01:38:58Z")
Here’s the stupid thing about it; it’s specific to 5.56 ammo. A .30-06 FMJ round will easily penetrate most body armor as well, but they’re shot from regular rifles, not EEVIL “assault” rifles. The reason people really want the M855 rounds is because they can get them for cheap as surplus, and/or their rifles are tuned to fire that particular weight of round. M16/M4 barrels are either set up for the M193 or the M855 in terms of twist rate, or they have an intermediate twist that’s good for neither but terrible for neither. ---
**Author:** ![GaryM](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garym/32/241_2.png) [@GaryM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GaryM)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/12 "2015-03-10T02:43:15Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Got a link? Because that sounds as useful (and painful) as a Barret .50 for home defense. > > [Found this “pistol”](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubS4WPjr0qU). Not exactly something you can tuck in your waistband. But because it’s designed to be fired while held in one hand it’s legally a pistol. Not too practical though. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/13 "2015-03-10T03:13:05Z")
> [@PhillyGuy](#): > > You seem to be defending people who shoot where the target, and thus what’s behind it, is obscured by vegetation. Aren’t those people violating a basic principle of gun safety? > > EDIT: I see running coach made this point previously. So, no argument except the shift the goal post…and yes, I see running coach made the same argument that really has nothing to do with the OP, and is the same sort of sophistry the folks trying to ban the ‘armor piercing’ ammo for ‘assault rifles’ uses. To answer this, firing a regular rifle round is going to do exactly the same thing, except it might be deflected instead and hit something other than what it was fired at. It’s not the tool, it’s how you use it, and if someone is going to do something stupid they can do it with these evil green tips as well as ball ammo. Like I said, the irony is that the ball ammo is actually more harmful if it actually hits a living being. But then, the point of this whole thing is to pick something, use sophistry to trick the ignorant and get them riled, ban something you can, then move on to the next thing…and the next…and the next. Right? It’s not about protecting cops, or someone shooting something behind vegetation or violating gun safety, it’s about banning a piece at a time. I’d have a lot more respect for folks if they would just come right out and say what they mean and do what they say instead of this sort of horseshit. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/14 "2015-03-10T03:26:34Z")
A solution designed to solve a problem that probably doesn’t exist. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/15 "2015-03-10T03:27:31Z")
> [@XT](#): > > So, no argument except the shift the goal post…and yes, I see running coach made the same argument that really has nothing to do with the OP, and is the same sort of sophistry the folks trying to ban the ‘armor piercing’ ammo for ‘assault rifles’ uses. You stated in your OP that this round is desired because of it’s long range and heavy brush performance. There’s plenty of other versions of 5.56/.223 to be had. If you want to hunt, get closer and wait until the target is out in the open. Otherwise, the shooter is an irresponsible asshole who shouldn’t have a gun at all. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/16 "2015-03-10T04:25:58Z")
There’s a couple pieces of information that are interesting to this story: [ul] [li]Armor piercing is fine in rifles because there is no way to ban them without banning nearly all rifle ammo. This goes back to BATFE rules regarding sporting purpose. The notion of a sporting purpose being necessary to allow types of firearms or ammunition pretty much went out the window with Heller and MacDonald though this is not yet litigated so the rules are unchanged. The core of the 2nd amendment is self defense and I look forward to the day the notion of ‘sporting purpose’ is put to rest.[/li][li]Someone realized that people were making AR pistols. In CA these are the items of true enthusiasts because due to short barrel rifle restrictions, and restrictions on any pistol whose magazine is outside the grip (both are banned), any AR Pistol needs to be single shot only. The stock is replaced by a covered buffer tube so that the firearm is not designed to fire from the shoulder, and the weapon is classified as ‘other’. Only one shot can be fired before reload. This is a $1,000 + single shot pistol that fires rifle ammo. So now that a pistol can fire rifle ammo, the entire class of ammo is attempting to be banned.[/li][li]This is par for the course for those that think the administration and BATFE will do anything to ban anything they can.[/li][/ul] The real topper on this story, is now [BATFE is walking it back claiming it was an oversight. (pdf)](http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Library/Publications/notice_of_publishing_error.pdf) > [@](#): > > Please be advised that ATF has not rescinded any armor piercing ammunition exemption, and the fact they are not listed in the 2014 online edition of the regulations was an error which has no legal impact on the validity of the exemptions. The existing exemptions for armor piercing ammunition, which apply to 5.56 mm (.223) SS 109 and M855 projectiles (identified by a green coating on the projectile tip), and the U.S .30-06 M2AP projectile (identified by a black coating > on the projectile tip), remain in effect. So they put out the new regs and a comment period to see if anyone would notice. All hell breaks loose in the gun rights community and they say it was a mistake. BATFE dropped that statement on March 7, but CNN is still running their story on March 9. First the administration wants to ban one of the most popular rifles and fails. Next here is an attempt to ban the ammo for it. Now I’m not sure if the BATFE can go ahead and ban the ammo at their discretion. It seems like if they follow the administrative procedures act they can. And they would be sued. ---
**Author:** ![Gray\_Ghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@Gray\_Ghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gray_Ghost)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/17 "2015-03-10T04:35:09Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > You stated in your OP that this round is desired because of it’s long range and heavy brush performance. There’s plenty of other versions of 5.56/.223 to be had. > > If you want to hunt, get closer and wait until the target is out in the open. > Otherwise, the shooter is an irresponsible asshole who shouldn’t have a gun at all. Why ever do people think that the only purpose for these rifles or pistols is hunting? Or that the Second Amendment was enacted to protect the right to hunt? Or that people think the AR-15 enthusiast community is primarily interested in using M855 for hunting? Hunting is something that is nice to be able to do with firearms; not their sole reason for existence. DinoR and bump have already covered why the ban is controversial and disliked. Pkbites explains why it’s a non-issue for law enforcement. In addition, if BATFE gets the idea that M855 can be banned because it might be used in an AR-pistol, and can defeat body armor, why not apply that logic to every other kind of mlitary surplus rifle ammunition, like, US, NATO, ex-ComBloc, etc…which will do exactly the same thing? Inexpensive military surplus ammunition is very helpful in providing a way that people can enjoy firearms recreation, self defense, and yes, hunting, cheaply and easily, and has done so with little societal ill effect since at least WW2. (And probably before then.) Again, not why people want to be able to shoot M855, but there are more than a few hunting situations where the target is clearly identified, and the backstop sure, yet brush-bucking performance is still sought. Hunting in thick cover, like Alaskan alder, California manzanita, Appalachian secondary forest growth: all are situations where you’d like the bullet to not deflect away, or start fragmenting on the nearest twig. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/18 "2015-03-10T04:39:39Z")
> [@Gray\_Ghost](#): > > Why ever do people think that the only purpose for these rifles or pistols is hunting? Or that the Second Amendment was enacted to protect the right to hunt? Or that people think the AR-15 enthusiast community is primarily interested in using M855 for hunting? Hunting is something that is nice to be able to do with firearms; not their sole reason for existence. It’s done to divide the gun rights community. They claim if you are hunting then they don’t want to ban _your_ guns, just those scary ones over there. It’s a way to try and subdue opposition in various circles. Hopefully people are catching on and realizing the 2nd amendment is not about duck hunting. ---
**Author:** ![Gray\_Ghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@Gray\_Ghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gray_Ghost)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/19 "2015-03-10T04:47:32Z")
Ran out of edit time so now that I see Bone’s post, I wonder whether BATFE (or EPA) could swing a ban on lead or jacketed lead ammo, due to environmental concerns? Similarly to how you haven’t been able to use lead shot to take waterfowl for some time. Of course, lead remediation costs and max 8 hour exposure levels may already be on the way to doing this for using lead at indoor ranges. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/20 "2015-03-10T04:49:40Z")
> [@Gray\_Ghost](#): > > Why ever do people think that the only purpose for these rifles or pistols is hunting? Or that the Second Amendment was enacted to protect the right to hunt? Or that people think the AR-15 enthusiast community is primarily interested in using M855 for hunting? Hunting is something that is nice to be able to do with firearms; not their sole reason for existence. [Box O’ Truth- Deflection.](http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-40-deflected-bullets-and-the-box-o-truth/) If you think your bullet will deflect wildly, then you have no damn reason for pulling the trigger. And I’m a gun owner. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639.md?page=2)