# 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:** 2
**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, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/21 "2015-03-10T05:27:13Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > [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. Sounds like that says the opposite of your point. For the purposes of this thread, only one of those calibers matters. And with ball ammo, it moved 4.5 inches in 10 yards and hit sideways. That difference is not trivial, and if you were hunting\*, or using it in combat that could greatly effect the accuracy and damage of the round (for better or for worse I cannot say). \*Generally not legal with ball/FMJ, so I doubt M855 is unless for lack of a law. Hunt with HP/SP/etc. ---
**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, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/22 "2015-03-10T05:35:22Z")
> [@thelurkinghorror](#): > > Sounds like that says the opposite of your point. For the purposes of this thread, only one of those calibers matters. And with ball ammo, it moved 4.5 inches in 10 yards and hit sideways. That difference is not trivial, and if you were hunting\*, or using it in combat that could greatly effect the accuracy and damage of the round (for better or for worse I cannot say). > > \*Generally not legal with ball/FMJ, so I doubt M855 is unless for lack of a law. Hunt with HP/SP/etc. If there’s brush that close to the shooter, he has no business shooting. If it’s that close to the animal, a few inches won’t matter that much if the hunter is actually capable. At any rate, the bullets are not hitting a branch and flying of at extreme/unpredictable angles. ---
**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, 7:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/23 "2015-03-10T07:34:12Z")
True, but I miss the part where it is mentioned that the brush is close by. You would be firing at a distance (50 yards on tBoT), whereupon it hits branches and travels 10 yards more. But the 50 could easily be 100 or 300, no? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/24 "2015-03-10T12:09:34Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > 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. Level III body armour is bulky as hell, though. And the ceramic plate that makes it work costs ~300 bucks a pop, and naturally once it has stopped one (1) bullet it’s no longer really dependable - whether it was rifle bullet or not. You might say it’s not that expensive for a saved life, but the truth is few PDs can include that kind of expense in their overhead. ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/25 "2015-03-10T13:36:15Z")
I suspect this is a solution in search of a problem. have any cops actually been killed by a criminal using this type of ammunition? ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/26 "2015-03-10T14:22:46Z")
> [@Mosier](#): > > I suspect this is a solution in search of a problem. have any cops actually been killed by a criminal using this type of ammunition? I don’t know, but I feel pretty comfortable saying AR-15 “handguns” probably aren’t the subject of most cops’ nightmares. I recommend everyone who’s interested in this read the ATF’s [notice on on this action](http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Library/Notices/atf_framework_for_determining_whether_certain_projectiles_are_primarily_intended_for_sporting_purposes.pdf). It covers a lot of the background and details their reasoning for moving forward with the ban. In a nutshell (I may get some of this wrong and nobody nerds out over details like gun nuts and Star Trek fans): Congress banned armor piercing handgun ammo back in the '80s at the request of law enforcement groups. Ammunition designed to be fired from a long gun can be exempted. Ammunition that _may_ be fired from a handgun and has a soft core is exempted. Steel-core M855 was initially exempted as a rifle round under the “sporting purposes” clause. Surplus M855 ammo became very popular. As environmental concerns about lead-core hunting ammo mounted, additional rifle rounds were exempted for sporting purposes. Then someone invented the AR-15 handgun, and now the ATF claims they can no longer honor the sporting purposes exemption for M855 because it _may be_ used in a handgun. Now, this is silly because lead core 5.56 may be used in those same handguns, and it will pierce armor all the same, but because of it’s material makeup no exemption is required. That means, in a nutshell, that this ruling is dumb. Really dumb. However, I don’t see this as any political malarkey designed to secretly ban assault rifles by starving them of ammo, as (slight more expensive) lead core 5.56 ammo is readily available. Rather, I see where the ATF is coming from, and I think congress should move quickly to amend the LEOPA to address this issue and solve the problem with common sense legislation. I’m sure that will happen it short order \. ---
**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, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/27 "2015-03-10T15:33:57Z")
The sooner the “sporting purpose” language dies the better. ---
**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, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/28 "2015-03-10T15:43:11Z")
> [@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. And none of this has anything to do with the exaggeration of ‘armor piercing’ ammo for ‘assault rifles’. You are talking about something totally different. I mentioned in my OP WHY people want the ammo (one of the many reasons, and one I figured the majority of non-gun folks here on the 'dope could easily grasp at an intuitive level). I really have no idea of what your point is in all of this. Are you good with banning this ammo for the reasons it’s being demonized though your actual issue with it is that hunters might misuse it, in your opinion, when hunting in heavy brush? And that it’s all good because there are still other options out there (so far)? What IS your point in this discussion? Serious question, snark free. ---
**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, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/29 "2015-03-10T17:14:36Z")
First off, the round in question is a better penetrator of armor. [In this test](http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA567525), both steel plate and aramid/glass combo. However, I’m not aware of any actual use in the real world that would make banning this round a positive thing. I was addressing the fact that gun owners were using a reason that _encourages_ unsafe gun handling. That gives the anti-gun side ammo for characterizing gun owners as unsafe and not to be trusted. (Added with their usual hysteria) ---
**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, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/30 "2015-03-10T19:29:49Z")
[And today the ATF has officially backed down.](http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2015-03-021015-advisory-notice-those-commenting-armor-piercing-ammunition-exemption-framework.html) > [@](#): > > 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. **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. Nothing says they can’t do it later. Another reason gun rights advocates need to be perpetually vigilant in opposition of these tactics. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/31 "2015-03-10T19:41:46Z")
What “tactics?” It was within their power to do a thing, and they listened to the people and chose not to do the thing, which is good because the thing was dumb. Let’s not pretend that this is anything other than an example of government generally being good. ---
**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, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/32 "2015-03-10T19:46:38Z")
The tactic is that of trying to find new ways to ban things. If people in congress try to ban assault weapons and retreat from that position because of various opposition, it’s still a tactic of trying to ban things. That they were unsuccessful does not make it an example of them being generally good. They still tried to ban something - and that is generally bad. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/33 "2015-03-10T19:53:12Z")
This sounds like a conspiracy theory. ---
**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, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/34 "2015-03-10T20:08:10Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > This sounds like a conspiracy theory. It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you. 😛 ---
**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, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/35 "2015-03-10T20:17:53Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > This sounds like a conspiracy theory. It’s not a conspiracy theory - the evidence is obvious and available to examine. ATF tried to ban a type of ammo. People complained so they backed off. You’re saying that’s an example of government being good. Right? I’m saying, the initial action of trying to ban a type of ammo is bad. It’s consistent with the administration trying to ban other firearm related things. The consistent tactic is trying to ban things. That’s bad. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/36 "2015-03-10T20:30:17Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I’m saying, the initial action of trying to ban a type of ammo is bad. It’s consistent with the administration trying to ban other firearm related things. The consistent tactic is trying to ban things. That’s bad. Cite that this was initiated by “the administration?” Was it Obama himself? Or one of his cronies? Cite that this was motivated by a desire to ban “firearm related things” and not simply to enforce the plain wording of the LEOPA as written in 1986? If Obama and his cronies were so intent on banning something, why did they back down so easily? ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/37 "2015-03-10T20:40:01Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Cite that this was initiated by “the administration?” Was it Obama himself? Or one of his cronies? > > Cite that this was motivated by a desire to ban “firearm related things” and not simply to enforce the plain wording of the LEOPA as written in 1986? > > If Obama and his cronies were so intent on banning something, why did they back down so easily? Who backed down? This is still open for comment. No decision has been made. ---
**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, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/38 "2015-03-10T20:46:44Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Cite that this was initiated by “the administration?” Was it Obama himself? Or one of his cronies? You’re asking for a cite for something I did not assert. Who said the ammo ban was initiated by Obama himself or the administration? It could have been. The Obama administration certainly supported it. The Obama administration tried to push other bans. [The White House Press Secretary defended the proposal saying that the president has long believed there are “common sense” steps the government can take…and that this was one of them. (youtube video)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOQ7C4cNZas) > [@](#): > > Cite that this was motivated by a desire to ban “firearm related things” and not simply to enforce the plain wording of the LEOPA as written in 1986? It’s odd asking for a cite for something I did not assert. I did not speak to the motivation of the current activity - just that it is consistent with their attempts to ban things in the recent past. > [@](#): > > If Obama and his cronies were so intent on banning something, why did they back down so easily? I don’t know. Do you need a cite for that? ---
**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, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/39 "2015-03-10T20:51:01Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > Who backed down? This is still open for comment. No decision has been made. See post #30. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639/40 "2015-03-10T21:08:57Z")
Note that the ammo was [already banned](http://fortressamerica.gawker.com/atf-crumbles-to-pressure-from-gun-lobby-on-armor-pierci-1690538799/+adamweinstein)by the Gun Control Act with a teeny tiny loophole: the was a “sporting” exclusion covering hunting ammunition. To take advantage of that loophole gun maker started manufacturing pistols that accept the rounds (not typically what most hunters use). In response to this the ATF wanted the sporting exclusion removed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/proposed-ban-on-armor-piercing-assault-rifle-ammo/714639.md?page=3)