If at first they don't succeed, they just TRY TRY and TRY AGAIN!
They will NEVER stop coming for our guns and the next time Dems hold all branches of government, our guns will be FIRST on their agenda.
The recent failure of the ATF ammo ban on the popular M855 round was due to heavy disapproval from the American community. Regardless of the obvious mass opinion that M855 ammunition is to remain legal, Democrat leaders have decided to jump on the ATF bandwagon and continue efforts to ban it.
M855 ammunition is being banned on the grounds that it is “armor-piercing” ammunition. It has always been exempt from restrictions because it is primarily used only for sportsmen and hunting. M855 is popular for its availability, price, and accuracy.
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA)
Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY)
Since the ATF failed in its efforts to categorize M855 as illegal “armor-piercing” ammunition, a new bill has been introduced to the House by Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) and Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY).
This bill takes the ATF proposal and expands on it, banning any existing ammo that can be loaded into a handgun and “can penetrate the soft body armor often worn by police.” This would include any rifle round that can be used in a handgun.
“The Second Amendment does not give anyone the right to use a bullet that is specifically designed to pierce the protective gear worn by police officers…The Second Amendment, which I support, had well intended 18th century protections, but we live in a world with 21st century criminals and increasingly lethal weapons,” Representative Israel stated.
After the bill was proposed, Republican leaders fought back by proposing their own bill. On Monday, Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC), introduced H.R. 1365, the Ammunition and Firearms Protection Act, to the House. McHenry said that the motivation for this bill was an “assault on our Constitution and Bill of Rights.”
This bill proposes that M855 and any other ammunition that is meant to be loaded into a rifle is exempt from being considered armor-piercing ammunition.
Section 921(a)(17) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
“(D) Notwithstanding subparagraph (B), the term `armor piercing
ammunition’ does not include–
“(i) any M855 (5.56 mm x 45 mm) or SS109 type ammunition;
“(ii) any ammunition designed, intended, and marketed for
use in a rifle.”
Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC)
“The Ammunition and Firearms Protection Act would put an end to this attack on our Second Amendment by ensuring this popular ammunition used by countless law-abiding American sportsmen remains available and not subject to any future ATF bans,” said McHenry in a statement.
Referencing back to Israel’s statement, beginning a claim with “The Second Amendment, which I support…” is just like saying, “No offense, but…” prior to saying an obviously offensive comment. Have you ever noticed that a great percentage of comments that include “I am a supporter of the Second Amendment” in any form are usually statements that contradict the Second Amendment?
This is a great big pet peeve of mine that I see almost daily in politics. Never trust someone who says “I support the Second Amendment” until they literally advocate for the Second Amendment. Otherwise, it’s just a poor political tactic in efforts to gain trust of true Second Amendment supporters.
I also fail to see why it makes such a difference if the ammunition is in a handgun or a rifle. This proves that banning M855 and all other “armor-piercing” ammunition that can be loaded into a handgun is simply a cunning ploy to gain more control over law-abiding citizens’ access to ammunition.
Given the current state of the House of Representatives, I don’t see the Democrats’ bill making it any further.