Tsa

[ChumpDumper]

ATF is classifying this as a pistol, that is why M855 is being banned.

Hunting rifle?

[TheSanityAnnex]

Hunting rifle?

Sure. Accurate out to 200 yards.

Cop killer?

Find me one instance of a cop being killed with M855

[ChumpDumper]

Sure. Accurate out to 200 yards.

What do you hunt with it?

Cop killer?

Find me one instance of a cop being killed with M855

I don't know of any cops killed by rocket launchers either. I figure it's pretty hard to get that ammo too.

[ChumpDumper]

No one is arguing those should not be banned you stupid .




Does this look like a concealable handgun?

Who said anything about concealable?

Can it be used as a handgun?

[TheSanityAnnex]

What do you hunt with it?

5.56 or .308

Another 5.56 was at my doorstep today when I got home from lunch.

I don't know of any cops killed by rocket launchers either. I figure it's pretty hard to get that ammo too.

The armor piercing bullet ban had everything to do with being concealable.
Armor piercing bullets for handguns were banned in 1986 due to concerns for police safety as handguns are easily concealed and are used in the overwhelming majority of shootings. I have no problem with that ban and fully support it as it was written for police safety. They have now reclassified short barreled AR's as pistols, meaning M855 is now considered a handgun round. I found zero officer involved shootings with the M855 round, there is zero evidence that this round is an issue concerning police safety.

[TheSanityAnnex]

That picture was for you Pusher ing spenderthrift

[ChumpDumper]

5.56 or .308

What kind of animals are those?

[TheSanityAnnex]

What kind of animals are those?

I read your question wrong.

I don't own that particular gun, just posted a picture to show what was now being considered a handgun, minus the buttstock.

You could hunt pretty much anything you could with a regular rifle although accuracy would suffer the further out you got. I find the AR pistols kind of gimmicky, seem like a fun range toy though.

[TheSanityAnnex]

The armor piercing bullet ban had everything to do with being concealable.
Armor piercing bullets for handguns were banned in 1986 due to concerns for police safety as handguns are easily concealed and are used in the overwhelming majority of shootings. I have no problem with that ban and fully support it as it was written for police safety. They have now reclassified short barreled AR's as pistols, meaning M855 is now considered a handgun round. I found zero officer involved shootings with the M855 round, there is zero evidence that this round is an issue concerning police safety.

No comment chump?

[ChumpDumper]

No comment chump?

Well, some dude just pumped a gun store employee with 30 bullets from an AR-15 a couple months ago.

I don't think he was concealing anything.

On the whole, I see your point. Ammo manufacturers can't exactly be hurting for money right now though, so I don't see their retooling to be such a deal breaker.

[ChumpDumper]

I read your question wrong.

I don't own that particular gun, just posted a picture to show what was now being considered a handgun, minus the buttstock.

So if you took that stock off, you would pretty much hold it in your hand, right?

[TheSanityAnnex]

So if you took that stock off, you would pretty much hold it in your hand, right?

If you were to remove that stock (buffer tube) the gun would not function, it is an integral part of the firearm.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Well, some dude just pumped a gun store employee with 30 bullets from an AR-15 a couple months ago.

I don't think he was concealing anything.

On the whole, I see your point. Ammo manufacturers can't exactly be hurting for money right now though, so I don't see their retooling to be such a deal breaker.

For me it is not so much about the shortage but what will be banned next. Lead is being banned, steel core is being banned, soon there will be hardly anything legal to shoot. And what is left that is legal will be extremely expensive. Manufacturers just can't drop all their old machinery and buy 100s of millions of dollars of new machinery over night. It could 10 years+ to get that all sorted out and back to normal manufacturing levels. And that is not even considering all of the different primers/powders/brass changing as well.

[ChumpDumper]

If you were to remove that stock (buffer tube) the gun would not function, it is an integral part of the firearm.

OK, but you can't really call it just a rifle at that point can you?

I don't know enough about the nomenclature -- or about the gun's construction obviously.

Anyway, isn't the new regulation about what the bullet can do, not the classification of the gun itself?

[ChumpDumper]

For me it is not so much about the shortage but what will be banned next. Lead is being banned, steel core is being banned, soon there will be hardly anything legal to shoot. And what is left that is legal will be extremely expensive. Manufacturers just can't drop all their old machinery and buy 100s of millions of dollars of new machinery over night. It could 10 years+ to get that all sorted out and back to normal manufacturing levels. And that is not even considering all of the different primers/powders/brass changing as well.

Considering the size of thee companies, I wouldn't worry about their ability to fund retooling.

And does it really take ten years to retool bullet factories? I mean it took like four years to build the Toyota factory from scratch.

[TheSanityAnnex]

OK, but you can't really call it just a rifle at that point can you?

I don't know enough about the nomenclature -- or about the gun's construction obviously.

Anyway, isn't the new regulation about what the bullet can do, not the classification of the gun itself?

You can call it what you want, it is not easily concealable, and that was the crux in banning armor piercing for handguns as they are easily concealable. The bullet has always been able to do what it does. It was exempted by congress because it's common use was for sporting purposes, the same as it is now. Because they are now considering the above a handgun, M855 falls under banned armor piercing for handguns. It's bull .

[TheSanityAnnex]

Considering the size of thee companies, I wouldn't worry about their ability to fund retooling.

And does it really take ten years to retool bullet factories? I mean it took like four years to build the Toyota factory from scratch.

The industry still hasn't caught up since Sandy Hook and no ammo was banned. With an outright ban on 50% of produced AR ammo I think my 10 year guess is close. It is much more than just machinery though, 5.56 and .223 have different components, all that has to be factored in as well.

[ChumpDumper]

You can call it what you want, it is not easily concealable, and that was the crux in banning armor piercing for handguns as they are easily concealable. The bullet has always been able to do what it does. It was exempted by congress because it's common use was for sporting purposes, the same as it is now. Because they are now considering the above a handgun, M855 falls under banned armor piercing for handguns. It's bull .

Well, is being concealable even a factor after Sandy Hook and Aurora?

[ChumpDumper]

The industry still hasn't caught up since Sandy Hook and no ammo was banned.

Well there was not a reason to believe that e in fear harding was permanent.

With an outright ban on 50% of produced AR ammo I think my 10 year guess is close. It is much more than just machinery though, 5.56 and .223 have different components, all that has to be factored in as well.

I will believe ten year estimates when I see them.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Well, is being concealable even a factor after Sandy Hook and Aurora?

According to the ATF yes. That is what this is all about, M855 being able to be shot from a "handgun".

[TheSanityAnnex]

Well there was not a reason to believe that e in fear harding was permanent.

I will believe ten year estimates when I see them.

I'm just going off what I have seen. This idea that the industry could just ramp up quickly is far fetched. Time will tell.

I appreciate you not going with your schtick today, actually been a pleasure conversing with you.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm just going off what I have seen. This idea that the industry could just ramp up quickly is far fetched. Time will tell.

I appreciate you not going with your schtick today, actually been a pleasure conversing with you.

From my limited Googling, a new plant that could produce 2-3 billion rounds of ammo takes about $35 million and ten months to complete.

http://www.guns.com/2013/08/09/remin...rkansas-video/

[ChumpDumper]

According to the ATF yes. That is what this is all about, M855 being able to be shot from a "handgun".

But that is not the same as concealable.

Looks like they are using the final language of the 1986 law

18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B) provides:
(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means—
(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun

http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/fil...g_purposes.pdf

--which apparently goes against the original intent of the lawmakers, who only wanted to ban such ammo designed to be used in handguns.

So it's legal hair splitting, but interesting that the language ended up that way back then. The ATF claims that there are now handguns that use such ammo. Are there any actual pistol looking things that shoot that stuff?

[TheSanityAnnex]

From my limited Googling, a new plant that could produce 2-3 billion rounds of ammo takes about $35 million and ten months to complete.

http://www.guns.com/2013/08/09/remin...rkansas-video/

Remington is one of the biggest and produces all types of ammo. My timeline is specifically for the production of M855.

Many companies have been reluctant to expand and invest in new facilities. These new ammo plants are some of the first major expansions in American ammunition manufacturing capacity in about 10 years, and couldn’t happen sooner.

I think a lot of them are reluctant due to spending millions on machinery that will produce the next banned bullet.

[TheSanityAnnex]

But that is not the same as concealable.

Looks like they are using the final language of the 1986 law

http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/fil...g_purposes.pdf

--which apparently goes against the original intent of the lawmakers, who only wanted to ban such ammo designed to be used in handguns.

So it's legal hair splitting, but interesting that the language ended up that way back then. The ATF claims that there are now handguns that use such ammo. Are there any actual pistol looking things that shoot that stuff?

Those pictures I posted are what the ATF is calling handguns. There are some smaller ones but all basically the same as those pictures. I believe there are very small single shot handguns but they were exempted because 1 shot doesn't pose much threat to a police officer.