Be sure you are signed up for JPFO's periodical Email Alerts.
JOIN JPFO TODAY
Get a very aggressive defense of your rights.
Click on the above.
Help us avoid errors.
Should you prefer a full page of JPFO’s main links, then
Read these classic
rebuttals to "Gun Control"
When the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives backed off from (for the moment) last week from their intent to ban M855 "green tip" ammunition, because of the threat it ostensibly poses to law enforcement officers (a "threat" that seems not to ever have materialized in the nearly 30 years of the ammo's availability on the civilian market), the anguished bleating of the gun ban zealots was long and loud.
The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence called it a "[v]ery disappointing decision"--language echoed by House Democrats, who added their contention that it is within BATFE Director B. Todd Jones' "existing authority" to go ahead with such bans. Congressman Eliot Engel, (D-NY) was in particularly high dudgeon:
Eliot Engel, (D-NY)
Engel introduced his bill to ban "armor piercing" ammunition last week, with H.R. 1358, the "Armor-Piercing Bullets Act." From the text of the bill, the intent seems to be to grant the BATFE the authority to do just want that agency wanted to, with the proposed M855 ban. The obvious question here would be, "If the BATFE already, as House Democrats claim, has statutory authority to implement such bans, why would Engel feel the need to introduce legislation granting that authority"? Engel also indicated that he would soon be once again introducing his perennial attempt to ban the FN Five-seveN and its ammo--another "cop-killer" with little if any history of "cop-killing" in the U.S.
Another of New York's congressional Democrats, Rep. Steve Israel, is even more incensed, going so far as to accuse the BATFE of "cowardice" for backing down on the ban:
Jackie Speier (D-CA)
Hmm . . . "reckless" and "cowardly"--now that's an unusual combination. Representative Jackie Speier (D-CA), with Rep. Israel cheering her on, today introduced yet another bill to ban so-called "armor-piercing ammunition, H.R. 1454, the "Modernized Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act." The text is not yet available, but the bill already has 16 co-sponsors (although one of them is the District of Columbia's Eleanor Holmes Norton, who does not have a vote). Presumably, the new bill will be substantially similar, if not identical, to Speier's H.R. 2566, introduced in the last Congressional session.
That bill would have banned ammunition not on the grounds of the metallic composition of the projectile, but on the actual ability of the projectile to defeat police body armor. Since nearly all modern centerfire rifle ammunition will do so easily, this would be an enormously wide-ranging ban. In fact, look at the language specifying how the ammunition's performance is to be gauged in determining whether or not the ammunition is "armor-piercing":
Notice that the legislation offers no guidance on what is to be the "Body Armor Exemplar." The Attorney General is to make that determination herself. What is to stop her from rejecting the Type IIIa soft body armor, worn by most cops, and capable of stopping such calibers as the .357 Sig and .44 Magnum, and instead using Type I. rated only for anemic .22 rimfire and .380 ACP rounds? What, indeed, is to stop her from designating a cop's polyester shirt as the "armor" that private citizens's handgun rounds must not be able to penetrate?
But a larger point is that in claiming that the current law--banning ammunition by virtue of its construction--is inadequate, because an infinitude of ammo not so constructed is equally capable of penetrating body armor, they are tacitly admitting what gun rights advocates have been saying since the attempt to ban the M855 came to light. That round has no special "armor piercing" capability. Reps. Israel and Speier must know this, but that did not stop them from railing against the decision to shelve the M855 ban proposal.
In the end, as I argued here in the recent past, in a free society, we the people must have the means of denying those who presume to govern us--and their enforcers--invulnerability against our wrath, and thus impunity for their abuses.
A former paratrooper, Kurt Hofmann was paralyzed in a car accident in 2002. The helplessness inherent to confinement to a wheelchair prompted him to explore armed self-defense, only to discover that Illinois denies that right, inspiring him to become active in gun rights advocacy. He also writes the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner column. Kurt Hofmann Archive.