Skip to comments.
M855 SS109 Cross Section of Projectiles (Bullets)
Gun Watch ^
| 6 March, 2015
| Dean Weingarten
Posted on 03/06/2015 6:42:07 PM PST by marktwain
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
The "armor piercing" bullet ban never made any sense whatsoever.
1
posted on
03/06/2015 6:42:08 PM PST
by
marktwain
To: marktwain
Most gun laws (1934, 1968?, etc.) make no sense. Those laws were enacted by emotional thinkers.
2
posted on
03/06/2015 6:47:58 PM PST
by
Paladin2
To: marktwain
The left loves to use buzz words like “cop-killer”, “automatic” “armor piercing”, “assault rifle” and others, in order instill panic in the low information crowd, hoping they will gain new recruits to their gun-control agenda.
3
posted on
03/06/2015 6:53:46 PM PST
by
deoetdoctrinae
(Gun-free zones are playgrounds for felons.)
To: marktwain
That must be some .223 handgun.
4
posted on
03/06/2015 6:56:41 PM PST
by
Vermont Lt
(When you are inclined to to buy storage boxes, but contractor bags instead.)
To: marktwain
Much of government agencies’ political decisions are based on subjective and irrelevant information. They agenda oriented. Nothing new here.
5
posted on
03/06/2015 6:57:42 PM PST
by
Sasparilla
(If you want peace, prepare for war.)
To: Paladin2
“Those laws were enacted by emotional thinkers.”
No, they were enacted by emotional FEELERS. No thinking was involved.
6
posted on
03/06/2015 6:59:33 PM PST
by
43north
(BHO: 50% black, 50% white, 100% RED.)
To: Vermont Lt
This is but one type of AR handgun:
7
posted on
03/06/2015 7:00:21 PM PST
by
Yo-Yo
(Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
To: marktwain
Were those projectiles created and intended for handgun use? I’m going to wager no, thus are part of the exception of that definition.
Having said that, it would not surprise me that some drone declared them banned. And it shouldn’t take that much effort to get such a ban overturned by a court, since the law is very specific that the round must be intended for use in (not just usable in) a handgun.
8
posted on
03/06/2015 7:02:43 PM PST
by
kingu
(Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
To: deoetdoctrinae
Always thought “armor piercing” only made politicians tremble when they rode in automobiles...
9
posted on
03/06/2015 7:05:02 PM PST
by
jughandle
(Big words anger me, keep talking.)
To: Yo-Yo
It slides right into your pocket. Ha Ha.
10
posted on
03/06/2015 7:05:59 PM PST
by
Vermont Lt
(When you are inclined to to buy storage boxes, but contractor bags instead.)
To: 43north
Yeah, Duh.
Correct.
Social Justice involved.
11
posted on
03/06/2015 7:08:32 PM PST
by
Paladin2
To: Yo-Yo
And 7.62x39 be far behind? This too is a pistol..
12
posted on
03/06/2015 7:09:17 PM PST
by
Jaxter
(Si vis pacem para bellum.)
To: Jaxter
13
posted on
03/06/2015 7:10:59 PM PST
by
Jaxter
(Si vis pacem para bellum.)
To: Yo-Yo
Kool. Do they have an AR-12 handgun?
14
posted on
03/06/2015 7:11:51 PM PST
by
Paladin2
To: Jaxter
“This too is a pistol.”
With the rear stock, isn’t it classified as a short barrel rifle?
15
posted on
03/06/2015 7:16:17 PM PST
by
Sasparilla
(If you want peace, prepare for war.)
To: Sasparilla
Carbine
If it is using “Pistol” ammo
16
posted on
03/06/2015 7:19:13 PM PST
by
timlilje
To: Jaxter
That’s a big bag of NOPE!
Ouch!
17
posted on
03/06/2015 7:22:41 PM PST
by
Clint N. Suhks
(Bibi is the President we wish we had.)
To: Vermont Lt
It is important to note that there
are differences between NATO spec M855 and 223 Remington. Shooting M855 out of a 223 Rem chambered weapon may result in overpressure failure of the casing where the primer is ejected...
SAAMI has issued a specific warning about this.
18
posted on
03/06/2015 7:30:28 PM PST
by
Rodamala
To: marktwain
The author doesn’t get it at all.
The letter of the law no longer matters.
19
posted on
03/06/2015 7:33:57 PM PST
by
Lurker
(Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
To: marktwain
Those pictures explain why the M855 sucked so bad at 600 yards in the EIC match at the Wilson match. Total inconsistent quality control.
20
posted on
03/06/2015 7:37:55 PM PST
by
Tailback
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson