NRA Director Sen. Larry Craig's Ammunition Ban Amendment

KeepAndBearArms.com ^ | February 26, 2004 | Angel Shamaya

[TERMINATTOR]

While National Rifle Association officials have been denying that they've been orchestrating a sellout in the U.S. Senate, Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) -- an NRA Director -- has been working on an ammunition ban. On the Senate floor today, he introduced, discussed, defended and tried to justify the "Craig/Frist" amendment. This amendment, said Craig, is needed "to strengthen current armor piercing ammunition law." NRA's point-man in the U.S. Senate says that this is "what the law enforcement community needs."

"We don't want to wipe out the hunting and sporting ammunition," said Craig. The "sporting purpose" test was used before -- as justification for firearm rights infringements via the 1938 Nazi Weapons Law and later copied nearly verbatim in the U.S. Gun Control Act of 1968.

"Let's send a message that armor piercing ammunition is flat off limits," said Sen. Craig.

The NRA Director went on to support strong enforcement of his proposed ammunition ban, using phrases like "prison for life."

The Second Amendment does not enumerate the right of the people to keep and bear "sporting" arms. Banning any arms, or their ammunition, is clearly off limits to Congress. A longtime Director of the National Rifle Association ought to know that. Instead, he's supporting an ammo ban -- based on the infamous Nazi "sporting purpose" text -- on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

Some might suggest that it doesn't matter what gets said on the Senate floor -- that what matters is what gets signed into law. People who believe that ought to consider the dangers here. Once a "pro gun" congressman publicly expresses support for gun control -- ammunition control is indeed gun control -- he empowers the enemy and emboldens future attempts to whittle away our rights.

The truth about civilian possession of "armor piercing ammunition" is immutable, immovable, unchanging. If government employees can deploy AP ammo against the people, denying that same ammunition to the people is directly contradictory to the meaning, purpose and intent of the Second Amendment: a balance of power.

The excuse for banning AP ammo -- "to protect law enforcement employees" -- is a dangerous road to travel. It's the same justification used to ban magazines that hold more than ten rounds. It's the same reason given to deny The People free access to machineguns. It was the same foundation upon which the Clinton/Feinstein semi-auto rifle ban was built and signed into law.

When does that excuse stop working? When the legal magazine capacity is reduced to five rounds? When all semi-auto rifles are banned? When owning a bullet-resistant vest means life imprisonment -- unless the government signs your paycheck? When all handguns are banned?

If you use "protecting law enforcement" as justification to restrict the right of the people to keep and bear arms -- if you accept that unacceptable excuse for chipping away at the Second Amendment -- then lay down your arms and go tend your garden, catch up on your reading and forget about restoring the Second Amendment. There's no end to that excuse other than total disarmament -- because even a mere single shot .22 caliber rifle manufactured before World War One can be used to injure a law enforcement officer.

Bear in mind that Sen. Craig's ammo ban amendment is being offered today, by him -- to his own bill. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (S1805) is written to protect gun manufacturers from the frivolous lawsuits being waged by those whose ultimate goal is to ban all firearms. The bill is being used as a rider for many other gun controls today and leading up to the final vote on Tuesday. Sen. Craig wants to amend his own bill -- with an ammunition ban -- under the guise of abiding his oath of office. He said so on C-SPAN, in plain English.

We've requested text of the Amendment (SA2625) from Senator Craig's office and through another Senator's office, as well. As soon as we have it, we will publish it.

[skip2myloo]

Remember, sane people are not going to be the ones deciding which ammo is good/bad.

It will be the CPSC, the same CPSC that tried to shut down Daisy BB Gun.

[BCR #226]

Read the law carefully...

It is illegal to "manufacture or sell" armor piercing ammunition (Yes, I am refering to the "Pistol Caliber" ammunition as described in your post.) But, you may possess it and legally shoot it out of a firearm depending on state and local laws.

I know, and work with guys that have thousands upon thousands of rounds of .308 AP ammunition. Specifically, the M2 AP rounds.

BTW- you bring up a very, very good point. There is no regulation on rifle caliber (meaning no able to be used in a handgun) AP ammunition. You can get .30 caliber AP in .300 WM and .338 Lapua, and .50 BMG among other calibers easily.

Mike

[BCR #226]

Black Talon isn't AP ammunition.

It's a pre scored hollowpoint with no better penetration than any other hollow point.

Mike

[archy]

I'm not interested in a 3030 lever, but I really want an AR type in 6.8mm! Sounds great to me. Have you read the article on its development in the current SOF mag?

I'll be trying an XM-8 out Sunday at Camp Robinson, Arkansas this Sunday. Among other things, I'm going to try to hang onto some fired brass and a couple of GI rounds- I have a project or two in mind.

Interestingly, one other goodie on hand may be an Australian F88 AuSteyr reworked for the 6,8mm cartridge- the F88 has a quick-change barrel, and the replacement of the bolt with one with the larger face for the 6,8 is no problem. It should be interesting to see how well the cartridge fits in the L88 magazine, which is NOT a M16-type mag.

[skip2myloo]

The AG can designate any ammo he wants as AP, including FMJ REQUIRED for CMP Service Rifle and Pistol competition at Camp Perry.

Plus, FMJ is a cheap ammo good for target practice in preparation for hunting season.

No need not to prohibit use of FMJ, claiming its AP, because its useful for punching holes in paper.

Besides, there's that ol' slippery slope argument - give an inch today, give a foot tomorrow.

On another note, here's some recent links at NRA-ILA about CPSC and gun issues:

BB Guns & Gun Control ABCs By James O.E. Norell

[The Consumer Product Safety Commission`s lawsuit to force a BB gun recall is reason to revisit why Congress voted overwhelmingly to exempt firearms and ammunition from the CPSC`s purview... The Consumer Product Safety Commission`s lawsuit to force a BB gun recall is reason to revisit why Congress voted overwhelmingly to exempt firearms and ammunition from the CPSC`s purview...]

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?ID=86

Clinton Appointee Ignores The Facts—Initiates BB Gun Recall

[On Tuesday, outgoing Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Chairman Ann Brown, a Clinton appointee who has bragged to the Washington Post that she "like[s] to be on TV," orchestrated a 2-1 vote by the CPSC to initiate a mandatory recall process for certain Daisy Powerline BB guns...]

http://www.nraila.org/CurrentLegislation/Read.aspx?ID=164

Contact CPSC About Daisy Recall

[ Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Chairman Ann Brown, one of the remaining holdovers from the Clinton Administration, has chosen to step down from her position, but not before attempting a last-minute attack on air rifles...]

http://www.nraila.org/CurrentLegislation/Read.aspx?ID=155

Federal Agency Takes Aim At BB Guns

[The Consumer Product Safety Commission`s lawsuit against Daisy Manufacturing Co... seeks to force Daisy to recall two of its popular BB-gun models, for no other reason than that they are ...]

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=1206

Air Rifles In Line Of Fire

[With less than two weeks left in her tenure as chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, Clinton Administration hold over Ann Brown is aiming to take a parting shot at an American cultural icon, the Daisy air rifle...]

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=1100

Safety Agency Chief Going Out With Gusto

[Ann Brown, with only three days left as chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, has scheduled a "major news conference" today, at which, industry sources say, she will start a recall of millions of Daisy air rifles...]

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=1124

Issue From The Past Rears Its Head

[) introduced legislation this week requiring the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to regulate the manufacture and design of firearms... Congress has already exempted guns from oversight by the CPSC, recognizing that firearms are already regulated by some 20,000 federal, state, and local laws and regulations, as well as by the approximately 700 standards set by the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute, which are reviewed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology...]

http://www.nraila.org/CurrentLegislation/Read.aspx?ID=691

Corzine-Kennedy "Consumer Protection" Bills

Poor Smokescreen For Back-Door Gun Prohibition [ But in 1976, Congress voted 76-8 in the Senate, 313-86 in the House, that the CPSC "shall make no ruling or order that restricts the manufacture or sale of firearms, ammunition, including black powder or gun powder, for firearms...]

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=149

[Don Joe]

Thanks for the kind words, I appreciate 'em.

[yarddog]

I always thought those 30-30 carbines made a pretty decent rifle for the backwoods guerilla.

They have all the normal requirements such as reliability and durability. Also handy to carry and I always liked the ability to keep topping them off from loose ammo without worrying about mags. It also saves space and weight.

I bought a Marlin with a Redfield receiver sight around 1984 then when I sold it I kept the sight. I later got a Winchester model 94 and noticed the sight fit it as well. The combination of peep and hooded front is both fast and accurate. Nearly as good as a scope withought all that weight and bulk.

They have plenty of power for shooting people and that flat pointed bullet is effective.

[Don Joe]

All centerfire rifle ammo that will cut through kevlar like a knife through butter.

People who are only familiar with pistol ammunition, who have never gone deer hunting, have no comprehension of the sheer power of even low-end centerfire rifle ammunition. Even the (wrongly) "disrespected" (I hate that non-word) 30-30 has an incredible amount of power when compared to even "high power" pistol ammunition. You have to be careful with bullet placement. It's not too hard to ruin a lot of meat in a nice deer. The bullet can easily go the entire length of the deer, destroying a tunnel of meat several inches in diameter, shattering bone as it goes, and driving the bone fragments into even more venison.

And a .30-'06 is a lot more powerful than a 30-30. A modest FMJ round will go clean though a 30 inch hardwood tree, and keep on going, with plenty of "oomph" left in it. (I've done this experiment myself with my fifty buck 109 year old Mosin Nagant, which has pretty much the same ballistics as a .30-'06.)

Make no mistake. If they ban ammunition that can "pierce body armor", you can kiss your deer rifle goodbye. It'll be shotgun-only zone from sea to shining sea.

Now, I've hunted deer with a shotgun. It was all I could afford. I had to be close, which translated into sneaking way into the swamp and waitin for the yayhoos up from The Big City to drive the deer in to where I was quietly waiting (and freezing).

It also meant a not very easy hunt, for two reasons. One, shotgunning just isn't that easy. It might have helped if I had a "real" slug/buckshot barrel, instead of my "normal" barrel with the bead at the tip, but even so, there's an inherent disadvantage to using a scattergun vs. a rifle.

It also meant dragging the deer a long distance over very nasty ground. Up, down, up, down, up, down, up, down... gets old after a quarter mile, and it gets real old past that point -- and that's when I was young and healthy. Swampland -- even "dry swamp" land -- ain't like the green down at the countryclub. When you hear about hunters dying of heart attacks during deer season, now you know why.

When I hunted with a rifle, I was on nice, open, private land, and there wasn't much of a "drag" at all, since the truck could come up within a few feet of the carcass.

Shotgunning for deer is like noisy bowhunting. You get a bit more range, sure, but it's not that much more. Sure, there's the exception to the rule, but IMO they're rare, and there's a big element of luck involved. You don't go for a 100 yard shot with much of a reasonable confidence of a clean kill -- let alone longer range -- and it's not good to ruin game, cause an innocent animal to suffer needlessly, and then go and die way deep in the swamp to become food for maggots and coyotes.

It looks like that's where they're trying to take us. Big game hunting will be restricted to buckshot-only.

IMO this ought to serve as a wake-up call to the "they'll never come for my deer rifle" crowd, and I suggest using it as such. They're notorious for not giving a rat's ass about increasingly draconian laws, because they never thought their hobby was threatened. "Niemoller's Law" applies to them, and it's high time they realized it. This piece of legislation may just do the trick WRT to getting their attention. In fact, if it doesn't, then nothing will, short of a sale at the local sporting goods shop: "Get fifty dollars off the purchase of a new shotgun when turning in your prohibited deer rifle."

[archy]

Nobody needs armor piercing rounds for hunting.

Just so. Any cop caught with any such ammunition must be considered an assassin intent on murdering citizens, and probably should be executed on the spot.

[Don Joe]

This is just some BS study wasting my tax money. It's bad, but not as bad as KABA says.

I'm not so sure of that. Consider:

(1) STUDY.--The Attorney General shall conduct a study to determine whether a uniform standard for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor is feasible.

(2) ISSUES TO BE STUDIED.--The study conducted under paragraph (1) shall include--

(A) variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired; and

(B) the amount of powder used to propel the projectile.

This paves the way for "outcome based research". They decide what outcome they desire, and then calibrate their methodology to deliver that outcome. Since they've pretty much telegraphed their intentions (the prohibition of any ammunition that can penetrate a ballistic vest), the likely outcome will be the prohibition of all centerfire rifle ammunition. They will probably ban shotgun slugs too, because even though they may not penetrate a vest, they'll most likely kill anyway via blunt force trauma. Note that the section describing the "study" does not use any form of the word "penetrate" or "pierce".

[agitator]

"There is NO provision in Craig's amendment that redefines AP ammunition."

I don't care. Armor piercing ammunition shouldn't be defined or regulated period. The idea here is to put in place a law that allows for re-definition later.

It's only a matter of time.

1. Definitions.

a) Armor piercing ammunition shall now be construed to mean any ammunition capable of piercing body armor made of wet toilet paper.

2. Possession Prohibited. Armor piercing ammuntion may not be possessed by anyone not wearing government jackboots.

Why is our alleged side proposing anything but eliminating regulations that define or regulate AP ammo?

[gunner03]

All, I watched Larry Craig yesterday, and what he proposed was to strenghten the penalties if AP ammo is used, to counter T. Kennedy's proposal to let the Justice Dept determine what AP ammo is. You do know where J. Reno and her ilk would take that. Semper Fi

[skip2myloo]

I agree with every word, I would only add that the Second Amendment ain't about Duck or Deer hunting, and we need to focus more on the right of the people to defend themselves against criminals and a possibly future [/s] tyrannical government, rather than appearing to buy into the argument that the PRIMARY purpose of guns/ammo is their suitability for hunting.

ALL my guns are for self-defense, most are best suited for that specific purpose and I target practice a great deal with them to that end, I also hunt with some of them occasionally.

[Don Joe]

No so with Spectra and Kevlar/Spectra blends, right?? Layering, denser threads, and closer weaving are major factors now being addressed.....

I don't think you're familiar with the difference in power between "high power" handgun ammunition and "common" centerfire rifle ammunition.

To put it another way, even if a soft vest could stop a rifle bullet from penetrating (which I do not believe possible), the wearer would likely die anyway from blunt force trauma.

[Hanging Chad]

"...you don't need an armor piercing bullet to...form the citizen's militia that defends against government oppression. About the only thing you need armor piercing ammunition for is killing cops..."
- - -
Think, man, think.
When/if the time ever comes (god forbid) that the citizens must take up arms,
just who is it that you think will be bringing forth this opression?

[agitator]

If you ask me, we should at least be saying "NO AMENDMENTS, PERIOD" or proposing amendments that gut existing bogus law, not buying into the lefty idea that AP ammo is regulateable in the first place and then further buying into the phoney premise that what constitutes AP is negotiable.

[skip2myloo]

Yes, a .22 Short would be classified as Armor Piercing by Janet Reno and her ilk.

You cannot give the government one silly little millimeter of latitude to interpret anything -- it opens the door wide open to abuse.

As I pointed out a couple of posts ago, the Consumer Product Safety Commission under Clinton tried to shut down Daisy BB Gun comapny.

Rather than propose further Amendment to the Kennedy Ammo Ban Amendment, Craig should have spoken out vociferously agaisnt the idocy of the proposal itself as well as identify the potential for abuse by leaving the designation of what constitutes AP to an uninformed, arbitrary future AG with an anti-gun agenda.

And, the NRA has not addressed any of Craig's actions on their NRA-ILA web site with ANY updates today.

I think the NRA is embarrassed by their Director's action with regard to their intent for S. 1805 to be a "clean bill".

[Don Joe]

Black Talon isn't AP ammunition.

It's a pre scored hollowpoint with no better penetration than any other hollow point.

Correct. "Black Talon" was a stupid marketeer's idea -- combine a softpoint bullet with black enamel and sooper-eeevul ad copy to appeal to idjits to part them from their money. It backfired.

This proposal is very ominous. It is a "camel's nose under the tent" attempt to quietly prohibit all centirefire rifle ammunition.

If this goes through, the only thing your deer rifle will be good for is firing blanks during "reenactment" games.

The fact that they're downplaying it so much tells us that they mean business. This isn't an agitprop exercise, designed to give them something to rant and rave about. This is the real deal. They're going in for the kill.

[Don Joe]

What this law would do is change the definitions from those detailed above, to a very broad rule, prohibiting any centerfire rifle ammunition.

[Don Joe]

I really don't like things being called a BAN unless it IS A FLAT OUT BAN. We don't need 'the boy who cried wolf' out there. This time KABA is off the mark.

And I never said I liked the study. For the record, I will take that in exchange for the ban on gun lawsuits. Same with the trigger locks(unless the CPSC clause is there - that's a dealbreaker). Those are PITA's. The lawsuits can break the business.

Making all rifle ammunition illegal can break the business just as easily as making rifles illegal.

This is a "kinder, gentler" approach to the goal. Rather than put a ten thousand dollar per bullet tax on ammunition sales (I forget which idiot legislator proposed that abortion a few years ago), this one simply quietly redefines the ground out from under the entire rifle market.

Sure, the guns will be legal. But, try to find ammunition for them...

I guess the .223 rifles can be converted to take .22 rimfire, for only a few hundred dollars per rifle, but the big question is why bother?