Posted on 02/26/2004 11:15:11 PM PST by 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.
As for death due to shock wave, that's what trauma plates are designed to diffuse and absorb. And if such prevented penetration, the laws of physics dictate that the total foot-pounds of energy hitting the target would be less than that existing at the muzzle. Rounds of small mass do not impart a great deal of energy to a target.
The problem is that a round tumbling through soft tissue creates a shock cone that contains energy capable of rupturing blood vessels and hollow organs (e.g. heart, stomach, intestines) and disrupting vascular solid organs such as the spleen and liver, not to mention the semi-solid lungs. The effects of shock on the CNS (outside of the brain) also disrupts nerve impulses which control heartbeat and respiration....
The Mauser/Tokarev (7.62x25) will cut through those like a hot knife through butter. It's like a .30 cal. pocket rifle, approx. 1400 FPS, IIRC. I was hunting bowling pins with a friend. I was knocking them over with my .45, and he was getting increasingly frustrated at being unable to hit any of them with his new Tokarev.
Then we examined the pins. His flew clean through them, without even making them wobble.
I once ran into someone who had an AD with one. He dropped it, and it discharged. Went through his legbone, then through his knee bone, then out, then through a 4x4 post, and kept on flying. It's probably in low earth orbit. (j/k)
As for death due to shock wave, that's what trauma plates are designed to diffuse and absorb.
Ah, but there's the rub. No one wears trauma plates in day to day operations. You can't get them to wear them. It's all the departments can do to get their officers wearing lightweight soft body armor. That's why all the money is in making wearable vests. And, that's why soft body armor will be the "gold standard" for these "tests" to determine which rounds are "armor-piercing" (IOW, all hunting rounds).
And if such prevented penetration, the laws of physics dictate that the total foot-pounds of energy hitting the target would be less than that existing at the muzzle. Rounds of small mass do not impart a great deal of energy to a target.
Ever hit a gallon milk jug filled with water with a "modest" load? Even a .50 muzzleloader will blast it to smithereens. Big, blunt cross section, similar to what would be produced by a vest that doesn't let something like a 30-30 penetrate (if they could come up with a soft vest that would stop such a load).
It wouldn't be pretty, and I would not volunteer to be the "test dummy"!
Basically, what we're looking at is a law that is aimed at common hunting loads. They will go right through any soft armor, and even if someone came up with soft armor that could stop them from penetrating, the blunt force trauma would be deadly, inlieu of a trauma plate, and for reasons explained above, they won't be factoring a trauma plate into their calculations.
The Constitutional convention thing would be a real nightmare for the Bill of Rights. By the time the politicians were through, we'd be lucky to have any guaranteed rights. And as for who might call for such a convention, Wayne LaPierre has gone on record as being willing to call for one if he's unable to get CFR tossed. With Washington Pols clamoring for one and Washington lobbyists echoing the call it's be a shoo in.
BOHICA!
Black Talons are not armor piercing by current definition. They aren't really banned, Winchester renamed them, and sells them to LEO, they make a similar performing bullet for civilians. The black talon was designed to expand, not to penetrate vests, quite the opposite actually. There bad rep was due to the "claws" that formed from the jacket, not because they would penetrate a vest any better than any other jacketed hollow point.
The time is coming though. With a few more encroachments like CFR, the AWB, Patriot I and II and a host of others still to rise from that cauldron of evil we call "Congress," the citizenry will get fed up and fight back. It won't be some grand battle with lines of occupation clearly marked and recognized. Instead, it'll be individuals or small groups of two or three assassinating police officers and stealing their weapons. The police will respond by beefing up their patrols with more manpower and heavier weapons which will require even more force from the insurgents. Eventually, the politicians who have caused all of it will either have to flee for their lives or lose them.
My tag-line pretty well sums it up.
Grim days ahead for "Longarm." Hard choices.
Just imagine a President Kerry and AG Schumer.
I can see a con-con which is denounced by broad segments of the population as something totally bogus, from a banana republic, and the results ignored.
That's a great opening chapter for CW2, BTW.
Even if it where, that wouldn't stop them. However that would not an ex post facto law, unless they punished for possesion in the past. If you could turn it in after the law banning possesion was passed or be punished for not turning it in, then that would pass the ex post facto test. An an ex post facto law is one that criminalizes something you did in the past, not something you did in the past AND continue doing after the law is passed.
Why go after them? The politicians are the real problem, and they can't set up 1000 yard, or even 300 yard, security cordons around *all* of them, or even most of them *all the time*. See "Enemies, Foreign and Domestic" by Freeper Travis McGee (Matthew Bracken). (Who should be along shortly to post his picture of "Cletus Longarm".)
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.