Replies

That can go both ways. If the bill would pass, you would have the same exact people yelling they should have introduced less restrictions.

Pay close attention to this portion of the letter by Gary Marbut, president Montana Shooting Sports at the end of the article.

"If this is correct, and if the Craig/Frist amendment language relies upon this definition found elsewhere in the USC, then the Craig/Frist amendment net effect appears to be limited to shifting authority for this area of the law enforcement from Treasury to Justice, and to commissioning the Justice Department study about AP ammunition. Hard to find much bad in that."

That study would buy us the time to defeat the amendment and the anti's. Bear in mind, all of the gun groups are still working for a clean bill.

You Said:

"That study would buy us the time to defeat the amendment and the anti's. Bear in mind, all of the gun groups are still working for a clean bill."

__________________________________________________________

The way I'm reading it though, if I had my CZ52 loaded with Russian mil-surp (steel core) and even used it in self defense, I would be guilty of a crime.

Point #2 is that armor piercing in military terms only applies to vehicle armor, not protective vests. The study is bad precedent in my book. It can only conclude that almost all rifle bullets will go through most LEO protective vests and help the anti's yell "cop killer".

I fear anything that leaves interpretation up to BATFE. A lot / most eastern block 7,62x39 ammo is steel core, they simply found it cheaper to make that way. Someone at BATFE figured out that there was a 7,62x39 silhouette/hunting pistol and outlawed all the steel core surplus.

Huh ??

May be my old reading comprehension problem again.

"...then the Craig/Frist amendment net effect appears to be limited to shifting authority for this area of the law enforcement from Treasury to Justice..."

Where has this guy been ??

Isn't he aware that authority HAS ALREADY BEEN SHIFTED from Treasury to Justice ??

As part of Homeland Security, BATF was renamed BATFE and transferred from Treasury to Justice, lock, stock and barrel (as we say in the shooting sports).

And what possible benefit would there be to a strategy of let's buy time to defeat something bad at some unknown future date' -- rather than defeat it soundly NOW, nip it in the bud ??

I don't understand why anyone would advocate any strategy that would give an ammo ban an opportunity to "take root" and grow.

'Let's let the liberals take Massachusetts, but we're gonna hold the line at New York, oops New York is already gone. But, we're definitely gonna hold the line on California, no retreat.

What ?? Whaddaya mean "left" coast ??'

[/sarcasm]