(02-26-2015 06:24 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 05:43 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 03:45 PM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 03:39 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Nice title...worthy of Drudge for sure!

Quote:The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives this month revealed that it is proposing to put the ban on 5.56 mm ammo on a fast track

Just a minor detail.

Is the title wrong?

Not when you know the context...but you don't know context from the title. That's what Drudge is famous for...that's all I was saying.

A reputable sources title would say something like: "The ATF is proposing to ban 5.56 mm bullets"

And you're expecting reputable from the WWE board? Why don't you yourself be reputable and address the issue instead of prancing around the 'title'.

Because he is a lib with no defense for the topic. All they know is deflection or changing the argument. He isn't capable of defending the proposed ban.

I bought two small .22 caliber guns two years ago only to find out that ammunition wasn't available because HUD was buying all of the bullets. Why was a non-military government department buying all of the ammunition so it could not be purchased by the general public? WTF?

I'm not a conspiracy nut, but that is ridiculous. Maybe those people fearing black helicopters are onto something.

(02-26-2015 06:24 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 05:43 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 03:45 PM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 03:39 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Nice title...worthy of Drudge for sure!

Quote:The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives this month revealed that it is proposing to put the ban on 5.56 mm ammo on a fast track

Just a minor detail.

Is the title wrong?

Not when you know the context...but you don't know context from the title. That's what Drudge is famous for...that's all I was saying.

A reputable sources title would say something like: "The ATF is proposing to ban 5.56 mm bullets"

And you're expecting reputable from the WWE board? Why don't you yourself be reputable and address the issue instead of prancing around the 'title'.

Because it IS in the WWE room. So there's really no point. Especially since all I see here is an article from the hyper-partisan Washington Examiner. And nothing has happened. When it does, they we can discuss it. Bottom line, Obama isn't going to sign any sort of EA like this. Mark that down.

(02-27-2015 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 06:24 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 05:43 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 03:45 PM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 03:39 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Nice title...worthy of Drudge for sure!


Just a minor detail.

Is the title wrong?

Not when you know the context...but you don't know context from the title. That's what Drudge is famous for...that's all I was saying.

A reputable sources title would say something like: "The ATF is proposing to ban 5.56 mm bullets"

And you're expecting reputable from the WWE board? Why don't you yourself be reputable and address the issue instead of prancing around the 'title'.

Because it IS in the WWE room. So there's really no point. Especially since all I see here is an article from the hyper-partisan Washington Examiner. And nothing has happened. When it does, they we can discuss it. Bottom line, Obama isn't going to sign any sort of EA like this. Mark that down.

Did you expect the hyper-partisan leftist media to cover something like this?

How about these media sources?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter...ifle-ammo/

http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/lo.../23816437/


How about the actual proposal from the BATFE?

http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/a...rposes.pdf

Thanks Kaplony. I appreciate that.

I found this at the bottom of the Forbes story:

Quote:Whatever the motivation for this change might be, as the ATF attempts to define its way to a larger regulatory role over a constitutional right, it’s clearly time for Congress to clarify its legislation or risk being left meaningless. (The ATF has opened a public-comment period until March 16. Email APAComments@atf.gov to give your opinion.)

I didn't see anything regarding Obama or any executive action. This makes it sound like it's just a hole in an old law that Congress needs to address. Oh...the humanity of it all.

Nope...no mention of Obama or an executive action in the News-Leader story either.

(02-27-2015 11:23 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Thanks Kaplony. I appreciate that.

I found this at the bottom of the Forbes story:

Quote:Whatever the motivation for this change might be, as the ATF attempts to define its way to a larger regulatory role over a constitutional right, it’s clearly time for Congress to clarify its legislation or risk being left meaningless. (The ATF has opened a public-comment period until March 16. Email APAComments@atf.gov to give your opinion.)

I didn't see anything regarding Obama or any executive action. This makes it sound like it's just a hole in an old law that Congress needs to address. Oh...the humanity of it all.

It isn't a "hole." It is the BATF taking an action. They don't have to take this action, to start this process. BATF reports to Obama through the chain. You think this would happen if the administration didn't want it to happen?

And, per the NYT, the administration started this effort three years ago.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/us/mov...pe=nyt_now

(02-26-2015 05:40 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Is the 556 the most popular or cheapest? I have no idea but that might deter more ar15 purchases. I'm sure there's an agenda behind this.

It won't deter anything. On the contrary, every time Führer Obama threatens to ban something, gun and ammo sales rise exponentially. It's quite beautiful, really. The American people giving that loser a giant, proverbial middle finger.

Like others have said, 5.56mm ammo (and sporting rifles in general) are used in a fraction of crimes. Doesn't matter to Führer Obama, though. He epic failed on getting AWB through, so he's just playing dictator and trying it a different way. What else is new?

This is much to do about nothing, just hype. the 855 green pointed 5.56 round is supposedly armor piercing. The armor piercing is subject to the type of core that is in the round itself. The 855 does not have a solid core. Bt hey let the Tyrant do what ever he wants to try to do.

This rings similar to the hype of Winchester's Black Talon 9mm round in the early-mid 90's. It was taken off the market as a "cop killer" due to its "expansion". But in reality, it was remarketed as "Ranger" and was not painted black and can be purchased currently.

(02-26-2015 07:45 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I bought two small .22 caliber guns two years ago only to find out that ammunition wasn't available because HUD was buying all of the bullets. Why was a non-military government department buying all of the ammunition so it could not be purchased by the general public? WTF?

I'm not a conspiracy nut, but that is ridiculous. Maybe those people fearing black helicopters are onto something.

HUD buying all that ammo isn't going to stop the manufacturer from making more. All that happened was that someone got richer thanks to obamas admin.

See, he does create jobs. LOL

(03-02-2015 02:46 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 07:45 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I bought two small .22 caliber guns two years ago only to find out that ammunition wasn't available because HUD was buying all of the bullets. Why was a non-military government department buying all of the ammunition so it could not be purchased by the general public? WTF?

I'm not a conspiracy nut, but that is ridiculous. Maybe those people fearing black helicopters are onto something.

HUD buying all that ammo isn't going to stop the manufacturer from making more. All that happened was that someone got richer thanks to obamas admin.

See, he does create jobs. LOL

I sort of remember that HUD thing...wasn't that just an order to be able to buy that many bullets...set high as to achieve a lower purchase point? Did we ever hear whether they actually bought all them or not?

(03-02-2015 03:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-02-2015 02:46 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 07:45 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I bought two small .22 caliber guns two years ago only to find out that ammunition wasn't available because HUD was buying all of the bullets. Why was a non-military government department buying all of the ammunition so it could not be purchased by the general public? WTF?

I'm not a conspiracy nut, but that is ridiculous. Maybe those people fearing black helicopters are onto something.

HUD buying all that ammo isn't going to stop the manufacturer from making more. All that happened was that someone got richer thanks to obamas admin.

See, he does create jobs. LOL

I sort of remember that HUD thing...wasn't that just an order to be able to buy that many bullets...set high as to achieve a lower purchase point? Did we ever hear whether they actually bought all them or not?

If they didn't then we should really be pissed as typically with a contract like that there are significant penalties for breaking them.

I don't think the thing was ever a contract like that....but a purchase order by HUD to purchase up to that many bullets.

Snopes explains a lot of this in regards to other government agencies. Most importantly that these requests are for purchases over several years and not for one time purchases.

Bullet Whole

Quote:In 2013 the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a number of different requests for quotes for various types of ammunition totaling hundreds of millions of rounds. However, those quotes represented the upper limits of options to buy ammunition over the course of several years, not a one-time mass purchase of that number of rounds. The purpose of the proposed buys was to supply ammunition for training and use by agents of the DHS and other federal law enforcement agencies.

It's still puzzling why HUD would need bullets.

Generic comment, because some posters won't stop bumping that f***ing gay marriage thread!!

http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/police-s...oA.twitter

Quote:A top police representative on Tuesday said that there is no history of criminals using a round popular among AR-15 rifle shooters against officers, undermining the Obama administration's argument for banning the 5.56 M855 "lightgreen tip."

"Any ammunition is of concern to police in the wrong hands, but this specific round has historically not posed a law enforcement problem," said James Pasco, executive director of the Washington office of the Fraternal Order of Police, the world's largest organization of sworn law enforcement officers, with more than 325,000 members.

He told Secrets that the round used mostly for target practice "is not typically used against law enforcement."

While he said that he is "not finding fault" with the surprise move last month by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to classify the round as "armor piercing" and then ban it, Pasco added, "While this round will penetrate soft body armor, it has not historically posed a threat to law enforcement."

Generic comment, because some posters won't stop bumping that f***ing gay marriage thread!!

(02-26-2015 03:22 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Here we go, with nothing to lose Obama is going all in on his liberal agenda.

Quote:It’s starting.

As promised, President Obama is using executive actions to impose gun control on the nation, targeting the top-selling rifle in the country, the AR-15 style semi-automatic, with a ban on one of the most-used AR bullets by sportsmen and target shooters.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives this month revealed that it is proposing to put the ban on 5.56 mm ammo on a fast track, immediately driving up the price of the bullets and prompting retailers, including the huge outdoors company Cabela’s, to urge sportsmen to urge Congress to stop the president.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2560750#!

Or...

Quote:Yet, all the gun nuts are screaming about is that this is a plot by President Obama to infringe upon their 2nd Amendment rights, when in fact the president has absolutely nothing to do with it. Moreover, the original law, titled “Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1985,” was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan in 1986. As stated above by Snopes.com, these AR pistols weren’t available in 1986 and this is nothing more than the ATF attempting to update regulations based off new products entering the market.

Gun Nuts Freak Out Over False “Obama Ammo Ban”

(03-04-2015 12:48 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 03:22 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Here we go, with nothing to lose Obama is going all in on his liberal agenda.

Quote:It’s starting.

As promised, President Obama is using executive actions to impose gun control on the nation, targeting the top-selling rifle in the country, the AR-15 style semi-automatic, with a ban on one of the most-used AR bullets by sportsmen and target shooters.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives this month revealed that it is proposing to put the ban on 5.56 mm ammo on a fast track, immediately driving up the price of the bullets and prompting retailers, including the huge outdoors company Cabela’s, to urge sportsmen to urge Congress to stop the president.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2560750#!

Or...

Quote:Yet, all the gun nuts are screaming about is that this is a plot by President Obama to infringe upon their 2nd Amendment rights, when in fact the president has absolutely nothing to do with it. Moreover, the original law, titled “Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1985,” was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan in 1986. As stated above by Snopes.com, these AR pistols weren’t available in 1986 and this is nothing more than the ATF attempting to update regulations based off new products entering the market.

Gun Nuts Freak Out Over False “Obama Ammo Ban”

Let's see what we know.

The BATFE, an executive branch agency, wants to ban these bullets because they say they are armor piercing and can be used in short barreled AR frame pistols. They say it is an effort to protect law enforcement.

The military, also an executive branch agency, not only doesn't classify the same bullets as armor piercing has begun replacing them because it was an already underperforming round and especially in short barrelled weapons.

The largest law enforcement organization in the world says this is no big deal because they don't historically have a problem with this particular round.

Obama promised his leftist minions executive action on gun control over two years ago.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/prevent...n-violence


But go ahead with your defense by using what I am sure is a non-partisan source named Forward Progressives.