Sign a petition to stop the XM855.

[piston10]

I signed it and will be making phone calls.

 

[Shadowrider]

It's also not a bad idea to just go ahead and paste the body of your letter into a fax and send it to all of them that way too. It's a long shot but they might actually get the fax faster depending on the logistics of their screening process. Might as well just "flood" them with requests anyway.

 

[dennishoddy]

Anybody ever look up any stats about how many vest shoot throughs has occurred by using XM855 during a criminal act?
I'll bet it's next to none. Be an interesting fact to pass along in those emails and phone calls.

 

[Mr.Glock]

I signed it and will be making phone calls.

Cool Jeremy. It is not a waste of time to do sign the petition.

 

[Mr.Glock]

I'm saying that signing the petition is just about the same as doing nothing. If you sign the petition, but don't contact your reps, you are pissing in the wind and in that case I do know "better than the rest of us". Contact your reps.

I'll say it again. F4ck that stupid petition. It's a creation of the Obama administration. Do you really think giving credence to that artificiality will serve to put even one iota of pressure on the BATFE to reconsider their decision? If anything, it'll show them they are hitting us where it hurts and they'll redouble their efforts.

If you did both, great. If you do even more, great. I'm addressing those who merely think signing that petition is "doing something".

Step up and show us proof of your statement that it is a sham and a "creation of the Obama administration".

Prove it to us, that you have facts to back up your statement to such facts!!

 

[SMS]

Step up and show us proof of your statement that it is a sham and a "creation of the Obama administration".

Prove it to us, that you have facts to back up your statement to such facts!!

You need me to show you proof that the White House's "We the People" petition process is a political public relations creation of the Obama administration? You need proof that it has no Constitutional foundation nor any legally binding statutory authority? You need proof that it is a gimmick that has made a mockery of the system and resulted in real hot button issues like "building the death star" to be pushed to the front of the line for debate? You need proof that is just another feel good "I did something" easy way out of actually getting involved? LOL.

Nah, I'll pass. Look it up yourself.

Did you write and/or call your reps yet?

 

[Glocktogo]

My email to BATFE:

To Whom It May Concern,

The current proposal to ban M855 ammo by BATFE for civilian sale raises several troubling points. To wit:

First, M855 has been unregulated on the civilian market since its introduction in the late 70’s. There are literally millions and millions of rounds in the hands of the public. Regulating it now is merely creating a black market with artificially inflated prices for the consumer and would do little to reduce its availability to those who would ignore the rules and laws of the United States in pursuit of criminal activities.

Second, it is designed for and intended to be fired in rifle barrels of 20 inches or longer. It is documented to be a poor performer in shorter barrels, such as the 14.5” barrel of the M4 carbine. Firing it in a pistol length barrel is counterintuitive, as there are many rounds exhibiting superior performance in shorter barrels. As such, the intent of this proposed rule is also counter-intuitive and does not accomplish any quantifiable objective.

Third, M855 ammunition does not even meet the definition of “armor piercing” ammunition as defined by BATFE’s own definitions, per 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(17)(b), which read:

(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means-
(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or
(ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.
This does not describe M855 ammunition, therefore it is excluded from the definition. M855 does not have a steel core, nor is it a steel projectile. It has a steel “tip”, over a base lead core, jacketed in copper. At velocities above 2,450 fps, it exhibits fragmentation, which is the opposite of a round intended for steel or body armor penetration. The round was designed to penetrate light intermediate barriers and still perform, not steel plate or body armor.
Fourth, this ammunition is routinely used for sporting purposes all across the country, from varmint and small game hunting to popular sporting competitions of various types. It is readily obtainable and inexpensive (currently) when compared to other available ammunition in this caliber of comparable performance. Removing it from the market places an unnecessary financial burden on the public for virtually no explainable benefit to public safety.

Fifth, and most disturbing is the appearance of a conflict of interest on the part of the federal government, when viewed in light of the recent court decision against The United States in Liberty Ammunition, Inc., v. United States, which the U.S. Dept. of Justice argued as the defendant. https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2011cv0084-112-0
While this court order specifically covers M855A1 ammunition, one cannot help but question the timing and appearance of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, to include whether this will financially impact Liberty Ammunition, LLC in any way.


If the BATFE intends to continue pursuing this NPRM in light of all the valid reasons not to, please address each of these concerns in a reply, and in the Federal Register. I appreciate your time and consideration regarding this most important issue.

Regards,

Jerry D. Biggs

Cc: The Hon. Senator James M. Inhofe; The Hon. Senator James Lankford; The Hon. Representative Jim Bridenstine

My emails to my Senators & Representative:

Honorable Senator Inhofe,

I am writing to express my deep concerns regarding a recent NPRM from the BATFE, which seeks to ban M855, 5.56X45mm ammunition for citizen use. Please help us in combating this capricious and overzealous "power of the pen" backdoor gun control scheme. These are my concerns:

First, M855 has been unregulated on the civilian market since its introduction in the late 70’s. There are literally millions and millions of rounds in the hands of the public. Regulating it now is merely creating a black market with artificially inflated prices for the consumer and would do little to reduce its availability to those who would ignore the rules and laws of the United States in pursuit of criminal activities.

Second, it is designed for and intended to be fired in rifle barrels of 20 inches or longer. It is documented to be a poor performer in shorter barrels, such as the 14.5” barrel of the M4 carbine. Firing it in a pistol length barrel is counterintuitive, as there are many rounds exhibiting superior performance in shorter barrels. As such, the intent of this proposed rule is also counter-intuitive and does not accomplish any quantifiable objective.

Third, M855 ammunition does not even meet the definition of “armor piercing” ammunition as defined by BATFE’s own definitions, per 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(17)(b), which read:

(B) The term “armor piercing ammunition” means-
(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or
(ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.
This does not describe M855 ammunition, therefore it is excluded from the definition. M855 does not have a steel core, nor is it a steel projectile. It has a steel “tip”, over a base lead core, jacketed in copper. At velocities above 2,450 fps, it exhibits fragmentation, which is the opposite of a round intended for steel or body armor penetration. The round was designed to penetrate light intermediate barriers and still perform, not steel plate or body armor.

Fourth, this ammunition is routinely used for sporting purposes all across the country, from varmint and small game hunting to popular sporting competitions of various types. It is readily obtainable and inexpensive (currently) when compared to other available ammunition in this caliber of comparable performance. Removing it from the market places an unnecessary financial burden on the public for virtually no explainable benefit to public safety.

Fifth, and most disturbing is the appearance of a conflict of interest on the part of the federal government, when viewed in light of the recent court decision against The United States in Liberty Ammunition, Inc., v. United States, which the U.S. Dept. of Justice argued as the defendant. https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2011cv0084-112-0
While this court order specifically covers M855A1 ammunition, one cannot help but question the timing and appearance of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, to include whether this will financially impact Liberty Ammunition, LLC in any way.

If the BATFE intends to continue pursuing this NPRM in light of all the valid reasons not to, please address these concerns in a reply. I appreciate your time and consideration regarding this most important issue.

Respectfully,

Jerry D. Biggs

BATFE can eat a giant bag of gentleman sausages on this one.

Feel free to reproduce any or all of these. Anything to make it easier for people to join the fray!

 

[Mr.Glock]

You need me to show you proof that the White House's "We the People" petition process is a political public relations creation of the Obama administration? You need proof that it has no Constitutional foundation nor any legally binding statutory authority? You need proof that it is a gimmick that has made a mockery of the system and resulted in real hot button issues like "building the death star" to be pushed to the front of the line for debate? You need proof that is just another feel good "I did something" easy way out of actually getting involved? LOL.

Nah, I'll pass. Look it up yourself.

Did you write and/or call your reps yet?

Called on the carpet for your posting such statements and cannot back the statement up! That is what is called ******** out in the country! LOL!

 

[SMS]

Awesome writing GTG…I'll use your first one for the BATFE public comment.

 

[Mr.Glock]

My email to BATFE:

My emails to my Senators & Representative:


BATFE can eat a giant bag of gentleman sausages on this one.

Feel free to reproduce any or all of these. Anything to make it easier for people to join the fray!

Good one Glocktogo. Well written.