Breaking News: BATFE Released a Comment About the Proposed M855 Ban/ NO Ban at this time

Tom R
by Tom R

At least 80,000 people have so far commented and told the BATFE what they think of the proposed ban.

The BATFE issued the following statement:

Thank you for your interest in ATF’s proposed framework for determining whether certain projectiles are “primarily intended for sporting purposes” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)©. The informal comment period will close on Monday, March 16, 2015. ATF has already received more than 80,000 comments, which will be made publicly available as soon as practicable.

Although ATF endeavored to create a proposal that reflected a good faith interpretation of the law and balanced the interests of law enforcement, industry, and sportsmen, the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and include issues that deserve further study. Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework. After the close of the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process (for example, through additional proposals and opportunities for comment) before proceeding with any framework.

You can read the announcement on the BATFE Website at:
http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2015-03-021015-advisory-notice-those-commenting-armor-piercing-ammunition-exemption-framework.html

I’m not sure what they are saying other than they are not making a ruling until after they review the comments. How do you readers interpret it?

Tom R
Tom R

Tom is a former Navy Corpsman that spent some time bumbling around the deserts of Iraq with a Marine Recon unit, kicking in tent flaps and harassing sheep. Prior to that he was a paramedic somewhere in DFW, also doing some Executive Protection work between shifts. Now that those exciting days are behind him, he teaches wilderness medicine and runs an on-demand medical staffing business. He hopes that his posts will help you find solid gear that will survive whatever you can throw at it--he is known (in certain circles) for his curse...ahem, ability...to find the breaking point of anything.You can reach him at tom.r AT thefirearmblog.com or at https://thomasrader.com

More by Tom R

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 168 comments
  • Raz-0 Raz-0 on Mar 12, 2015

    http://www.washingtonexamin...

    or the BATFE brass is doubling down.

    Don't count it done yet. Unless that quote is them passing the buck to the legislature to smear people come campaign season, it sounds like they still have that particular bug up their ass.

  • Dhdoyle Dhdoyle on Mar 12, 2015

    Tom R.:
    I'm hoping that you're still watching comments on this article. Please keep watching this issue for later developments. The decision may not be the big win that everybody is congratulating themselves over. Here's the rest of the story:

    As somebody on another web site shared, the BATFE apparently modified this section of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR Title 27) in 2014 and deleted the paragraph containing the exemption for M855 and SS-109. The first problem is that the exemption is still gone. The second problem is that the BATFE made a material change in 27 CFR without allowing a public comment period. This is a serious procedural violation.

    The BATFE is splitting hairs on this decision. They say that removing the exemption for M855/SS-109 from the armor penetrating ban is not the same as banning the sale of these articles. I would respectfully disagree. This stuff is still classified as armor penetrating ammunition without an exemption.

    • Doc Rader Doc Rader on Mar 12, 2015

      @dhdoyle Yep, still following. I saw the same thing, and the scuttlebutt on that was that BATFE was going to have the correction published in the PDF version of the document and posted on their website (FWIW), since they had already printed the hard copies (I think I am recalling that correctly).

Next