Obama to ban bullets by executive action, threatens top-selling AR-15 rifle

fortsbest

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,763
So there's this that's new. Anyone seen it on big new channels yet?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-to-ban-bullets-by-executive-action/article/2560750

Obama to ban bullets by executive action, threatens top-selling AR-15 rifle
BY PAUL BEDARD | FEBRUARY 27, 2015 | 6:19 AM
Photo - A warning on the Cabela's website.
A warning on the Cabela's website.
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.


Wednesday night, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, stepped in with a critical letter to the bureau demanding it explain the surprise and abrupt bullet ban. The letter is shown below.

The National Rifle Association, which is working with Goodlatte to gather co-signers, told Secrets that30 House members have already co-signed the letter and Goodlatte and the NRA are hoping to get a total of 100 fast.

"The Obama administration was unable to ban America's most popular sporting rifle through the legislative process, so now it's trying to ban commonly owned and used ammunition through regulation," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA-ILA, the group's policy and lobby shop. "The NRA and our tens of millions of supporters across the country will fight to stop President Obama's latest attack on our Second Amendment freedoms."

At issue is so-called "armor-piercing" ammunition, an exemption for those bullets mostly used for sport by AR-15 owners, and the recent popularity of pistol-style ARs that use the ammo.

The inexpensive 5.56 M855 ammo, commonly called lightgreen tips, have been exempt for years, as have higher-caliber ammunition that also easily pierces the type of soft armor worn by police, because it's mostly used by target shooters, not criminals. The agency proposes to reclassify it as armor-piercing and not exempt.

But now BATFE says that since the bullets can be used in semi-automatic handguns they pose a threat to police and must be banned from production, sale and use. But, as Goodlatte noted, the agency offered no proof. Federal agencies will still be allowed to buy the ammo.

"This round is amongst the most commonly used in the most popular rifle design in America, the AR-15. Millions upon millions of M855 rounds have been sold and used in the U.S., yet ATF has not even alleged — much less offered evidence — that even one such round has ever been fired from a handgun at a police officer," said Goodlatte's letter.

Even some police don't buy the administration's claim. "Criminals aren't going to go out and buy a $1,000 AR pistol," Brent Ball, owner of 417 Guns in Springfield, Mo., and a 17-year veteran police officer told the Springfield News-Leader. "As a police officer I'm not worried about AR pistols because you can see them. It's the small gun in a guy's hand you can't see that kills you."

Many see the bullet ban as an assault on the AR-15 and Obama's back-door bid to end production and sale.

"We are concerned," said Justin Anderson with Hyatt Gun Shop in Charlotte, N.C., one of the nation's top sellers of AR-15 style rifles. "Frankly, we're always concerned when the government uses back-door methods to impose quasi-gun control."

Groups like the National Shooting Sports Foundation suggest that under BATFE's new rule, other calibers like popular deer hunting .308 bullets could be banned because they also are used in AR platforms, some of which can be turned into pistol-style guns. "This will have a detrimental effect on hunting nationwide," said the group.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,224
Impeachment is the only way to stop this asshole from further ruining this country.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,700
Impeachment is the only way to stop this asshole from further ruining this country.
Impeachment in and of itself will not remove a President. There has to be a removal process to unseat a President. Clinton was impeached but finished his term.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,224
Impeachment in and of itself will not remove a President. There has to be a removal process to unseat a President. Clinton was impeached but finished his term.
Clinton wasn't impeached.

It didn't pass the Senate.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
He wasn't impeached. It has to clear both houses of congress and it didn't clear the senate.
He was impeached. An impeachment is analogous to a trial. If you don't get convicted, you've still been tried. If an impeachment isn't successful, the president has still been impeached.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,224
He was impeached. An impeachment is analogous to a trial. If you don't get convicted, you've still been tried. If an impeachment isn't successful, the president has still been impeached.
So, what would you use as a term for removal from office? And, yes, I know what impeachment means.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,224
I suppose my point is that he wasn't removed from office by true standards. He wasn't removed from his duties. No president ever has been. Impeachment as a word means he was convicted, I get that. But, he wasn't removed.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,556
I suppose my point is that he wasn't removed from office by true standards. He wasn't removed from his duties. No president ever has been. Impeachment as a word means he was convicted, I get that. But, he wasn't removed.
No, impeachment as a word does not mean convicted.

Clinton WAS impeached. He was not convicted, however, and thus he remained in office.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,556
So, what would you use as a term for removal from office? And, yes, I know what impeachment means.
Conviction is removal from office. Impeachment does not mean conviction. And nothing has to pass both houses.... The House passes impeachment, the Senate then convicts, or not, following trial. Removal from office occurs automatically upon conviction, not impeachment.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States
 

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,210
Obama doesn't have to worry about being impeached. Or even assassinated, for that matter. He chose the perfect insurance for that ever happening. As bad as he is...

 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Right, but tell me the former Governor of Massachusetts would stand in the ATF's way when they decided to do this.
 

DLK150

DCC 4Life
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
8,789
He can be impeached by the House but to be removed from office, it has to have a two thirds majority in the Senate. Reps have a 54 vote majority, so they would need a minimum of 13 dems to join the party. Not happening.

This won't stand. There's almost no way without a compelling argument as to why this type specifically should be banned. Also, it would likely affect sportsmen more than anyone else although it's a dangerous precedent if it does stand.

It's no surprise though. He let the dem led senate do his dirty work until they lost the senate. Now he's a lame duck with no chance of having his agenda pass through Congress but he has no real fear of impeachment so he's going to flip the bird at existing law whenever he feels like it.

He probably qualifies for impeachment more than any president in history including Nixon but he will not be removed from office even if they try.

:flip this pretender. He can burn in hell when his time comes.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
He can be impeached by the House but to be removed from office, it has to have a two thirds majority in the Senate. Reps have a 54 vote majority, so they would need a minimum of 13 dems to join the party. Not happening.

This won't stand. There's almost no way without a compelling argument as to why this type specifically should be banned. Also, it would likely affect sportsmen more than anyone else although it's a dangerous precedent if it does stand.

It's no surprise though. He let the dem led senate do his dirty work until they lost the senate. Now he's a lame duck with no chance of having his agenda pass through Congress but he has no real fear of impeachment so he's going to flip the bird at existing law whenever he feels like it.

He probably qualifies for impeachment more than any president in history including Nixon but he will not be removed from office even if they try.

:flip this pretender. He can burn in hell when his time comes.
There's a lot of presidents with genocide on their rap sheet. Although Obama's expansion of the drone strike program may nearly qualify. I think Bush deserved it more than Obama, since it was his incompetent administration that put us in a decade long war for no reason.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I guess using the words Obama and executive action is enough to make people believe anything.:lol


While it's true that the ATF proposed a ban on "green tip" ammunition in February 2015, President Obama was not involved through executive action of any description. The ATF described the proposal as the result of a long-term examination, several years in the making, of whether the ammunition fit the criteria for an exemption for sporting purposes:
In light of recent developments in the firearm and ammunition marketplace, ATF sought input from industry, law enforcement organizations, and the general public on the application of the unique "sporting purpose" exemption set forth in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C). In November 2012, ATF held four meetings with interested parties representing law enforcement, the firearms and ammunition industries, and non-governmental organizations. In addition, after completion of these meetings, ATF also solicited and accepted comments from the general public through December 31, 2012. All of that input was considered in interpreting the meaning of the statutory language, and developing the framework described below.
Last updated: 26 February 2015
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/ammoban.asp#Xfvy1O6u91HFVboO.99
 
Top Bottom