David Codrea:
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives announced Tuesday it “will not at this time seek to issue a final framework” implementing a proposed ban on what it’s still insisting is “armor piercing ammunition.” The special advisory issued by the Public Affairs Division noted that with the comment period scheduled to close by next Monday, “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,” the advisory explained. “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.”
[ … ]
While arguments are correct that M855 ball ammo does not meet ATF’s own definition of “armor piercing,” the larger point, that there is no legitimate authority to impose such criteria in the first place, is being missed. So when ATF declares they’ll be back, until such time as that usurpation is addressed and resolved, it’s prudent to believe they will be, at the first political opportunity.
We could posit three theories behind what the ATF did today. First, not even the federal regulators like to be called names such as traitors, douche, incompetent and bloated. But that’s assuming they care about the American people, and the evidence for such an assertion is lamentable nonexistent. So that theory suffers from being wishful thinking.
Second, the ATF understands that M855 green tip ammunition doesn’t meet the statutory definition of AP, or its corollary, that 5.56 mm lead ball ammunition can also penetrate soft body armor and is far more lethal in most circumstances. Therefore, there will be a protracted legal battle waged against this regulation.
Third, the ATF realizes that a ban on M855 ammunition is meaningless without a ban on 5.56 mm ammunition, and that would have no more basis in law than a ban on any other type of ammunition. Additionally, the ATF realizes they may be firing the first shot of a civil war were they to take an action like that.
Between theories 2 and 3, I don’t know which is more likely. I dismiss out of hand the notion that the ATF feared action taken by the anemic, pathetic, pitiful Senate and House. Readers may also have other theories (or combinations of the three proffered here). But David is likely right on one thing. The ATF will be back.
