Close
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 68
  1. #11
    Bang Bang Ridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cedar Park, TX
    Posts
    8,307

    Default

    Most 5.56 is domestically produced, so that won't be an issue. 7.62, who knows? I've heard the reason this only applies to 5.45 is because of the ratio of jacket to core. 7.62 is a larger bullet, so there is comparably more core to jacket in the bullet...

  2. #12
    The "Godfather" of COAR Great-Kazoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Washboard Alley, AZ.
    Posts
    48,101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BPTactical View Post
    How long until they link 5.56 and 7.62 x 39 to pistols?
    1993 when the Olympic OA-93 pistol debuted. The chi-com 223 was stopped (IIRC) about 89-90 In 94 no rilfe caliber pistol could weigh more then 50 oz, thanks to the AWB and knee jerk liberals


    IMO the .gov should BAN rifle caliber pistols, AFTER they eliminate SBR's from NFA status.
    Last edited by Great-Kazoo; 03-29-2014 at 07:46.
    The Great Kazoo's Feedback

    "when you're happy you enjoy the melody but, when you're broken you understand the lyrics".

  3. #13
    Guest
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    longmont
    Posts
    1,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ridge View Post
    Most 5.56 is domestically produced, so that won't be an issue. 7.62, who knows? I've heard the reason this only applies to 5.45 is because of the ratio of jacket to core. 7.62 is a larger bullet, so there is comparably more core to jacket in the bullet...
    I'm sure this is exactly why.
    (17) (A) The term “ammunition” means ammunition or cartridge cases, primers, bullets, or propellent powder designed for use in any firearm.

    (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.

  4. #14
    Grand Master Know It All
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Dickshooter, ID
    Posts
    4,832

    Default

    Its not banned from import. Misleading title. It only bans the cheap 7n6 armor peircing.

    Just like the 7.62 steel core.

    Wolf and silver bear will still be here.

  5. #15
    Escaped From New York zteknik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    6,269

    Default

    Wonder if the guy who built and was selling the pistol was one of Bloomies crony's??
    FHUGETABOUDIT!!!

  6. #16
    Varmiteer GunsRBadMMMMKay's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    551

    Default

    I never got the validity of calling them armor piercing rounds for pistols, considering most rifle calibers will penetrate soft body armor......and they ban them on the pretense that they will be "cop killer" rounds and defeat police body armor. They just play off peoples fear and ignorance to gain more anti- ground. I realize there are some of the rounds that are true ap, but the argument used to ban "ap" rounds for pistols isn't to protect apc's LOL.

  7. #17
    Grand Master Know It All funkymonkey1111's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Englewood
    Posts
    2,812

    Default

    it's amazing--usac sales had 1.7million rounds on thursday. sold out yesterday. unbelievable.

  8. #18
    Machine Gunner
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Highlands Ranch
    Posts
    1,960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Great-Kazoo View Post
    IMO the .gov should BAN rifle caliber pistols, AFTER they eliminate SBR's from NFA status.
    A better and more logical solution is stop trying to classify guns. A gun is a gun is a gun. SBR, SBS, riffle shotgun, revolver, pistol, ect... There is no logic to requiring a tax stamp for a gun with a short barrel just because it has a stock. Why is there even a need for the stamp? Because it is concealable? More concealable than a handgun? Stupid politicians have no f-ing clue how things work.

  9. #19
    Zombie Slayer Zundfolge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wichita, KS (formerly COS)
    Posts
    8,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric P View Post
    A better and more logical solution is stop trying to classify guns. A gun is a gun is a gun. SBR, SBS, riffle shotgun, revolver, pistol, ect... There is no logic to requiring a tax stamp for a gun with a short barrel just because it has a stock. Why is there even a need for the stamp? Because it is concealable? More concealable than a handgun? Stupid politicians have no f-ing clue how things work.
    It makes even less sense when you look at the historical reason for the SBR and SBS laws to begin with. Originally the 1934 National Firearms Act was going to include handguns and treat them like machine guns (registration and $200 tax stamp), but at the last minute (in order to gain passage) they removed handguns completely from the bill. The point of the SBR and SBS restrictions was to prevent people from getting around the laws against unregistered, untaxed handguns by cutting down shotguns or rifles. Frankly the entire SBR/SBS section of the statute should have been removed with the bits removed about handguns.
    Modern liberalism is based on the idea that reality is obligated to conform to one's beliefs because; "I have the right to believe whatever I want".

    "Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.
    -Friedrich Nietzsche

    "Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people."
    -Penn Jillette

    A World Without Guns <- Great Read!

  10. #20
    Zombie Slayer kidicarus13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Littleton
    Posts
    6,310

    Default

    And paying $200 for a tax stamp to silence a firearm although not silence it enough to actually keep from the shooter or anyone else from hearing the shot. Crazy.
    Lessons cost money. Good ones cost lots. -Tony Beets

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •