Armor piercing ammo legality

[RevolverRob]

Well tri lug bbls are IME ideal for pistol caliber carbines and SMG’s. Fast attach and removal, but more importantly won’t back off the way threaded on cans do. For rifle calibers you’re right though... it doesn’t work. I think Silencerco has a video demonstrating what happens.

As far as the reciprocating CH and limited ability to swap AR stuff, I’m hopeful B&T comes out with a PRO version of their rifles. If they follow the pattern of the APC9 then I’d be all over an 8” bbl APC300.


I think if B&T quits half-assin the lower thing and goes all AR grips across the board along with non-recip or at least folding charging handle, and eliminates the 3-lug - they’d be nigh perfect.

Still going to have an APC45 or a GHM45 sooner than later. Rattler will come first.



Help me out here. What would be illegal? Not being a smart ass. Genuinely curious.

M2 ball is an armor piercing round. It’s my understanding (and I could be wrong) that manufacturing AP pistol ammo is illegal if you do not have the proper FFL (regardless of if you intend to sell it). You can manufacture your own AP rifle ammunition and purchase rifle AP ammo, but not pistol AP ammo.

By loading AP rifle bullets into casings you intend to fire through a pistol - you can run afoul of the law (see 5.56 Greentip problems).

[OlongJohnson]

As I understand it, Rob's comment applies to brass or bronze bullets as well, which makes GMX bullets a no-fly in a pistol. The "gilding metal" they are made from is technically a low-zinc brass. Barnes bullets are pure copper, so they are OK in a pistol.

It's understood that any .223 and up (and some down) rifle ammo will pierce soft body armor, which is why the Federal law prohibiting "armor piercing ammo" applies only to pistol ammo.

[Caballoflaco]

Help me out here. What would be illegal? Not being a smart ass. Genuinely curious.

Basically what Rob said. Federal laws regarding armored piercing ammunition for pistols. In addition to the attempt to ban m855 Rob mentioned all the Russkie 7n6 ammunition was banned from importation when the federales saw pistols were being made in 5.45x39 and noted that round had a mild steel core.

[El Cid]

As I understand it, Rob's comment applies to brass or bronze bullets as well, which makes GMX bullets a no-fly in a pistol. The "gilding metal" they are made from is technically a low-zinc brass. Barnes bullets are pure copper, so they are OK in a pistol.

It's understood that any .223 and up (and some down) rifle ammo will pierce soft body armor, which is why the Federal law prohibiting "armor piercing ammo" applies only to pistol ammo.

Still doesn’t make sense to me. But I suppose there’s a reason when the people making laws don’t know shit about guns.

What about the FiveSeven pistol? That ammo zips through soft armor if I recall.

[Caballoflaco]

Still doesn’t make sense to me. But I suppose there’s a reason when the people making laws don’t know shit about guns.

What about the FiveSeven pistol? That ammo zips through soft armor if I recall.

A lot of it is in regards to bullet construction and if it has been ruled to have a “sporting purpose” which is why soft point and fmj 5.7 ammo is legal but the penetrator core version isn’t. There’s also some specific state laws, here in Alabama Teflon coated pistol bullets are specifically banned.

Here’s what a quick google search turned up with usc # references.


ARMOR-PIERCING AMMUNITION
Federal law prohibits the manufacture, importation, sale or delivery of armor-piercing ammunition, with very limited exceptions. Armor-piercing or metal-piercing ammunition is designed primarily to penetrate metal or armor, including body armor commonly worn by police officers. (18 U.S.C. § 921, 18 U.S.C. § 922 and 27 CFR § 478.37)

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.

[El Cid]

A lot of it is in regards to bullet construction and if it has been ruled to have a “sporting purpose” which is why soft point and fmj 5.7 ammo is legal but the penetrator core version isn’t. There’s also some specific state laws, here in Alabama Teflon coated pistol bullets are specifically banned.

Here’s what a quick google search turned up with usc # references.

Thanks. So as it relates to PDW’s (I see now this is its own thread) we are good to go using 300BLK TTSX because of the plastic tips.

And the law you quoted... they actually list depleted uranium! I don’t know what to say about that. Lol!

[OlongJohnson]

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;

Obama's whole attempt to ban M855/SS109 was based on the idea that AR format pistols are concealable and such a grave threat to law enforcement (although there were zero records dug up all through the fiasco of any police officer ever being shot with one) that the green tips must be banned.

The technical problem was that the steel portion of the core, whether by weight or volume, is well under half the core, so it doesn't even pass a majority test, let alone "entirely." Someone could play games and argue that the projectile actually had two cores, but why if that was the intended interpretation would they bother to say, "entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances)?"

In the end, there was no debate. Something like 80k comments were filed, overwhelmingly opposing the proposed rule. ATF showed every sign of forging ahead with the "armor piercing is what the party says it is" approach, just like they later did with "automatic is what the party says it is" to ban bump stocks. Then Representative John Cornyn (R-TX), chair of the House Ways and Means Committee (the people who make the Federal budget, basically), met with BATFE seniors and said essentially, "Gosh, it sure would be nice if we were able to support the work you're doing." About three days later, it was announced that the rule making process was suspended.

ETA:


Thanks. So as it relates to PDW’s (I see now this is its own thread) we are good to go using 300BLK TTSX because of the plastic tips.

As noted above, that is not the reason, and that wouldn't get you anywhere on the non-tipped TSX bullets. The reason is that Barnes bullets are pure copper, not gilding metal. Pure copper is not "tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium."

Gilding metal, which polymer-tipped GMX bullets are made from, is brass, an alloy of copper and zinc. One might attempt to argue that the projectile is not entirely brass because of the tip, but I wouldn't stake my freedom on it. Notice also that Hornady does not produce the GMX technology for pistol calibers, unlike Barnes. So I personally would not load GMX bullets into a pistol, or even have them around in any caliber that could be loaded into a pistol I own.

IANAL, but I studied the heck out of this question a few years ago for some reason.

[awp_101]

all the Russkie 7n6 ammunition was banned from importation when the federales saw pistols were being made in 5.45x39 and noted that round had a mild steel core.
Same thing happened with all that ChiCom 7.62x39 steel core that was coming in dirt cheap in the 90s. Olympic Arms was warned their x39 pistol (OA-93?) could cause importation to stop because then 7.62x39 could be considered an AP pistol round and Oly went ahead with it anyway. I remember hearing about lots of people being pissed when it happened.

[Velo Dog]

Gilding metal, which polymer-tipped GMX bullets are made from, is brass, an alloy of copper and zinc. One might attempt to argue that the projectile is not entirely brass because of the tip, but I wouldn't stake my freedom on it. Notice also that Hornady does not produce the GMX technology for pistol calibers, unlike Barnes. So I personally would not load GMX bullets into a pistol, or even have them around in any caliber that could be loaded into a pistol I own.

Hornady now has the Handgun Hunter line of ammunition which appears to use a similar copper alloy to the rifle MonoFlex and GMX projectiles. ?????

https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/handgun-hunter#!/

[Unobtanium]

Remember the 45gr spire point brass bullet Barnes made in .224 caliber that quietly got phased out about a decade ago? It was billed as a product for pelt-hunters of coyote, etc. I have videos of that ripping several stacked II vests in a row, punching a foot of gel, and continuing into the nether from a 5.7 pistol.

[Mike C]

Thanks I forgot about this and need to go pickup some Barnes then ASAP.

[OlongJohnson]

I've had a little correspondence with Hornady CS about the Handgun Hunter line. Included confirmation that it's a copper-zinc alloy and ended with them essentially saying, "It's GTG with relevant authorities." That's not an exact quote, just summarizing the message.

I can't find any definition of brass that doesn't capture "gilding metal" at 95 Cu/ 5 Zn, which leaves an approved exemption as the only way I can figure out for the stuff to be legal:

https://atf-eregs.18f.gov/478-148/2019-24301#478-148


§ 478.148 Armor piercing ammunition intended for sporting or industrial purposes.
The Director may exempt certain armor piercing ammunition from the requirements of this part. A person who desires to obtain an exemption under this section for any such ammunition which is primarily intended for sporting purposes or intended for industrial purposes, including charges used in oil and gas well perforating devices, shall submit a written request to the Director. Each request shall be executed under the penalties of perjury and contain a complete and accurate description of the ammunition, the name and address of the manufacturer or importer, the purpose of and use for which it is designed and intended, and any photographs, diagrams, or drawings as may be necessary to enable the Director to make a determination. The Director may require that a sample of the ammunition be submitted for examination and evaluation.

Given that it's specifically engineered to expand for hunting, it does seem reasonable that a sporting purposes exemption could be obtained. Seems like approved exemptions should be public info, but I haven't been able to find where they are published. Any of our LEOs know? Federal Register would be an obvious spot to look. I'm reasonably familiar with searching that in my own field of expertise, but wouldn't know what to search for in this case.

I don't have any special inside knowledge here. I'm very much on the outside, looking in, and trying to make sense of what I can see.

[El Cid]

I've had a little correspondence with Hornady CS about the Handgun Hunter line. Included confirmation that it's a copper-zinc alloy and ended with them essentially saying, "It's GTG with relevant authorities." That's not an exact quote, just summarizing the message.

I can't find any definition of brass that doesn't capture "gilding metal" at 95 Cu/ 5 Zn, which leaves an approved exemption as the only way I can figure out for the stuff to be legal:

https://atf-eregs.18f.gov/478-148/2019-24301#478-148



Given that it's specifically engineered to expand for hunting, it does seem reasonable that a sporting purposes exemption could be obtained. Seems like approved exemptions should be public info, but I haven't been able to find where they are published. Any of our LEOs know? Federal Register would be an obvious spot to look. I'm reasonably familiar with searching that in my own field of expertise, but wouldn't know what to search for in this case.

I don't have any special inside knowledge here. I'm very much on the outside, looking in, and trying to make sense of what I can see.

If only we had a system that charged people for criminal behavior instead of possession of an item that has legitimate use by good people...

[Mike C]

If only we had a system that charged people for criminal behavior instead of possession of an item that has legitimate use by good people...

If only.