Fox News: Police Safety Not Important - Let The Gun Nuts Have Armor Piercing Rounds (VIDEO)

.308 is a standard military round for much of the world. In times gone by, the 30-06 was a common military round. I thought the question here was whether the round was meant for a handgun (have you read the law in question) and whether it was an armor piercing handgun round. This is clearly a rifle round. Most rifle rounds are armor piercing. All ammo is meant to due damage. That is why they were designed. M193 and M855 are both designed to function in the AR15/M16 type of rifle. The M16 is an assault rifle. The AR15 is not. The also function quite well in various bolt action rifles. The Constitution does not specify sporting use. If sporting use is the litmus then there are a large number calibers the would be banned.

Wrong. There are certainly multiple legitimate applications for this type of ammunition, the fact that they are cheap and readily available perhaps among the most important. The fact is that the ONLY “armor piercing” bullets currently banned are those that can be fired by a handgun. It is illegal to try and ban a bullet like this that is not used in handguns.

Just like so many other arguments on gun rights, the original design/purpose of the ammo does not matter, only it’s characteristics. Just because it may have originally have been designed “for combat” doesn’t mean that is the ONLY thing it’s good for.

The answer to your question has to do with price and availability. This ammo is functionally no different from almost all other 223/5.56 ammo out there, but it is fairly cheap and plentiful. That’s why we need it. This isn’t about choice limitation, it’s about overall availability and affordability. It’s a well-known gun grabber tactic to try and make gun ownership as onerous and difficult as possible, and this tactic fits firmly within that

This ammunition clearly does not meet the standard for handgun armor piercing ammo, and thus it cannot be banned under current law. There is no reason to ban it, as (1) the ATF has not even alleged, let alone provided evidence of the fact, that a police officer has EVER been shot by this type of bullet, and (2) ANY 223/5.56 round, not to mention every long rifle round out there, will defeat police body armor. This ban is nothing but an attempt to make AR-15 ownership more expensive. End of story.

These people ARE targeting the AR-15 specifically. What rock have you been living under?

The fact that the .223 isn’t specific to the AR platform is irrelevant, especially since almost all M855 rounds are bought by AR-15 owers.

Most modern body armor is tested against 7.62×39 ammo. The steel tipped rounds are designed to pack enough punch to get through it.

Deeply misleading, and outright FALSE statement. Only Type III and type IV are tested against long rifle rounds, and police don’t normally wear this type of armor. SWAT teams do, but regular cops do not. There is no soft body armor in the world that will stop a long rifle round. Period.

Plus there is the larger fact that you are simply LYING about. Anything that an M855 round will penetrate, so will a 7.62×39 FMJ round.

Kinda difficult to answer a bogus question not grounded in reality. Your question seems to be (and correct me if I’m wrong):

Why do you need a round designed to defeat police body armor?

First of all, as I have explained, ANY long rifle round will penetrate the type of soft body armor the police use, so therefore ANY long rifle round is “designed” to defeat police body armor. Second, the types of body armor that will stop M855 will also stop regular .223 and 7.62×39, as designed. Only Type IV, the kind used by the military with heavy ceramic plates will stop some true “armor piercing” ammunition. Hint: M855 is not on that list.

Why are you LYING about this round in order to make your case? That’s the more important question I would say. Funny how I call you out on your boldfaced lie, and your tactic is to entirely ignore it. How do you say “ironic”?

Aah, so it’s “military” armor then? Fine. Did you check out the video? No military armor out there will be penetrated by M855, so your question is indeed bogus. Add to that the fact that ALL long-rifle ammunition was “designed” to defeat military body armor, and the question becomes even less valid.

Plus, I ALREADY answered this question multiple times. M855 is cheap and plentiful, that’s why I need it. Why are you ignoring the answer to the question? Why are you ignoring the fact that you have LIED about this round to make it seem more dangerous than it actually is? Hmmm?

How about you answer even ONE of these questions?: Why ban a round that is no more dangerous than all other currently-available long rifle ammunition? Why ban a round that does not meet the definition of “armor piercing”? Why ban a round using a law meant to protect the police, when no police have ever been shot by this round?

Can’t you read, madam? Maybe you SHOULD be “done here,” as you are clearly impervious to clear reasoning, and you clearly don’t have a problem with telling boldfaced lies and then completely ignoring it when you are called out on them.

Again, the answers are:
1. M855 is CHEAP
2. M855 is not actually armor piercing, and no more dangerous to police or military than any other long rifle round, it’s original purpose being completely irrelevant to the current discussion.
3. You want another answer too? Fine, having a round that penetrates slightly better than other 223 ammo is advantageous if you’re shooting something thick, say a large animal.

Funny how you accuse me of refusing to answer your question, even though I have about 5 times now, when you completely and wholly refuse to answer even one of mine? Funny how that works with you gun grabbers.

In many areas, it is actually illegal to hunt large game with anything smaller than a .243. However, there are a plethora of other legitimate sporting / hunting uses for even the M855. Plus the 2A has never been about hunting, this I’m sure you know.

However, the larger point here is that the ATF has no legal basis for trying to ban this round. It does not meet their own criteria for “armor piercing.” It is among the very least powerful long rifle rounds out there, even with a steel tip on the projectile. All modern Type III and type IV body armor will stop it, and no Type I or II will stop ANY long rifle round, including the less powerful versions of the .223/5.56 round. The extra tiny hard metal piece in the projectile makes ZERO difference in terms of the laws meant to protect our police

This is simply another move by this vehemently anti-gun administration to make sporting rifle ownership more expensive and difficult. I suspect the reason you refuse to answer any of my questions is because you realize this quite clearly, yet you really don’t want to admit it.

The proof is right there in the video. A type III armor plate, of the type used by BOTH police and the military, the lowest level of long-rifle rated armor, defeating the M855 round easily. Pretty much blows your whole “the M855 was designed to punch through military body armor” BS right out of the water.

Because gunz bro. Gunz.