Details

• Sponsor - Kennedy
• Proposed - July 27, 2005
• Congressional Record Link - SA1615
• Amends - S.397
• Amendments - None.
• Vote - 2005-217 - July 29, 2005, 31-64 Amendment failed.
• Results - No change in law.

Synopsis

SA1615 provides the Attorney General the new job of determining standards to decide what ammunition is capable of penetrating 'Body Armor Exemplar'. Any ammunition (handgun or rifle) that the AG determine to be 'armor piercing' is added to the legal list of ammunition to be 'armor piercing'.

From that point forward, it would be a criminal offence to buy or sell this 'armor piercing ammunition'.

Analysis

So, what would become defined as armor piercing ammunition? That would depend on how the AG defined 'Body Armor Exemplar'. The first body armor was designed to protect a police officer from his own firearm - .38 Special at the time. The second type upgraded that capability to .357 Magnum. If this were the direction that the AG took, all of the higher power handguns would be immediately impossible to get ammunition for. And as time passed and AGs came and went, this definition could vary.

Kennedy's continuing ploy is to confuse body armor with armored vehicles in people's minds.

• Body armor is designed to protect a human from some handgun fire.
• Armor piercing ammunition is designed to penetrate the armor on vehicles.

Virtually every rifle round produced is able to penetrate body armor.

Similarly, handgun fire can penetrate vehicles that do not have armor protection. Even a 9mm can penetrate the skin of a mid-60's Dodge.

So, by trying to criminalize ammunition based on performance against body armor, Kennedy runs the risk of making almost every piece of rifle ammunition and some handgun ammunition illegal.

The bottom line is that a political appointee should never have any say in the exercise of our Second Amendment rights.

More information is available at Neal Knox on SA2619.

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment 2.0!