Very few know the truth.

Hint: Ronnie R. signed the law.

You just love yourself, don't you.

I see the whiskey is flowing. I have a nice cup of black velvet carmel tonight.

The lie is that green tip will blow through a vest out of an AR handgun and plain old M193 won't. They both should go right through most SBA.

yup

The list of Azzes around this place grows by the day sometimes. Full moon and the kooks are out...

^^^^ This!

764fartnozzle is full of himself again I see.

Actually fellas this isn't technically true, as there is no "growth" there... this is none other than our old friend who won't go away, Larry Root. (da poooo-say)

Still wish Bricktop coulda whooped him when he had the chance.

Amid all the (typical) name calling there was no apparent knowledge of the internet lie.

BTW efw, Bricktop never had the chance to give me a whupping (the word you were grasping for) because while has never been anywhere near either of my homes, I drive by his shack twice a year. While he knows that, I have yet to see a sign out front saying: Larry Root, come in so I can whup you."

He is just another clone of the tough guy wannabes that this site has a few of.

Ironic that there is so much hate for a few by a few, but the haters just cannot put the hated on ignore and, in fact, ignore the hated. Guess it helps your post count.

Glad I bought all 5.56 when it was <$350/1000.

best to all of you and yours, Larry Root (my real name)

I really dislike our Republicans not getting the credit they deserve.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=37785

Statement on Signing the Bill To Regulate Armor-Piercing Ammunition
August 28, 1986

It is a pleasure to be able to sign into law H.R. 3132 to ban the production or importation of the so-called cop-killer bullets, which pose an unreasonable threat to law enforcement officers who use soft body armor. This bill, similar to legislation jointly submitted to the Congress by the Departments of Justice and the Treasury in 1984, recognizes that certain forms of ammunition have no legitimate sporting, recreational, or self-defense use and thus should be prohibited. Such action is long overdue.

During the 61/2 years that I have served as President, I have sought to strengthen law enforcement in this nation and to do everything possible to protect the lives and safety of the dedicated men and women who constitute our first line of defense against the forces of lawlessness. I am pleased, therefore, to sign H.R. 3132 to ban armor-piercing ammunition as this legislation has long had the strong endorsement of our outstanding law enforcement organizations, including the International Association of Chiefs of Police, National Sheriffs Association, Fraternal Order of Police, International Brotherhood of Police Officers, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, National Association of Police Organizations, National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, National Black Police Association, National Troopers Coalition, International Union of Police Associations, Police Executive Research Forum, Police Foundation, Police Management Associations, and the Major City Chiefs.

In signing this bill, I want to urge those States and localities that have not acquired body armor for their law enforcement officers to obtain such lifesaving equipment for their officers. The use of soft body armor is credited with saving the lives of more than 600 officers since it was first introduced in the 1970's. An even more important message is the one I have for law enforcement officers: If you have access to soft body armor, please use it. Your lives and safety are too important to risk needlessly. The fabric used in modern soft body armor is truly a miracle fiber, but it is useless if left in the dressing room locker or the trunk of a squad car.

In signing H.R. 3132, I am giving our law enforcement officers my pledge to do everything possible to eliminate the hazard posed by armor-piercing ammunition. Those officers who in the past may have used the threat of armor-piercing bullets as a justification for failing to wear soft body armor should no longer have that excuse. We are doing our best at the Federal level to enhance the safety of police officers but must have the cooperation of the officers themselves to secure the full benefits of this important legislative action.

Note: H.R. $132, approved August 28, was assigned Public Law No. 99-408.
Citation: Ronald Reagan: "Statement on Signing the Bill To Regulate Armor-Piercing Ammunition ," August 28, 1986. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=37785.

Dang 2 posts in a row that have contain nothing.

I thought a felon could not own a gun?

Jimmy, you are treading very close to the edge. Google slander and libel and the remedies available to a plaintiff in the Peach state.

I don't believe there was any mention of gun ownership, guess you missed that.

best to you and yours, Larry Root (my real name)

can we call you a retard?

Are you really threatening you fake legal actions, AGAIN?

I noticed that too.

What is he even babbling about now? Larry I really did not know who you even were a few weeks ago and now I still don't know. You throw a meaningless post up or comment on a thread and then wander off when someone usually counters your point.

As mentioned by someone above, yes it was a Rep that signed the bill but it was a waste of paper at the time and still is today. The premise of stopping AP rounds out of pistols was intended for the infamous "teflon coated" KTW round and the THV that were being or were going to be imported. At that point nobody was thinking of a 5.56 pistol. It was a classic case of cart before the horse, I dont believe a peace officer was ever killed by a specific AP designed round from a pistol but plenty have been killed by lots of things punching through their vest. A simple .17 HMR will go a lot deeper in kevlar than a lot of people would like to believe.

you know what i noticed at the papers? those that came in screaming they were gonna sue us for slander(they ment libel, just didnt even know what law they were gonna use....DUI charges were the big one people screamed this over) were the ones pissed we found out and printed the truth.....if we phugged up somewhere, rare but usually happened cause someone in the courts had the official info wrong, they didnt come in threatening a libel suit, they just wanted a prominent correction....

guessing the same applies here, if its true it aint libelous...and imagine Larry is screaming bout it cause the info is true, he just doesnt want it out there

Jimmy did not accuse anybody of anything. he made a simple statement about what he thought.

Those two are either brothers...or lovers. Hard to say.

Still don't have a clue about what "the green tip lie" is do you ?

best to you and yours, Larry

We know you're an expert on lies, Larry. That much is a given and that's known well enough here to disregard anything else you say.

And once again he skipped the opportunity to provide anything of merit. We are all just clueless and he is the guru.

Of lies? Yep, that's about it.

It's a lie that it's ALL about the AR pistol. And Larry is a useful tool of the Left by gobbling up the Progressive BS and spewing it...

It is not the fact that Reagan signed the law that the ATF is using...it is the fact that they are using that law incorrectly. M885 is not AP. It has not been used in a pistol to injure or kill a police officer...so the argument is baseless.

What I posted was the truth, it is illegal for a felon to own a gun. You really don't bother me whatever your name is. I am assuming of course that your post was some sort of threat?

There are exemptions in Federal Law for Police and .MIL who are felons to possess firearms.

They did an exemption for it. Surely they intended that exemption to be taken away or they wouldn't have put the bill on Reagan's desk and he wouldn't have signed it. Goes hand in hand with his ban on machine guns as POTUS, signing carry bans & waiting periods in to law in CA, and just an all around lifetime of support for firearms safety laws.

No jimmy, it was only an attempt to switch on the lights for you. It really isn't very smart to tread on the edge of slandering a person of whom you know nothing.
Unless you consider the endless lies paraded out by very few boys on this site as facts.

There is an old saying among attorneys that: " you can sue a ham sandwich."

So making the implication that someone is a felon is imprudent.

Let's just proffer, for the heck of it, that you did it to the wrong person who had the time, inclination and money to drag your butt into the court system. Win or lose, you would spend a lot of money, get plenty of bad publicity, your employer might take exception to whacko claims and Mr. X (the rich guy) could not only sue you in GA, but also in CA (where the slander was made) and in his home state as well. Then let's suppose he is a minority (hate crime) senior citizen (elder abuse), handicapped or a Vietnam vet. Then it's off to Federal court as well.

Ignorance of the law(s) is no defense, so I repeat tread lightly.

The law is clear and ATF is only doing what the law requires. As for being never used to kill a policeman or any other ordinary citizen, I doubt that claim can be substantiated except by militia neo nazi goons on the internet.

The obvious question is have any of you sages actually read the original law, subsequent case law and the ATF proposal ? The obvious answer is no.

If in fact any of you are such experts on the subject, one would assume you and your credentials would be submitted to ATF during the comment period. Again doubtful any have.

Meanwhile those dealers who have it are gouging the public with no remorse as they have to ditch it before it becomes law. Had they any ethics they would sell it at cost to get rid of it and put more ammo in the hands of law abiding citizens.

At Michael Douglas said: " Greed is good."

blah, blah, blah...

grow some balls and either go away or take your lumps.

Comical how Lawrence is so quick to start spouting off and threatening folks with lawyers, BOLO, posse, etc. Especially when it typically starts with him puffing up his scrawny chicken chest in a sad display of Internet bravado and opening his beotch hole to threaten someone.... only to spin 180° when he has a paranoid delusion that someone takes his sorry pathetic azz seriously and begins imagining that people are out to get him.

Then his trembling fingers can't dial fast enough the local law, sheriff, CIA, FBI, Secret Service, etc.

Predictable, but still mildly humorous.

never really considered anything humerous about a SICK Pluck.

I support bans on ammunition when Republicans do it. Why do you want all centerfire rifle ammo banned when a democrat is in?

Good to know where you stand on American's gun rights. This should make you upset as a gun owner...plain and simple.

I have sent correspondence to my Congressional Rep. I do not see how or where 'credentials' are needed to express displeasure with yet another governmental overreach on my gun rights.

I don't shoot this ammo nor own an AR pistol. But I would never support an infringement such as this or any others...you, as a gun owner, should not either. I have read the original law, and I have read the definition of AP rounds, also I have read the make-up of the M885 round and how it simply does not fall into this category.

Please cite one case where the round in question has been used to target LEO's in an AR pistol...just one. I am willing to bet you can not.

Here is what Jerry M has to say on the matter...



Lots of opinions on this...but the bottom line is no gun owner, if they appreciate their rights, should ever be on the side of the gun legislation.

Why do you continue to post here Larry?

We have never had rights, just privileges.

I oppose anti-gun moves when a democrat is in, but Reagan really wanted this based on the zeal he showed with his signing statement. I think we all support the 1989 & 2005 bans affecting imported semi-auto rifle since they were a Bush Executive Order and a Bush Administrative Rule Change respectively. Heck, we all support NFA 34 & GCA 68 since the NRA worked so hard to get them on the books.

you are a mindless little parrot, spewing the same drivel over and over...

read the Constitution of the United States of America.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

note the word 'right' instead of privilege

They had to put that in there for show. Never meant it to be a hindrance or they would have put a penalty in for violations. Notice that none of the "rules" they made up for themselves have penalties attached for when they violate them, but the pettiest offense you can commit will cost you. Now do you want to tell me who has rights and makes you walk the line?

How [bleep] stupid are you? I hope you never have reproduced. Holy [bleep].

Can you point us to a time in our nation's history that a firearm couldn't be removed from a civilian's possession via the slightest whim of an official?

April 19, 1775?

One side, the other, or both would have done it even on that day depending on who they wanted to take the weapon from.