Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46

Thread: Legality of using LE/Miltary Ammo

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1

    Question Legality of using LE/Miltary Ammo

    I've been reading for a while now, but this is my first post. It's probably been talked about before, so forgive me if this has been rehashed.

    As you all know, plenty of manufacturers market certain ammunition as tactical or for police and military. I've read endless forum threads on different varieties of these offerings, about people's preference and why the choose what they choose, etc. They are obviously very popular. I have Hornady TAP CQ in my carry handgun. Has anyone ever heard of someone using a "LE-style" round in a defensive situation only to have that be a legal liability in an ensuing legal process, either criminal or civil lawsuit? What I'm imagining is an over-zealous prosecutor saying something like, "why was this civilian using ammunition intended for law enforcement, he is a civilian!" Or insinuating that there is something inherently "aggressive" in choosing defensive ammunition with the best terminal ballistics.

    Thanks in advance for your responses.

  2. #2
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest
    Legality is dependent on the jurisdiction.

    It's just another form of gun control, sometimes from the right, sometimes from the left.

  3. #3
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    In Kentucky it is illegal to use armor-piercing or "flanged" ammo in commission of a crime and it as to be a felony. Use is defined as even having it loaded into a gun, even if no shots are fired. Then it goes on to say:

    (4) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any person who is justified in acting
    pursuant to the provisions of KRS Chapter 503.

    So I doubt, being in Kentucky, we have much to worry about if we had to use our weapon in a justifiable manner.

    http://www.lrc.ky.gov/KRS/527-00/080.PDF
    http://www.lrc.ky.gov/KRS/503-00/CHAPTER.HTM

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Google up Massad Ayoob on the use of the exact same ammo as the cops use. He's in favor of it just because (he says) it prevents the prosecution from making a big deal out of what you used since the cops use it.

    BTW, military ammo is restricted by the Hauge (not Geneva) Convention to the use of FMJ RN (ball) (no flat-nosed or otherwise) ammo. It's probably the second-worst stuff to use ("none" being the absolute worst) due to probability of over-penetration and having no way to make the leaking of bodily fluids happen faster.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Some manufacturers sell their products as army/LEO only and do their darnedest to make sure it is sold that way for one of a few reasons I can think of.

    1. They are facists who think the government is special.

    2. They are idiots who don't know how to market products and what to produce.

    3. They have completely separate lines of manufacturing and marketing for tax purposes. It is easier for them to sell LEO only products with no taxes included and just keep them separate from non government sales.

    There are no laws forcing companies to sell some ammo only to LEO, and in fact many of the "LEO only" products will end up in surplus areas where the manufacturer has production overruns. Massad has the right idea, use their ammo for legal purposes.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Florissant, Mo
    Posts
    227
    I have always wonder about that... normally... military stuff is the "bottom 3 bids"... so I guess its the "cheap" stuff.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    The idea of "Armor piercing" ammo is sort of misleading.

    ANY rifle ammo will compromise the standard-issue Level II body armor that most LEOs wear. ANY rifle ammo fired from a rifle--excluding .22lr.

    The standard 30.06 Remington ammo that people use for deer hunting will. The cheapest "white box Winchester" in .308 DEFINITELY will. And ANY .223 ammo will.

    And so will any full-power pistol ammo fired from a gun with a barrel longer than about 4" if it's .44magnum or larger.

    Because the certification process for Level II body armor isn't testing for that sort of thing--it's to protect the wearer from pistol ammo, and generally stuff that is small, low-power, and cheap, like what criminals and thugs generally use.

    So the concept of "AP ammo" is sort of a BS concept to start with.

    If anyone can find an instance where a criminal actually USED military-issue AP ammo in the commission of a crime and it proved to be somehow "more lethal" than "regular" rifle ammo, I'd like to see it.

    Restrictions on certain types of ammo is just fear mongering and propaganda. A rifle will kill you just as dead no matter if it is firing a standard FMJ round or the lastest high-tech Depleated Uranium/Armor Piercing round. Banning certain kinds of ammo because it "sounds nasty" or "looks evil" is just a stepping stone to banning ALL ammo, and therefore is just a tool in the arsenal of tyrants.

    Speaking of which, I have about 20 boxes of 10mm Black Talons. And as soon as I add a 10mm pistol to my collection (I stupidly sold my Delta Elite about 10 years ago) I will DEFINITELY be carrying those rounds, because finding the new PDXs in 10mm is nearly impossible--same bullet, same load, just a different colored lube coating on the bullet makes the Black Talon somehow "more lethal" than one that has a clear coat of the same chemical...

    WTF?
    Last edited by Dreamer; 02-05-2012 at 01:52 AM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  8. #8
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest
    The armor that armor-piercing pierces is hardened.

  9. #9
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    (7) "Armor-piercing ammunition" means 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
    (1) or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel,
    iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium. "Armor piercing
    ammunition" does not include shotgun shot required by federal or state
    environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes, a frangible projectile
    designed for target shooting, a projectile which the Secretary of the Treasury of the
    United States finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes, or any
    other projectile or projectile core which the Secretary of the Treasury of the United
    States finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used
    in an oil and gas well perforating device.

    This is Kentucky law, armor piercing ammo only applies to handgun ammo. But usually the law isn't about anything capable of defeating armor, but anything DESIGNED to defeat armor. Just because my .308 is capable of putting holes in soft armor doesn't mean that I am shooting armor piercing ammo in most states (I am guessing).

    Firedawg: Does it matter how "cheaply" it is made if it is up to your standard? That is the same way the government thinks. If it is up to par then buy they the cheapest stuff they can get their hands on. It doesn't matter too much that some of the other ammo is better, most of the ammo doesn't hit home anyways. And that has very little to do with the ammo, most of it is the way wars are fought now.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by 09jisaac View Post
    Just because my .308 is capable of putting holes in soft armor doesn't mean that I am shooting armor piercing ammo in most states (I am guessing).

    The fact that the .308 round that compromised body armor wasn't "officially designated" as AP will come as great comfort to the person wearing said body armor as they hit the ground, I'm sure...

    What I mean is that bans on "AP" ammo are ridiculous. There are almost NO manufacturers of AP ammunition for handguns anywhere on the planet. ALL rifle ammo will compromise the body armor that is issued to EVERY LEO in the US for everyday use. So banning a non-existant type of ammo has about as much to do with officer safety as a ban on "autonomous USB-compatible spleen-eating nano-bots" would...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 02-08-2012 at 11:32 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  11. #11
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    I agree. I don't think that AP ammo would be too difficult to make, so it don't seem that a ban on it would do anyone any good. I don't see very many "civilians" that NEED AP rounds, but I don't think that you should have to show a need.

    I think where AP rounds are heavier, don't they fly better at long range?

  12. #12
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    If you made the bullet of a .25ACP out of beryllium copper..... it would 'technically' be armor piercing. Doesn't matter that it probably couldn't get through a Level I vest. Like the old laws that mandated sealed beam headlights, it concerns it self with construction; not performance.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Florissant, Mo
    Posts
    227
    [QUOTE=Dreamer;1695899]
    If anyone can find an instance where a criminal actually USED military-issue AP ammo in the commission of a crime and it proved to be somehow "more lethal" than "regular" rifle ammo, I'd like to see it.

    The "Bank of America" robbery in the mid 90's....LOL.

    I think that was the only "real" time a criminal use any thought to "out gun" the police.

    But you are right, "AP" is over rated.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Large Caliber Kick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Mooresville, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by JTHunter View Post
    Why worry about all that stuff? I just take a sharp knife to my hollowpoints and make 2-3 "pie cuts" across the top so there are 4-6 fragments.
    The winchester ammo I carry for sd already has these "pie cuts" you speak of and is designated as "le only" by winchester. Oddly enough it can be orderd online easily.

  15. #15
    Regular Member sharkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    1,066
    I was gonna make a snarky comment but ....... yeah!, simunition now markets to civilians!

    I wonder how many years I have to save to play.


    http://simunition.com/en/products/theme/civilian

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    215
    I bought some LE only ammo , had a good dealer.
    He said everyone coming through my door are LE.
    I buy more when I can.
    Life is tough, its tougher when your stupid.

    http://www.itsnotthelaw.com

    Feds: U.C.C. 1-308, State: U.C.C. 1-207, Both: U.C.C. 1-103.6

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Google up Massad Ayoob on the use of the exact same ammo as the cops use. He's in favor of it just because (he says) it prevents the prosecution from making a big deal out of what you used since the cops use it.

    BTW, military ammo is restricted by the Hauge (not Geneva) Convention to the use of FMJ RN (ball) (no flat-nosed or otherwise) ammo. It's probably the second-worst stuff to use ("none" being the absolute worst) due to probability of over-penetration and having no way to make the leaking of bodily fluids happen faster.

    stay safe.
    I would just like to say that this is only for wartime ammo. SF stateside can (and do) use hollow-points state-side for base defense. Which does make me wonder what they would do if our country was invaded.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Large Caliber Kick View Post
    The winchester ammo I carry for sd already has these "pie cuts" you speak of and is designated as "le only" by winchester. Oddly enough it can be orderd online easily.
    There are plenty of brands and product lines that have those cuts that are not marked LE only. The one that is a little difficult to find is bonded ammo not marked LE only, but that is getting easier every year.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Aknazer View Post
    I would just like to say that this is only for wartime ammo. SF stateside can (and do) use hollow-points state-side for base defense. Which does make me wonder what they would do if our country was invaded.
    Probably use the same ball ammo, it will more consistently make a hole, regardless of armor. Plus, it would take some large changes and time in the govt ammo plants to change from ball ammo.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    So banning a non-existant type of ammo has about as much to do with officer safety as a ban on "autonomous USB-compatible spleen-eating nano-bots" would...
    Hey! Back the **** off my nanobots!

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Aknazer View Post
    Which does make me wonder what they would do if our country was invaded.
    Say "screw the Hague Conventions"?

    I mean, it's not like American civilians won't be shooting back, too. And it's not like they're going to give a crap what some agreement says as they're shooting to protect their lives, property, and way of life.
    Last edited by marshaul; 02-11-2012 at 01:52 PM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    Probably use the same ball ammo, it will more consistently make a hole, regardless of armor. Plus, it would take some large changes and time in the govt ammo plants to change from ball ammo.
    No I mean some armed forces already use JHP stateside for base/self defense (9mm, never heard of them using JHP for m16/m4). So if we were invaded does that mean those who had been authorized to use the 9mm JHP would now have to turn in their JHP and start using ball since it is the US soil that is the warzone?

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    Say "screw the Hague Conventions"?

    I mean, it's not like American civilians won't be shooting back, too. And it's not like they're going to give a crap what some agreement says as they're shooting to protect their lives, property, and way of life.
    Well I already disagree with the limits on ammo, but technically one could be considered a war criminal for using the wrong type of ammo and really, how can we expect the enemy to be using FMJs if we're saying "screw that" and using JHPs or EFMJs (talking about our military and not civilians).

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Aknazer View Post
    Well I already disagree with the limits on ammo, but technically one could be considered a war criminal for using the wrong type of ammo and really, how can we expect the enemy to be using FMJs if we're saying "screw that" and using JHPs or EFMJs (talking about our military and not civilians).
    If our country is invaded, we will either win, in which case nobody is going to charge anybody with squat, or we will lose, in which case our conquerers can charge anybody with anything they like.

    The time to play nice is not when invaders are bashing down your door.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    If our country is invaded, we will either win, in which case nobody is going to charge anybody with squat, or we will lose, in which case our conquerers can charge anybody with anything they like.

    The time to play nice is not when invaders are bashing down your door.
    And yet we expect other countries to play by these rules.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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