Defensive Carry banner

Wisconsin Bill Bans Civilian Use of Hollow Point Ammo

12K views 46 replies 37 participants last post by  gtfoxy 
#1 ·
A member from Wisconsin alerted us to a bill we somehow missed, AB221 introduced May 29, the bill essentially bans civilian use of hollow point ammunition stating:

'Whoever intentionally sells, transports, manufactures, or possesses any hollowpoint bullet, bullet that expands or flattens easily in the human body, or bullet with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions is guilty of a Class H felony'

Proposed Wisconsin Gun Law AB221 - American Gun Owners Alliance

Not sure the chances it has with only three sponsors though.
 
#5 ·
This sure shows that people purposing this bill have no clue as to what they are talking about
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patti
#25 ·
Because most of the people that want some form of gun control or another have no idea what a hollow point is for or what it actually does. They think it is some sort of super duper cop killer double death bullet. Same as they think that an AR-15 is functionally any different than any other semi-auto rifle. The only thing worse than a moron is a moron with an agenda.
 
#23 ·
^^YEAH^

And Bloomberg is Mayor of NY

His money is far reaching.
They said they were going to try this; first Colorado, then other states.

Hopefully there is a bucket with his name on it that needs kicking soon.
 
#9 ·
This was my first thought: Doesn't a hollow point expand, thereby reducing the possibility of over-penetration and hitting an innocent bystander? Wouldn't FMJ target loads actually penetrate, do less damage to the attacker, and have a greated chance of hitting a bystander upon exiting?

Heck, my PD ammo is 124 gr. hollow point while my target loads are as much as 147 gr. FMJ: I'm sure those would penetrate and strike whoever is behind the BG.

And I have a question after reading the text of the bill. The bill reads that penalties include a max of 6 years imprisonment, but IF you are guilty of this "crime" while committing another crime, the violation of this bill adds a max of 5 years to your prison sentence for the other crime. Am I reading that right? Why wouldn't it add six years? So if you use hollow points when robbing a liquor store, you get an additional five years, but if you're pulled over for speeding or whatever, and the cop asks to examine the bullets in your gun, you'll get six? I must not be reading that right.
 
#10 ·
I know two of the three who proposed it are definitely not gun fans.

Risser is 86 years old and has been in the Wisconsin govt as Assemblyman or State Senator since...get this...1957.

He is also one of the 14 State Senators that left Wisconsin during the tough budget negotiations in 2011 as to avoid a vote on Gov. Scott Walker's proposed reforms.

Sinicki is a former PTA President and former Milwaukee School Board member. Been in Assembly since 1998.
 
#11 ·
Looks line I'll have to restart development of the .90 AMP (Automatic Maxwell Pistol) round.

Seriously, where do they get these idiots? Do they honestly think the best way to combat violent crime is to make sure victims get shot with FMJ instead of hollowpoints?
 
#13 ·
This bill is going nowhere because Democrats do not control either chamber of the legislature. It already experienced some beat down when it was pointed out that gun deer hunting would essentially be banned since hunters could not use expanding rounds. A number of co-sponsoring Democrats from Milwaukee had to get hasty "We didn't mean to ban deer hunting. We never looked to see what was in he bill" excuses issued after winding up with egg on their face. Simply, it is the blind rage we hate guns self-pleasuring proposal for the base.

The biggest lesson is that all Democrats that get voted into office are going to be gun banners. Yes, all Democrats. Those like Petit, Begich, Heidkamp, and Baucus are endangered species headed for extinction. Bloomberg's efforts aside, the Democrat purity purge on guns has been going on for a while now. Banning guns is now only second to abortion in the liberal orthodoxy and nearly as sanctified. You cannot even trust ones like those named above because they can pull a Manchin once they ate safe for 5 more years having the "change of heart". If you vote for a Democrat,national, state, or local, you are voting for someone that wants to restrict the 2nd Amendment. Look at all the state proposal since Newtown, even those that went nowhere like this proposal, or the WA sheriff annual inspection, or MO confiscation proposal, etc.
 
#14 ·
Idiocracy

(noun) : a state of having or accepting social norms that are very basic, naive, or unintelligent; a form of government in which a country or territory is run by fools
 
#15 ·
It's not idiotic at all. If you look at it from the perspective of a legislator who wants a complete ban on all firearms, a la the UK, Austrailia, and Canada, there is a clear motive. In there minds, ANY restriction is a good thing. Any rule against ammo, a type of weapon, or more hurdles to purchase or ownership of firearms is a step in the "right" direction. The only goal is to implement some sort of limit, regardless of it's actual impact. Truth is irrelevant. They can create a great emotional case that hollow points are "deadlier" and therefore should be restricted, after all they are even banned by the Geneva Convention for use in combat, right? Consequences are not important if a restriction can be imposed. The consequences can be dealt with later. Call it "common sense gun control" and millions will flock to the cause, no matter how stupid.
 
#21 ·
'Whoever intentionally sells, transports, manufactures, or possesses any hollowpoint bullet, bullet that expands or flattens easily in the human body, or bullet with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions is guilty of a Class H felony'.
Without reading the site to check your facts, it appears to outlaw ALL bullets. A wadcutter or semi-wadcutter can expand. An unjacketed lead slug can expand too, especialy if it hits bone. It looks like only steel bullets can be used, but then you get into the realm of AP rounds.
 
#28 ·
Sry but I have to say that I do not see any reason for this. It is simply a tool to gain more control of ammunition. As soon as you allow this in they will be able to come in and "inspect your weapons and munitions" for possible violations. Establishes an even more potentialy hostile enforcement arm similar to ATF over night & makes me a criminal, over night, as well, even if I'd be exempt anyway, I still don't accept it.

If you want to inspect my weapons I reserve for personal defense & hunting then they can call up a Sate operated & controled mitia, with a given purpose, I would be eligable & have been given a Right, under the Second Amendment, to exercise as I saw fit. If regulating the type of ammunition I have to use, for personal or militia use, then I say fine but the State provide the ammo. I'll shoot theirs all they want.

What I spend my money on, providing I don't have explosive or incendiary, then leave me alone. This is like I said I would be exempt, as would any other large caliber handgun owner, which can be used for hunting, are exempt like I would be... so what then would really be the point?
 
#24 ·
Hopefully this idiotic bill won't make it to the floor for vote.

Keep us posted.
 
#32 ·
Then if a bg is shot by a JHP by a LEO, could they not sue for cruel and unusual use of force.
 
#35 ·
It's right up there with bans on "high capacity" magazines, minimum trigger weights, permits for ammunition, and all forms of registration. They seem innocuous and politically palatable to many, but they create layers and layers of bureaucracy and challenge meant solely to make the process of gun ownership more difficult. The legitimacy of the argument doesn't matter, as long as the outcome is more restriction. I'm sure you could get some of these people to campaign against FMJ since it's clearly "more dangerous" than JHP ammo, right?
 
#36 ·
Huh? I read the bill. Did I miss something?

I see no "exceptions" for long rifles nor does the bill indicate hand guns only. If so, I guess hunting in Wisconsin no longer will exist?

Wow!
 
#40 ·
Actually there is although the wording is iffy at best, in 941.294 (e):

The action is by a person who is complying with any rule promulgated by the department of natural resources that requires an individual to hunt deer or bear with the bullets or ammunition
 
#38 ·
Morons. Yet, I think they are doing this with the intent of a full-on ban. First, they will try to convince the public that hollow points are "deadlier" as stated earlier. Then they will want a ban on full metal jackets for being "armor piercing". ...So what are you left with, now?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top