TexasCHLforum.com

Texas 46.05 (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly possesses, manufactures, transports, repairs, or sells:

46.05 (3)  armor-piercing ammunition;

46.01 (12) “Armor-piercing ammunition” means handgun ammunition that is designed primarily for the purpose of penetrating metal or body armor and to be used principally in pistols and revolvers.

I am only interested in the 'possession' 'primarily' and 'knowingly' parts. I know normally that ignorance of the law is not a defense but this is ignorance of the ballistics performance of a given round.

How would I know what a round was primarily designed for ?

If I don't knowingly know that a round can defeat armor then how could I know it ? YouTube videos and marketing claims can be faked.

Unless I personally shoot a round or many rounds through metal or body armor then how could I have any knowledge of the round's capability? I haven't done so.

Would factors such as how the round was advertised? My YouTube history, etc come into play? (of course the court loves to bring as much into play as possible)

What about what classifies as body armor? Level II, Level III or IIIa or just 6 layers of denim?

What a mess. I'd much prefer if there was just a list of ammo that was prohibited rather than be left guessing what intentions, knowledge or primarily means.

I suggest that you consult an attorney that is familiar with this portion of the Texas Code. The understanding of what "possession", "knowingly" and "primarily" may the found in case precedents.

let me preface this with IANAL...

But, I've always gone with the thought that it is illegal to sell pistol ammo designated as 'armor piercing ammo' - so if you are buying it from a retailer, I would say that kind of eliminates the threat that you are buying anything that would qualify, or at the very least would give you defense against prosecution because it would definitely eliminate the 'knowingly' part.

I would also add, that I believe the state law mimics the federal law, which is also just as clear as muddy water

TheFriscoKid wrote:How would I know what a round was primarily designed for ?

The box of ammunition will state the weight and design of the bullet.
As I recall teflon coated bullets were never outlawed, but I don't think that they are sold anymore.

IMO, it is another example of an ill-conceived and useless law.
It was enacted as a response to so-called "cop killer bullets."

WildBill wrote:

TheFriscoKid wrote:How would I know what a round was primarily designed for ?

The box of ammunition will state the weight and design of the bullet.
As I recall teflon coated bullets were never outlawed, but I don't think that they are sold anymore.

IMO, it is another example of an ill-conceived and useless law.
It was enacted as a response to so-called "cop killer bullets."

Teflon coated bullets were designed to limit leading.

The confusion is clear if you were caught with handgun caliber armor-piercing ammo. Judge or Jury, would say if it penetrates a soft body armor of what patrol cop wears daily, it is illegal.

Example:

Do not touch those:


Reference:

For me the key parts are "46.01 (12) “Armor-piercing ammunition” means handgun ammunition that is designed primarily for the purpose of penetrating metal or body armor and to be used principally in pistols and revolvers."

It does not say capable it says designed primarily, and those are the key words... I think.
I have many rounds of hand gun ammunition in my gun room that are capable of penetration of threat level III soft body armor, but none of them were designed primarily to do so. Not advertised, marketed, intended as AP rounds.
I have Rifle rounds that are designed primarily as AP... and there are a select few "Hand Guns" that chamber these rounds.. but the ammo is designed, marketed, advertised as rifle rounds not handgun, so still think Im inside the law.

The gun is the FNH 5.7 - I've been watching YouTube videos for a few weeks and almost every round this gun shoots will easily penetrate level IIIa body armor.

The one dud example I've seen is the (only for law enforcement and military SS198 LF) which did not pierce a IIIa vest.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8zlPlolpG4

I don't even know if any of this matters. An assessment of Ft Hood details the rounds used -

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/def ... istol.html

Using SS192 and SS197SR ammunition (common commercial 5.7x28 ammo)...
1. 11 people were shot center-of-mass (COM), one was shot in the stomach and one was shot in the head. All 13 died. All 11 victims who were shot COM did not survive.
2. 3 of the 13 people who died, tried to charge Hassan, but he stopped them with COM shots.
3. The 32 people who were wounded were hit in the arms, legs, hips and shoulders. None of the wounded survivors were shot COM.

The following conclusions can be drawn:
1. The FN 5.7 is a very lethal round CQB because all 11 victims who were shot COM died. No survivors for those hit COM.
2. The FN 5.7 is a real stopper, because 3 tried to charge Hassan at close range and were stopped by COM shots.
3. One of the fatalities was shot in the stomach, and died. The fragmentation of the SS197R round can create a hail of metal shards that can cause serious internal organ damage and bleeding in the stomach.
4. None of the 32 people who were hit in the extremities, hips and shoulders were able to muster a counter-attack because the FN 5.7 must have shattered or broken bones. The high rate of wounded vicitms to fatalities was the direct result of the shooting ability of Hassan (or lack thereof), and not because the 5.7x28 round is not lethal.
5. Sgt. Kimberly Munley (base civilian police), one of the first responders, was immediately disabled with 5.7x28 bullet shrapnels to her wrist and a second 5.7x28 bullet broke her femur. The light 5.7x28 commercial ammo showed that it can shatter large bones due to its velocity
6. According to medical personnel, there was so much blood in the room that it was difficult to get to the victims because the floor became very slippery. One can conclude that the commercial 5.7x28 rounds can fragment or tumble, causing immense blood loss.
7. It took five bullets (which I assume was a 9 mm) from Sgt Mark Todd to stop Hasan. And he survived his wounds (no available info on where he was hit, except that one of the bullets paralyzed Hasan).

In conclusion:
1. The FN 5.7 is definitely a very lethal round. 100% fatality for COM shots.
2. The FN 5.7 is a man-stopper. Three military men tried to charge Hasan, and all three were stopped.
2. The FN 5.7 is a very incapacitating round, if extremities are hit, because it is powerful enough to break the femur (which is the largest bone in the body)
3. The fragmentation or tumbling effect of commercial ammo can cause a lot of blood loss.