Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > Interests > Tilted Weaponry


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-11-2007, 06:00 PM   #1 (permalink)
Huggles, sir?
 
seretogis's Avatar
 
Location: Seattle
Proposed OSHA rule to make ammunition sales difficult

Link

Quote:
Proposed “Safety” Regulations Would Dry Up Ammunition Sales

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has proposed new rules that would have a dramatic effect on the storage and transportation of ammunition and handloading components such as primers or black and smokeless powder. The proposed rule indiscriminately treats ammunition, powder and primers as “explosives.” Among many other provisions, the proposed rule would:

* Prohibit possession of firearms in commercial “facilities containing explosives”—an obvious problem for your local gun store.
* Require evacuation of all “facilities containing explosives”—even your local Wal-Mart—during any electrical storm.
* Prohibit smoking within 50 feet of “facilities containing explosives.”

It’s important to remember this is only a proposed rule right now, so there’s still time for concerned citizens to speak out before OSHA issues its final rule. The National Rifle Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation, and Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute will all be commenting on these proposed regulations, based on the severe effect these regulations (if finalized) would have on the availability of ammunition and reloading supplies to safe and responsible shooters.

The public comment period was originally scheduled to end July 12 but has been extended sixty (60) days until September 10, 2007. To read the OSHA proposal click here (PDF file).

According to OSHA, you may submit comments, identified by Docket No. OSHA-2007- 0032, by any of the following methods:

* Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions on-line for making electronic submissions.
* Fax: If your comments, including attachments, do not exceed 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-1648.
* Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger or courier service: You must submit three copies of your comments and attachments to:
OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2007-0032
U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-2625
200 Constitution Avenue, NW.
Washington, DC 20210
telephone (202) 693-2350 (OSHA"s TTY number is (877) 889-5627).

Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the docket number for this rulemaking (Docket No. OSHA-2007-0032). All comments, including any personal information you provide, are placed in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions you about submitting personal information such as social security numbers and birthdates.

For further information on submitting comments, plus additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of the OSHA proposal.

-----------------------------

OSHA Docket Office Docket No. OSHA-2007-0032 U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-2625 200 Constitution Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20210

Re.: Docket No. OSHA-2007-0032 (Explosives—Proposed Rule)

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am writing in strong opposition to OSHA’s proposed rules on “explosives,” which go far beyond regulating true explosives. These proposed rules would impose severe restrictions on the transportation and storage of small arms ammunition—both complete cartridges and handloading components such as black and smokeless powder, primers, and percussion caps. These restrictions go far beyond existing transportation and fire protection regulations.

As a person who uses ammunition and components, I am very concerned that these regulations will have a serious effect on my ability to obtain these products. OSHA’s proposed rules would impose restrictions that very few gun stores, sporting goods stores, or ammunition dealers could comply with. (Prohibiting firearms in stores that sell ammunition, for example, is absurd—but would be required under the proposed rule.)

The proposed transportation regulations would also affect shooters’ ability to buy these components by mail or online, because shipping companies would also have great difficulty complying with the proposed rules.

There is absolutely no evidence of any new safety hazard from storage or transportation of small arms ammunition or components that would justify these new rules. I also understand that organizations with expertise in this field, such as the National Rifle Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation, and Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Association, will be submitting detailed comments on this issue. I hope OSHA will listen to these organizations’ comments as the agency develops a final rule on this issue.

Sincerely,
This is pretty ridiculous, and I can't imagine it was proposed for any good reason. Hopefully there is enough negative feedback generated for them to ease the hell off. :P
__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames
seretogis is offline  
Old 07-11-2007, 06:20 PM   #2 (permalink)
Upright
 
If government is the answer, it must have been a really, really, really dumb question.
therealcat is offline  
Old 07-11-2007, 06:23 PM   #3 (permalink)
I Confess a Shiver
 
Plan9's Avatar
 
What a f*cking douchebag legislation. Thanks a lot, old crusty white men.

I hope somebody with common sense comes through and stops this crap.

A liquor store is more dangerous than a gun shop. Hands down.
__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."
Plan9 is offline  
Old 07-11-2007, 09:13 PM   #4 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Are there a lot of gun stores blowing up in thunderstorms that i'm just not hearing about?
filtherton is offline  
Old 07-12-2007, 03:42 AM   #5 (permalink)
I Confess a Shiver
 
Plan9's Avatar
 
Gotta be.

Just like all those guns that commit crimes when you're not watching.
__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."
Plan9 is offline  
Old 07-12-2007, 01:59 PM   #6 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
As I glance quickly through the proposed regs, OSHA undertook the revision at the request the Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME) and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI), both of which suggested the 35 year old regs were outdated and there were conflicting standards among the numerous agencies that regulate explosives to some degree.

I wonder how many have read the regs and not just the rhetoric all over the right wing blogs?
Quote:
To make the standard more "user-friendly," the proposal has been
rewritten in plain language. Internal inconsistencies and duplicative
requirements have been eliminated. In addition, it has been rewritten
to eliminate references to public safety that are beyond OSHA's
authority to regulate.

One of OSHA's major goals in this proposed rulemaking is to
increase regulatory consistency with other Federal agencies involved in
regulating the explosives industry and to eliminate confusion within
the regulated community. To achieve this goal, OSHA proposes to adopt
the GHS definitional classification system for "explosives." This
will make OSHA's classification system consistent with the one used by
DOT, which is also based on the GHS.

To provide the regulated community with greater regulatory
flexibility, OSHA has endeavored to use general performance-oriented
language in the proposed standard. This allows OSHA to draft a
requirement in terms of a goal and it allows the employer greater
choice on how to achieve that goal.

http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owad...TER&p_id=19509
I dont know if these new proposed regs are better or worse than the 35 yr old regs...but a little additional research by anyone concerned with the regs wouldnt hurt before jumping to conclusions or relying solely on the veracity of the NRA analysis (they wouldnt exaggerate, would they?).
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 07-12-2007 at 02:07 PM..
dc_dux is offline  
Old 07-12-2007, 08:58 PM   #7 (permalink)
MSD
The sky calls to us ...
 
MSD's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: CT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crompsin
Gotta be.

Just like all those guns that commit crimes when you're not watching.
Didn't you hear what Jesse Jackson said? "Guns don't kill people, people who buy guns from gun stores kill people." Your rhetoric is out of date.
MSD is offline  
Old 07-17-2007, 07:19 AM   #8 (permalink)
Myrmidon
 
ziadel's Avatar
 
Location: In the twilight and mist.
w00t!

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Fe...id=3162&issue=

But, it'll be back.

Quote:
SUMMARY: On April 13, 2007, the U.S. Department of Labor published a
proposed rule entitled Explosives with a comment period that ended 7/
12/2007. On July 9, 2007, the comment period was extended to 9/10/2007.
At this time the U.S. Department of Labor is closing the comment period
effective July 17, 2007. The Department intends to re-propose the
Explosives NPRM at a later date in order to clarify the intent of the
rulemaking.

DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published on April 13,
2007 (72 FR 18792) is closed effective July 17, 2007.


We must be vigilant.
__________________
Ron Paul '08
Vote for Freedom
Go ahead and google Dr. Ron Paul. You'll like what you read.
ziadel is offline  
 

Tags
ammunition, difficult, make, osha, proposed, rule, sales

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:36 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360