New OSHA regs on ammo, powder and primers

jnyork · Post by **jnyork** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 12:20 pm

I'm sure all of you are by now aware of the terrible mess at OSHA with their proposed new regulations which would effectively end the shooting sports as we know them by severely limiting our ability to obtain ammo and components.
Here is a great letter, copied from another board, you can copy and paste into your message to your Senators and Congressman. Time is very short and we all need to move NOW on this situation:

Dear :

RE: OSHA-2007-0032, PROPOSED RULES

I'm writing you to express my extreme concern regarding the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration's proposed
rule changes regarding explosives, this in 29 CFR Part 1910,
Docket No. OSHA-2007-0032. This proposal would, for the
first time, specify and severely restrict the products used
by millions of American sport shooters, hunters, reloaders,
and antique style firearms enthusiasts, i.e.: all small arms
ammunition and all elements used in the manufacture of such
ammunition; the primers, smokeless powder, and other
elements used by reloaders; and the black powder and
percussion caps used in muzzleloading and replica firearms.
The adoption of this proposal would devastate the shooting
sports industry and, in my opinion, represent a direct and
unconstitutional violation of the right to keep and bear
arms guaranteed to citizens by the Second Amendment.

Examples:

Paragraph (c) (3) (iii) (C) would, in effect, bar all
sporting goods stores, gun shops, or other retailers from
stocking and selling small arms ammunition, reloading
supplies, and black powder. This would literally shut down
an entire retail industry. Gunsmiths would not be allowed,
under this clause, to store the ammunition they require for
test firing, thus destroying the repair industry.

Paragraph (e) (1) (iii) would require individual citizens
who purchase ammunition, reloading supplies, or black
powder--even a single box of small arms ammunition--to
notify local police and fire departments of the purchase and
transport, as well as the location of the designated storage
facility, and to receive permission to do so. This is a
direct violation of a citizen's rights, as well as
ludicrously expensive waste of public resources. It would
also place such economically infeasible requirements on
commercial shippers and carriers that it would ensure that
these business would simply cease to ship these products.

Paragraph (h) (3) (i) (B) places unreasonable limits on the
retail stocking, sale, purchase, and possession of reloading
supplies, and also demonstrates an abysmal ignorance of the
shooting sports upon the part of those who wrote this
proposal. The same is true of Paragraph (h) (4) (i) (C)
regarding primers.

These are only some of the high--or rather, low--points in
this proposal.

In short, even if this proposal emanates from ignorance
rather than malice, its provisions would severely restrict,
if not destroy outright, an entire spectrum of vital
industries that already operate at a high level of safety
under sufficient regulation, and a slate of sports that are
beloved by millions of American citizens. Whether made in
ignorance or malice, it also represents a direct threat of
bureaucratic infringement on a number of civil rights.

The only acceptable outcome for this regulation is that it
be completely rewritten in every particular to specifically
exclude from any new regulation (as was done regarding
civilian and commercial fireworks, which industry actually
has a much less impressive safety record than that of the
small arms ammunition/reloading industry) the wholesale and
retail sales of, the storage of, the shipping of, and all
elements of small arms ammunition, primers and reloading
supplies, and black powder and percussion caps for shooting
sports.

I do realize that you are presently dealing with many vital
and pressing issues, but please do not allow this
bureaucratic mismanagement, whether accomplished in
ignorance or representing an arrogant power grab by an
agency that has no mandate in this area, to proceed.

Sincerely,

Bob259 · Post by **Bob259** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 3:12 am

Thanks. Letters sent

jnyork · Post by **jnyork** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 8:42 pm

Hmmmm. 83 lookers, only one interested enough to do something about it. Makes me wonder what you fellers are going to use for ammo and components. Sad.

BlauBear · Post by **BlauBear** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:03 pm

Cynically, I have very little faith in my ability to influence our representatives in any positive way. I do have faith that this boneheaded piece of bureaucratic bull (or attempted back door gun ban) will have a short life thanks to NRA and industry lobbyists and attorneys, not to mention legislators with a good idea what would happen to their tenure in office if this thing is enforced.

Our representatives know my opinions: Sometimes we agree, sometimes we don't, and that's alright. Life is more complicated than any single issue so we agree to disagree and move on. It happens that we agree on this issue, so this regulation is DOA, although it is curios that it ever got this far.

Activism is good, but I can't do it anymore. I'd rather play with rimfire rifles and the kids.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:04 am

jnyork wrote:Hmmmm. 83 lookers, only one interested enough to do something about it. Makes me wonder what you fellers are going to use for ammo and components. Sad.

I had already posted my comments on it on the OSHA site and emailed representatives before you posted this. Just because folks don't post replies doesn't mean they aren't doing anything about it.

jnyork · Post by **jnyork** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:55 am

So far, on the OSHA website, only 975 opinions on the proposed new regs. This from a country with an estimated 60,000,000 gun owners!! Zumbo, on the other hand, got over 20,000 hits in just a couple of days. I simply cannot believe the level of apathy on this issue.
__________________

BlauBear · Post by **BlauBear** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:37 am

Incredulity may be a better term than apathy, and a faith that this thing is DOA. At worst, this was an attempt to sneak something in that has failed and will now be dealt with - it's one of those regulatory attempts that can't survive daylight. Zumbo sparked outrage because he was seen by many as a traitor while this is seen as "Business as Usual". It's just another reminder to pay my NRA dues even though I disagree with some of their positions.

Bob259 · Post by **Bob259** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:50 am

jnyork wrote:So far, on the OSHA website, only 975 opinions on the proposed new regs. This from a country with an estimated 60,000,000 gun owners!! Zumbo, on the other hand, got over 20,000 hits in just a couple of days. I simply cannot believe the level of apathy on this issue.
__________________

Posted comment on the OSHA site today as well

glocker17 · Post by **glocker17** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:16 pm

Not to worried about this. OSHA does not even regulate most gun shops as they employ less than 11 employees, OSHA has zero authority over individual citizens anyway only businesses, making these regs unenforceable anyway? I anticipate that these mess will be gone soon.

BlauBear · Post by **BlauBear** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:54 pm

Yep - Somebody badly over-stepped and provoked some serious closed door discussions.