AFT proposed rule to regulate gunpowder

[nrs]

Another attack on ammo by regulating our ability to reload. Gooberment sneaking this one under the table. Not alot of talk about this and it is already well into the comment period. Only 74 days left, ends 11/21



Comment submittal
https://www.federalregister.gov/documen ... -authority

[YNOTAZ]

Yes this is an attack on reloading and a backdoor restriction on gun rights. They don't propose any lower limit to restrict this to manufacturers, distributors, and retailers.

It is aimed at "any person who stores explosives", that's you and me boys and girls. Submit a comment and write your congress person.

[NBC_LT]

You may be defending the rights for Apples when Oranges are being proposed in this rule.

ATF does not consider smokeless gunpowder in any category of their "explosive materials":
https://regulations.atf.gov/555-202/2019-24570#555-202

Smokeless powder is a propellant, not an explosive. Even though smokeless powder has some ingredients of regulated material, it does not count as an "explosive mixture" - as sold by a licensee/vendor - if you add stuff to it then that may transform it into a regulated explosive material:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- ... -27630.pdf

ATF has explicitly exempted smokeless gunpowder from Subpart K (Storage):
https://www.atf.gov/explosives/qa/smoke ... es-storage

This proposal may affect the firearms/NFA community for those who store over 50 lbs of black powder (low explosive) and "display" level fireworks (usually commercial) - but not even your high volume, belt-fed feeding, smokeless cartridge reloader. Those amounts of explosives should be in a magazine - or hopefully not stored willy-nilly by a neighbor.

[YNOTAZ]

Funny, interstate commerce regulations call smokeless powder, black powder, and primers, explosives.

I'm not sure about you but I don't have the money to argue, with the fed, in court, if they decide they don't like me for any reason.

[xerts1191]

IMG_0019.JPG (22.75 KiB) Viewed 2813 times

[NBC_LT]

Funny, interstate commerce regulations call smokeless powder, black powder, and primers, explosives.

I like to be in the know about anything dealing with regulations - so please let me know which interstate commerce regulation are you referring to. Are you referring to the 49 CFR (DOT-Dangerous Goods) regulations? If so the 49CFR indeed does lump propellants into shipping class 1 (Explosives)- however typically places them into lower divisions of hazard (most commonly 1.4) that have rather liberal quantity limits (75kg) and exceptions for it's UN code (0509). As you can see in the ATF regulations (555.202) UN 0509 is not included in any ATF Explosives classification - so I'm not loosing any sleep over this proposed rule change -which would only affect ATF explosives licensees.

[kenpoprofessor]

Funny, interstate commerce regulations call smokeless powder, black powder, and primers, explosives.

I like to be in the know about anything dealing with regulations - so please let me know which interstate commerce regulation are you referring to. Are you referring to the 49 CFR (DOT-Dangerous Goods) regulations? If so the 49CFR indeed does lump propellants into shipping class 1 (Explosives)- however typically places them into lower divisions of hazard (most commonly 1.4) that have rather liberal quantity limits (75kg) and exceptions for it's UN code (0509). As you can see in the ATF regulations (555.202) UN 0509 is not included in any ATF Explosives classification - so I'm not loosing any sleep over this proposed rule change -which would only affect ATF explosives licensees.

Until Wickard v. Filburn is overruled, they'll do everything in their power to stymie what we do, and to bring us hell on earth.

Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde