From: "Eric Peterson" <>
Subject: Re: [SUVCW] New Regs Threatens Ammo/Gunpowder
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 21:08:40 -0400
References: <773c85270707061101sb42b21aqfa6abe7610b7dfbc@mail.gmail.com>
What a very clever way to attack our 2nd amendment rights. They're not
saying you can't own arms and ammunition. They will just make the cost to
procure them prohibitive.
That's really what they're up to here. Any moron would know that the rules
they propose would force the industry to shut down.
I would like to know how many of these plants have been blown up when struck
by lightning? Probably none. I work for a major insurance company and have
seen many buildings burn when struck by lightning. Every one of them
smoldered first then the fire grew. All the occupants had plenty of time to
get to safety.
My company also insures many sporting goods stores. How many have blown up
because a customer suddenly pulled a lighter out of his pocket? None.
Now in case anyone doubts what I am saying or thinks my sample is too small,
my territory used to be the upper Midwest. Then it was the deep south. Now
its' the eastern seaboard from Georgia all the way to Delaware. Eighteen
years of experience.
I can tell you that a number of clothing retail stores have been burned down
when children playing with lighters or other malicious customers decided to
set fire to clothing on the racks. Should all the retailers have to search
their customers for lighters? If the threat of fire or explosion was the
real reason then that would be the case.
This ridiculous and obvious attack on the 2nd amendment has to be stopped.
By the way, I'm not sure what effect this would have on the "purist"
re-enactor ( a term a retailer put on me when I wouldn't buy smokeless
powder ) like myself. I refuse to use smokeless powder because it didn't
exist in the civil war. I am sure that if the rest of the industry collapses
or has to raise its' costs then the black powder market would also be
effected. I'm pretty sure that most of the smokeless powder manufacturers
also make good ol black powder.
Eric Peterson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Everett Blevins" <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 2:01 PM
Subject: [SUVCW] New Regs Threatens Ammo/Gunpowder
News on this was just talked about on Rush and is the first I've heard of it
before this came across another listserv group I'm on.
Such a ruling not only threatens the right to bear arms our ancestors, but
also to have gunpowder for ceremony and reenactments.
http://www.nssf.org/news/PR_idx.cfm?PRloc=common/PR/&PR=BP070207.cfm
*Proposed OSHA Regulation Threatens
Firearm and Ammunition Industry*
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the government
agency charged with assuring the safety and health of America's workers, is
proposing a regulatory rule
<http://www.nssf.org/share/PDF/FedReg041307.pdf>affecting the
manufacturing, transportation and storage of small arms
ammunition, primers and smokeless propellants.
As written, the proposed rule would force the closure of nearly all
ammunition manufacturers and force the cost of small arms ammunition to
skyrocket beyond what the market could bear—essentially collapsing our
industry. This is not an exaggeration. The cost to comply with the proposed
rule for the ammunition industry, including manufacturer, wholesale
distributors and retailers, will be massive and easily exceed $100 million.
For example, ammunition and smokeless propellant manufacturers would have to
shut down and evacuate a factory when a thunderstorm approached and
customers would not be allowed within 50 feet of any ammunition (displayed
or otherwise stored) without first being searched for matches or lighters.
NSSF and SAAMI have already had a preliminary meeting with OSHA officials to
begin the process of explaining to them the major problems this proposed
rule presents for all levels of the firearms and ammunition industry.
Furthermore, NSSF and SAAMI are each seeking a 60 day extension of the
public comment period (currently scheduled to expire July 12).
NSSF is urging all retailers to contact OSHA directly and request a 60-day
extension of the public comment period. Retailers should inform OSHA that
the proposed rule constitutes a "significant regulatory action" as defined
in Executive Order 12866 (1993) Section 3(f)(1) in that it will clearly
"adversely affect in a material way" the retail sector of the firearms and
ammunition industry, productivity, competition and jobs and that the annual
compliance cost for all retailers of ammunition will far exceed $100 million
dollars.
Click here <http://www.nssf.org/share/docs/BP070207-OSHAletter.rtf>; for a
template letter. If you choose to draft your own letter, the reference line
must read as follows:
*RE: Docket No. OSHA–2007–0032
Request to Extend Public Comment Period and Request for Hearing on
"Significant Regulatory Action" as Defined in Executive Order 12866*
*Please fax the letter to: 202-693-1648 (include the docket number and
Department of Labor/OSHA on the cover sheet and in the reference section of
your letter).*
*Please e-mail the letter by visiting: http://www.regulations.gov and
following the submission instructions.*
OSHA Visits Wonderland
by David
Calderwood<http://www.lewrockwell.com/calderwood/mailto: type="text/javascript">DisplayMail('insightbb.com','dcalderwood');>
by David Calderwood
DIGG
THIS<http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http://www.lewrockwell.com/calderwood/calderwood15.html&title=OSHA%20Visits%20Wonderland&topic=political_opinion>;
Published to cricket-chirping silence in the Federal Register on April 13,
2007 was a rule <http://www.nssf.org/share/PDF/FedReg041307.pdf>; proposed by
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to govern the
manufacture, transport, and distribution of explosives.
The Alice-in-Wonderland aspect is that the rule *includes small arms
ammunition and reloading components like smokeless propellant and small arms
primers in its definition of "explosives."* If the rule were implemented as
written, it would effectively eliminate the manufacture, transport,
wholesaling and retailing of ammunition in the United States.
You read that correctly.
For years anti-private-gun-ownership zealots have wished that another head
of the federal regulatory hydra, the Consumer Product Safety Commission,
would "ban guns" as articles too dangerous for mere civilian mortals to
handle or own. Apparently they are getting their wish, instead, from OSHA
under the notion that firearm ammunition cartridges are so unstable and
explosive that anyone storing or selling them would have to insure (by
search if necessary) that no one carrying matches, a lighter, or any other
source of flame or sparks approached within 50 feet in all directions. This
is but one of several requirements that would make it impossible to make or
sell ammunition.
The proposed rule asks for comments, including specifically whether small
arms ammunition and components should be included in the new rules with
dynamite, TNT, ammonium nitrate, and other blasting agents.
Despite this request, one has to wonder if the persons writing these rules
are intentionally proposing a backdoor ammunition ban or are as disconnected
from reality as is our current President, who we may recall was amazed and
astounded when he first saw a barcode scanner at a supermarket checkout line
a few years ago.
Anyone who shoots firearms or, especially, reloads firearm ammunition knows
that ammunition and its components are not remotely similar to explosives.
Ammunition cartridges are practically impossible to set off without
basically crushing them with a hammer or cooking them at a relatively high
temperature. Even then, cartridges that are so "cooked" don't fire the
bullet or "explode;' the brass cartridge case simply ruptures. The proposed
rule would have us believe that shoppers at Wal-mart routinely set off
chain-reaction explosions at the gun counter through negligent use of their
Zippos, and that UPS trucks carrying ammunition are blowing up on every
highway overpass, killing their drivers.
Even in the very rare event that ammunition or its components are involved
in a fire, explosions are virtually unknown. These components burn quite
well, but only primers are explosive and even then it would require quite a
quantity of them to constitute a significant concern. Given the rarity of
such events, a sweeping change to the legal constraints on their manufacture
and trade is sheer lunacy.
In light of the gravity of this proposal, one might have expected it to be
newsworthy in the Main Stream Media…but of course this is false. If a rule
proposing to ban Gays and Lesbians from residences within 1000 feet of a
school were proposed in some obscure publication there'd be headlines for
weeks, but not when it comes to anything that would effectively starve guns
of ammo.
The rule, if adopted, would likely cripple the provision of ammunition to
the Department of Defense as well as to police organizations, so there's a
good chance that changes will be made. It is not difficult to imagine,
however, that exceptions could be made leaving private citizens to bear the
full effects of the rule.
Examples abound of regulatory bureaucrats dumping horrid "laws" on citizens
while spineless legislators wring their hands in anguish, frozen in their
impotence. In Illinois you can get a $375 fine for
*<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1583485880/lewrockwell/>;
*going over 45 MPH in a construction zone even if no workers are present,
and while legislators have publicly cried that they didn't intend for this
magnified fine to apply at such times, there is no move to "fix" it.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation, an industry trade group, has a very
nice
discussion<http://www.nssf.org/news/PR_idx.cfm?PRloc=common/PR/&PR=BP070207.cfm>of
the rule and a model letter for submission should one believe
petitioning
unelected regulatory bureaucrats is the role of a good citizen. *Unless
extended, the comment period closes on July 12!*
Here, immediately after the songs and the fireworks and the platitudinous
speeches of Independence Day, is great time to be reminded that our national
government, powerful enough to give some people everything they want, is
more than powerful enough to strip us of everything we have. As long as our
friends and neighbors retain their faith in the Church of Federal
Omniscience, nameless and faceless Civil "Servants" will continue to propose
stripping us of what few liberties we retain.
*Let the sheeple sing!* "…and I'm proud to be an American 'cause at least I
know I'm free."
*July 6, 2007*
*David Calderwood [send him
mail<http://www.lewrockwell.com/calderwood/mailto: type="text/javascript">DisplayMail('insightbb.com','dcalderwood');>]
a businessman, artist, and author of the novel *Revolutionary
Language<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1583485880/lewrockwell/>;
*, selected January 2000 Freedom Book of the Month at
Free-market.net<http://www.free-market.net/>;
.*
Copyright (c) 2007 by David C. Calderwood
Ernie
SUVCW List Adminstrator
Ernest Everett Blevins, MFA • Blevins Historical Research
110 Evergreen Way • Villa Rica, Georgia 30180
• 770-456-1876
Historic Preservation Consultant -- Historical and Architectural Research --
Genealogical (Family) Research -- Preservation Planning and Documentation --
House History
Member: American Planning Association, New England Historic Genealogical
Society, Sons of the American Revolution, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Sons
of Union Veterans, and member of numerous other lineage and heritage
societies. .
The Sons of Union Veterans of the Ciivl War (SUVCW) list is an unoffical
list. It was established in January 2007 to assist in diseminating
information and seeking assistance to members, associates, and potential
members who have an interest in the SUVCW, GAR, the people and events of the
period of the War Between the States.
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in
the subject and the body of the message