OSHA vs. the NRA
posted at 7:52 am on July 10, 2007 by Michelle
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Is OSHA trying to outlaw ammunition? The NRA thinks so. As a result of the group’s objections to a proposed rule on explosives, OSHA is extending its comment period on the regulation. Speak now or forever hold your peace:
OSHA has extended the comment period on proposed changes in its explosives standard for 60 days, to Sept. 10. The amendments, published April 13, have been generating significant buzz within the gun rights community, with the National Rifle Association saying it “indiscriminately treats ammunition, powder and primers as ‘explosives.’ ”
The NRA is organizing opposition to the rule, which it believes would prohibit possessing firearms in gun stores (and other commercial facilities containing explosives); require evacuation of such facilities, “even your local Wal-Mart,” the organization says, during an electrical storm; and prohibit smoking within 50 feet of such facilities. NRA said July 9, when OSHA announced the extension, that it, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ intend to file comments on the proposal “based on the severe effect these regulations (if finalized) would have on the availability of ammunition and reloading supplies to safe and responsible shooters.”
OSHA says written comments may be submitted (identified by Docket No. OSHA-2007-0032) via www.regulations.gov or faxed (10 pages or fewer) to the OSHA Docket Office at 202-693-1648.
I’ve got more on the summer gun wars over at mm.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
This is just obscene what these people are trying to do. NRA is all over this as are several reenacting organizations of the American Civil War. Artillery groups will be dramatically impacted by this as each round is at least a quarter pound and can be as much as a pound of powder.
I have written up how to get to the comments section of the OSHA site here. PLEASE, if you are a recreational shooter, let them hear from you. NRA has a boilerplate response, also included at the link above, but feel free to come up with your own rant.
Pilgrim on July 10, 2007 at 7:57 AM
OK Pilgrim…lets hope it makes some progress…pun intended.
DoctorDentons on July 10, 2007 at 8:04 AM
DING DING DING DING! For the first time EVER…someone hit on the correct reference. You win the prize! The prize is the admiration and possibly loathing of all your friends and colleagues! ;)
Pilgrim on July 10, 2007 at 8:09 AM
An electrical storm? Quick, everybody go outside!
OSHA…killing people with safety for over 30 years.
James on July 10, 2007 at 8:14 AM
Let’s jump on this as if it were amnesty!
boomer on July 10, 2007 at 8:19 AM
Time for another NRA donation. Where’s my checkbook?
lynnv on July 10, 2007 at 8:20 AM
IMHO, this is worse than amnesty! It is a direct attack on the second amendment. What’s the point in “Keeping” firearms if you can’t “BEAR” the weapons? A firearm without ammunition is a club. You can bet your sweet uh-huh the bad guys are going to have all the ammunition they need.
Actually, I really don’t think this would stand a SCOTUS test but an injunction isn’t something I’d be willing to wait for either.
Pilgrim on July 10, 2007 at 8:22 AM
Black powder, propane, gasoline, if one is too dangerous they all are.
Hening on July 10, 2007 at 8:23 AM
You are correct. Oddly enough though it seems that few people really get wound up about it.
boomer on July 10, 2007 at 8:27 AM
And this is from a RINO OSHA. Can you imagine what a Hiliary- or Hussein Obama- or Rudi-led OSHA would do?
steveegg on July 10, 2007 at 8:36 AM
Hopefully this Supreme Court is more Constitutionally based than previous ones. Unfortunately the IRS, the EPA, and OSHA have been given special deference in the past. Usually the government has to prove that a defendant is liable before they can levy fines or other punishments. Not so in the case of these three agencies. If accused by any of these agencies, the defendant is considered guilty until they prove their innocence (anybody who’s been audited will understand this).
This is why liberals use OSHA, the EPA and the IRS to further their leftist agendas.
cmay on July 10, 2007 at 8:39 AM
Don’t forget non-obvious items. The store I work at sells liquid-fueled lamps. At any given time we have two to three hundred gallons of oil- and alcohol-based fuels for them in stock, in half- and one-liter plastic bottles.
Then there is the Sherwin-Williams paint store down the street. I have no idea how many hundreds or thousands of gallons of potentially-flammable paint they have in stock.
Hospitals, auto-repair places, model airplane stores, etc.
“You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered.” – Lyndon B. Johnson
Rusty Bill on July 10, 2007 at 9:11 AM
LOL that should be a bumper sticker… SAFETY KILLS !
In the case of OSHA and the EPA, no doubt… its true !
Maxx on July 10, 2007 at 9:20 AM
Well, it looks like the NRA will get themselves a new member this evening thanks to OSHA.
Another example of the abuses that can result from the federal government’s rulemaking authority. Since this would affect interstate commerce in a way that violates the second amendment, can’t Congress act?
Slublog on July 10, 2007 at 9:27 AM
An electrical storm? Quick, everybody go outside!
OSHA…killing people with safety for over 30 years.
James on July 10, 2007 at 8:14 AM
LOL that should be a bumper sticker… SAFETY KILLS !
In the case of OSHA and the EPA, no doubt… its true !
Maxx on July 10, 2007 at 9:20 AM
Naw, you will be okay if you wear your hard hat.
On-my-soap-box on July 10, 2007 at 9:42 AM
I’ve had osha at my door twice in twenty years. Both times I told ‘em to hit the road, jack and don’t come back unless you have a court order.
Mind over matter. I don’t mind and they don’t matter.
Time for another fax campaign.
locomotivebreath1901 on July 10, 2007 at 9:46 AM
This was posted on the Bullseye pistol list a few days ago. There were some comments suggesting that it was alarmist and that it only applied to explosives used in the mining and excavation industries. I don’t think so. It would not be the first time that the anti-gun lobbies made an end run around the Second Amendment to achieve their aims. Read all about the Mayors’ anti-gun manufacturer lawsuits.
JimK on July 10, 2007 at 10:14 AM
The misguided government wants to mess with my ammo while they are asleep at the immigration office. Is Bush trying to pay back the patriots for our objection to his stupid immigration bill?
What next?
saiga on July 10, 2007 at 10:59 AM
A flash in the pan, one hopes.
profitsbeard on July 10, 2007 at 11:04 AM
Thank God OSHA wasn’t around in 1776.
infidel4life on July 10, 2007 at 11:08 AM
It is true of the FAA too. After all, they were buddies with Valujet and supportive of them, even though Valuejet was carrying illegal items together (tires and oxigenizers). Don’t forget that they were running around telling everyone that Valujet was safe enough for them to fly on it.
The FAA had systematically turned a blind eye to the safety violations that Valujet was committing.
Tim Burton on July 10, 2007 at 11:17 AM
Is President Bush in charge of OSHA? Is he the boss? He could nip this in the bud. I blame Bush.
archon2001 on July 10, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Meanwhile fertilizer can be purchased by anyone and spewed liberally from the mouths of politicians.
Christine on July 10, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Cold dead hands.
Well, the government completely ignores the Constitution in pretty much every regard, so why not the second amendment? Rule of law? What’s that?
wherestherum on July 10, 2007 at 11:50 AM
Thanks Michelle.
How typical of the bureaucrats to come up with non-sense like this. I’m going to visit the OSHA website right now.
Zorro on July 10, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Stupid OSHA. They always pull dumb shit like this, but the fact they’re trying to deny the second amendment is insane!
Bad Candy on July 10, 2007 at 12:47 PM
This story oughta get bumped too…looks like it got buried.
Bad Candy on July 10, 2007 at 12:55 PM
+1
Its been a long time sense physics class, but all of these burn, not explode. They only explode when they’re ignited under pressure. Am I right?
liquidflorian on July 10, 2007 at 12:57 PM
These scum bag gun banners are coming at OUR 2nd Amendment from every angle thier little minds can come up with. All of us that support the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, need to stay involved and keep fighting these assaults on our Constitution.
americaslaststand on July 10, 2007 at 1:03 PM
My firearms and politics email list has been all over this like white on rice.
Clearly this is “back-door” gun control. Not only do the regulations impact the manufacturers and retailers of ammunition, they impact both the home reloader and the end retail purchaser of ammunition.
To say that these regulation will cause the price of ammunition to skyrocket is an understatement. The scenarios supplied by the NRA (see above) are also understated. The practical effect of these regulations are much worse. They will put an end to the retail sale of ammunition at sporting goods departments across America. They will cause every firearm in America to be useless relics — something which is a wet dream of every gun grabber.
Those who reload their own ammunition for either cost or to achieve greater accuracy than standard factory loaded ammunition will be effectively shut down and prohibited from doing so. These regulations simply beg for your local Stalinist Mayor or city council to ban this activity “for public safety” reasons, because (after all) OSHA had declared it to be a “dangerous” activity.
Those who shoot a lot (competitive target or skeet/trap shooters, for example) will find limits on the amount of ammunition they can possess at any time, unless they invest in costly external “magazines” on their property. OSHA regulations say so.
Permits and licenses to “possess ammunition” at home would be right around the corner.
This is a “camel’s nose-in-the-tent” attempt to directly undermine the Second Amendment. And it’s simply not necessary. The ammunition industry has an exemplary safety record. Modern propellants are stable (unlike the gun powder used for fireworks), easily transportable, and burn at a consistant rate under almost all environmental conditions. In terms of volitility, modern propellents are considerably safer to handle than gasoline. And Americans safely handle millions of barrels of gasoline on a daily basis.
There are 90 million gun owners in America (4 million of whom are dues paying members of the NRA and another 3/4 million members of GOA). So, to those gun owners that read this blog: IF YOU DON’T GO TO THE WEBSITE (www.regulations.gov) AND LODGE A PROTEST, YOU SUCK!
georgej on July 10, 2007 at 1:17 PM
I tried to leave a comment but it wont go through, Dangit!
americaslaststand on July 10, 2007 at 2:17 PM
This is not OSHA VS The NRA, it is the government VS We The People. This is a veiled attempt by OSHAs’ political masters at an unlawful ammo grab. It looks as if the Bush administration, through it’s lackeys, is spitting at us for rejecting Shamnesty.
We need to swamp the regulations’ web-site with our outrage. I encourage everyone to post their disgust on the web-site then return and proudly display your docket number. Mine is 802265b52.
Enough of our elected officals spitting at us.
Rode Werk on July 10, 2007 at 2:44 PM
Yeah, that’s a good question, why the hell is Bush or Congress for that matter letting this go on? Is this a revenge move for amnesty? If it is, Bush may as well start packing his bags now, cuz nobody will stop Impeachement if this happens.
Bad Candy on July 10, 2007 at 3:00 PM
I get the pun and hope so to.
I tried yesterday to file a comment with OSHA, and I thought they wanted “too” much personal information about myself. I am a voice of the citizenry first, an individual second. Typical big government bureaucracy tactic to put an individual on the stand in order to stand for you rights. I knew it would only be a matter of time until they figured out that without bullets, guns are useless. Today I am, John Doe 123 Main St. Anytown, USA.
KCtheKat on July 10, 2007 at 3:10 PM
That OSHA document is as clear as mud. I don’t own a working gun, but would be pretty angry if this regulation was used to implement de facto gun control. Might even have to join the NRA.
Snidely Whiplash on July 10, 2007 at 6:10 PM
Couple of anti-gun “conservatives” have hijacked the “LAT on Fred” thread!
Believe that the 2nd only applies to muskets!
SSG Fuzzy on July 10, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Actually, it works like this;
1. Liquid fuels such as those you mentioned combust in the vapor phase, not the liquid phase; think of a mist of finely-divided droplets. When confined in an enclosed space, this combustion causes a rapid pressure spike and expansion effect, i.e., an explosion. Compression of the vapor prior to initiation causes a more powerful “bang”. This is how your car’s engine works- Intake- Compression- Ignition- Exhaust, the classic “four-stroke” Otto cycle.
Any liquid fuel packs more explosive wallop per gram than a propellant powder (smokeless, black, or otherwise) simply because being a liquid, there are no “air spaces”- every bit of the available volume consists of a hydrocarbon or other similar molecule just waiting for something (like heat) to crack its bonds and let it decompose to elemental hydrogen and oxygen. (Which it tends to do instantly, and violently.) This is why liquid-fueled rockets almost always have higher Isp (specific impulse) than solid-fueled ones.
The important thing to remember is the vapor phase. A full, tightly capped can of gasoline probably won’t explode if it’s in a fire. What may happen, though, is that the heat will cause it to “boil off” (i.e., heat it above its vaporization temperature), at which point there will be a gas-expansion effect, the can may “pop” like a balloon, the fuel will be vaporized as a mist in the fire area, and- can you say “major-league accelerant resulting in explosive fuel-air reaction”?
(The above courtesy of someone who took Arson Investigation lo, these many years ago.)
cheers
eon
eon on July 10, 2007 at 6:46 PM
“The right to bear arms” includes bullets, because a weapon is not “armed” otherwise.
profitsbeard on July 10, 2007 at 8:50 PM
I knew it was coming just didn’t know it what form. There is a very good reason that Euro-wienies and the UN are always screaming for us to give up our guns. With them we continue to be citizens of the United States rather than subjects of a world government. I’ve been holding off on an NRA membership for various reasons but now I am joining.
deepdiver on July 10, 2007 at 10:25 PM
I just finished using the information provided by Pilgrim and my tracking number is 802661ff. I used my real information because I don’t have a firearm, so they can’t come and take it away no matter what. We need to work together more on all the important things that are floating around Congress that are against the Constitution and against Common Sense. Some things might be regulation of credit card company so that they can’t abuse people on any whim that they dream up. Support for abstinence, ideally, in sex education as the only 100% effective pregnancy and AIDS preventative. I’m sure lots of people could come up with other things that impact our daily lives that Congress could do something about if enough people wrote, call and faxed their Reps. and Senators.
TruthToBeTold on July 10, 2007 at 10:50 PM
I have a personnel experience with osha. Much the same as you would expect of someone with an agenda.
I was building a pizza hut on the west side of Indianapolis in the mid seventies. An inspector visited our job site. We did not know he was coming, we were just using normal safe working habits. After looking us over, checking paperwork, checking electric polarity, etc, etc . . . after he could not find anything he claimed my worklamp was an electrical hazzard because it had a reflector.
Let “them” take charge and bury the tree of Liberty.
creative dude on July 11, 2007 at 4:21 AM
Comment pages: