I have to read the proposed rules again. I glanced at them the other night and side tracked at around page 30 or so. Having dealt with OSHA and OSHA regs in the past, I'm not going into panic mode until I have read all the proposed changes.
URGENT: OSHA
http://www.gunthing.com/index.php/forum ... read/2513/
Follow this link for a discussion and more information about a recently proposed federal regulation that would basically stop the trade in ammunition, explosives, and propellents. This would seriously curtail even retail sales of components and ammo.
It's a propsed rule in the federal register so it's not on the books yet, and there's a comment process so I please follow the link above to find out more and please provide comments.
Follow this link for a discussion and more information about a recently proposed federal regulation that would basically stop the trade in ammunition, explosives, and propellents. This would seriously curtail even retail sales of components and ammo.
It's a propsed rule in the federal register so it's not on the books yet, and there's a comment process so I please follow the link above to find out more and please provide comments.
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
http://www.nssf.org/news/PR_idx.cfm?PRl ... 070207.cfm
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.
If you choose to draft your own letter, the reference line must read as follows:
RE: Docket No. OSHAâ€"2007â€"0032
Comment on Department of Labor/OSHA Proposed Rule
"Significant Regulatory Action" as Defined in Executive Order 12866
What re they going to do with a match or lighter? I could maybe see a butane torch cooking off some weak primers, but that would hardly cause damage unless the person was really stupid.[/i]customers would not be allowed within 50 feet of any ammunition (displayed or otherwise stored) without first being searched for matches or lighters.
I don't see how OSHA even has authority to regulate.
I'll give them authority over regulating the manufacturing process, sure, but I don't see how daddy.gov has any authority to tell me I can't have a cigarette lighter in Walmart.
I'll give them authority over regulating the manufacturing process, sure, but I don't see how daddy.gov has any authority to tell me I can't have a cigarette lighter in Walmart.
Just think about the children....and all of those gun store explosions.gsusnake said:I don't see how OSHA even has authority to regulate.
I'll give them authority over regulating the manufacturing process, sure, but I don't see how daddy.gov has any authority to tell me I can't have a cigarette lighter in Walmart.
UPDATE
From an NRA-ILA ALERT:
Labor Department Announces It Will Revise
Overreaching OSHA Explosives Rule
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it will significantly revise a recent proposal for new “explosives safety†regulations that caused serious concern among gun owners. OSHA had originally set out to update workplace safety regulations, but the proposed rules included restrictions that very few gun shops, sporting goods stores, shippers, or ammunition dealers could comply with.
Gun owners had filed a blizzard of negative comments urged by the NRA, and just a week ago, OSHA had already issued one extension for its public comment period at the request of the National Shooting Sports Foundation. After continued publicity through NRA alerts and the outdoor media, and after dozens of Members of Congress expressed concern about its impact, OSHA has wisely decided to go back to the drawing board.
Working with the NRA, Congressman Denny Rehberg (R-MT) planned to offer a floor amendment to the Labor-HHS appropriations bill this Wednesday when the House considers this legislation. His amendment would have prohibited federal funds from being used to enforce this OSHA regulation.
Such an amendment is no longer necessary since Kristine A. Iverson, the Labor Department’s Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, sent Rep. Rehberg a letter, dated July 16, stating that it “was never the intention of OSHA to block the sale, transportation, or storage of small arms ammunition, and OSHA is taking prompt action to revise†this proposed rule to clarify the purpose of the regulation.
Also, working with the NRA, Congressman Doug Lamborn (R-CO) gathered signatures from 25 House colleagues for a letter, dated July 11, expressing concerns about this proposed OSHA rule. The letter calling the proposal “an undue burden on a single industry where facts do not support the need outlined by this proposed rule†and “not feasible, making it realistically impossible for companies to comply with its tenets.â€
The OSHA proposal would have defined “explosives†to include “black powder, … small arms ammunition, small arms ammunition primers, [and] smokeless propellant,†and treated these items the same as the most volatile high explosives.
Under the proposed rule, a workplace that contained even a handful of small arms cartridges, for any reason, would have been considered a “facility containing explosives†and therefore subject to many impractical restrictions. For example, no one could carry “firearms, ammunition, or similar articles in facilities containing explosives … except as required for work duties.†Obviously, this rule would make it impossible to operate any kind of gun store, firing range, or gunsmith shop.
The public comment website for the proposed rule is no longer accessible. The Labor Department will publish a notice in the July 17 Federal Register announcing that a new rule proposal will soon be drafted for public comment. Needless to say, the NRA monitors proposed federal regulations to head off this kind of overreach, and will be alert for OSHA’s next draft.
:woohoo: =D>
From an NRA-ILA ALERT:
Labor Department Announces It Will Revise
Overreaching OSHA Explosives Rule
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it will significantly revise a recent proposal for new “explosives safety†regulations that caused serious concern among gun owners. OSHA had originally set out to update workplace safety regulations, but the proposed rules included restrictions that very few gun shops, sporting goods stores, shippers, or ammunition dealers could comply with.
Gun owners had filed a blizzard of negative comments urged by the NRA, and just a week ago, OSHA had already issued one extension for its public comment period at the request of the National Shooting Sports Foundation. After continued publicity through NRA alerts and the outdoor media, and after dozens of Members of Congress expressed concern about its impact, OSHA has wisely decided to go back to the drawing board.
Working with the NRA, Congressman Denny Rehberg (R-MT) planned to offer a floor amendment to the Labor-HHS appropriations bill this Wednesday when the House considers this legislation. His amendment would have prohibited federal funds from being used to enforce this OSHA regulation.
Such an amendment is no longer necessary since Kristine A. Iverson, the Labor Department’s Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, sent Rep. Rehberg a letter, dated July 16, stating that it “was never the intention of OSHA to block the sale, transportation, or storage of small arms ammunition, and OSHA is taking prompt action to revise†this proposed rule to clarify the purpose of the regulation.
Also, working with the NRA, Congressman Doug Lamborn (R-CO) gathered signatures from 25 House colleagues for a letter, dated July 11, expressing concerns about this proposed OSHA rule. The letter calling the proposal “an undue burden on a single industry where facts do not support the need outlined by this proposed rule†and “not feasible, making it realistically impossible for companies to comply with its tenets.â€
The OSHA proposal would have defined “explosives†to include “black powder, … small arms ammunition, small arms ammunition primers, [and] smokeless propellant,†and treated these items the same as the most volatile high explosives.
Under the proposed rule, a workplace that contained even a handful of small arms cartridges, for any reason, would have been considered a “facility containing explosives†and therefore subject to many impractical restrictions. For example, no one could carry “firearms, ammunition, or similar articles in facilities containing explosives … except as required for work duties.†Obviously, this rule would make it impossible to operate any kind of gun store, firing range, or gunsmith shop.
The public comment website for the proposed rule is no longer accessible. The Labor Department will publish a notice in the July 17 Federal Register announcing that a new rule proposal will soon be drafted for public comment. Needless to say, the NRA monitors proposed federal regulations to head off this kind of overreach, and will be alert for OSHA’s next draft.
:woohoo: =D>
Yeh, when I read this I thought it would die a pretty quick death. It basically amounted to the death of an entire business model, and by default, extreme limitations on the rights of all americans. I doubt it was even done intentionally. It was probably more along the lines of typical bureacratic incompetence.
+1Thorsen said:Yeh, when I read this I thought it would die a pretty quick death. It basically amounted to the death of an entire business model, and by default, extreme limitations on the rights of all americans. I doubt it was even done intentionally. It was probably more along the lines of typical bureacratic incompetence.
I thought the same thing.
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing
A forum community dedicated to Georgia firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Nemo
431 Replies
Malum Prohibitum
312 Replies
seajay
132 Replies
Recommended Communities
