Reloader & Muzzy Guys Beware -- Explosive Materials Background Check Act

[Sumpnneedskillin]

Little behind the power curve on this as it's a month old.  This isn't getting much visibility because it's not something new.  It's changing the wording on current law. 
There are some serious restrictions/burdens for getting powder if these changes are passed.

Here's the official text
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:S.792:

18 USC 841
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/841
18 USC 842
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/842
18 USC 843
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/843

This article has a pretty good summary
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/05/foghorn/explosive-materials-background-check-bill-revealed/?fb_source=pubv1

[Atroxus]

I read the article, but not the full text of the bill as I am at work. I am against this as written if the summary in the article is accurate.

I reload and I don't have a problem with requiring a license/background check to purchase powder/primers *if* it met all of the following; the permit cost is less than 10 dollars a year(I think $50 every 3 years is too high), permits are provided on a "shall issue" basis, no records are kept on amounts purchased by permit holders and the parts about denying based on restraining orders and terrorist watch lists are not present.

Restraining orders can be obtained on someone who has never been convicted of a crime, as can someone be added to the terrorist watch lists, so I would never support this type of bill as long as it contained this type of restriction.

[netcoyote]

I reload and I don't have a problem with requiring a license/background check to purchase powder/primers *if* it met all of the following; the permit cost is less than 10 dollars a year(I think $50 every 3 years is too high), permits are provided on a "shall issue" basis, no records are kept on amounts purchased by permit holders and the parts about denying based on restraining orders and terrorist watch lists are not present.

This is a favorite trick of big government bureaucrats. Get a bill passed that LICENSES an activity and start out with very few innocuous limitations and maybe a small fee for "administrative purposes". People say, "Awww, it's not that bad". Once something is licensed it is a lot easier to later impose much higher fees and restrictions, some without any voting requirements because it is only accountable to an administrative or enforcement organization rather than a legislative one. This is the classic "camel nose under the tent" practice.

Restrictive regulations like this must be stopped before they begin. Focus on the problem. Powder is not the problem. Primers are not the problem. Human behavior is the problem.

[csaaphill]

oh hell no anyone got one of thos quick links to fight this crap?
 
care not most can pass this crap let me sp-ell it out SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!! No more!!!!!!!!