Post by: Sumpnneedskillin on May 08, 2013, 09:32:06 AM
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: (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:S.792:)
18 USC 841
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/841 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/841)
18 USC 842
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/842 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/842)
18 USC 843
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/843 (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 (http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/05/foghorn/explosive-materials-background-check-bill-revealed/?fb_source=pubv1)
Post by: Atroxus on May 08, 2013, 09:44:53 AM
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.
Post by: netcoyote on May 20, 2013, 08:46:32 AM
Quote
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.
Post by: csaaphill on June 05, 2013, 01:25:14 AM
:bash:
care not most can pass this crap let me sp-ell it out SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!! No more!!!!!!!!