1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

OSHA Update- Good News

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by Tailbuster, Jul 16, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Tailbuster

    Tailbuster TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    254
    Reprinted from Case, on another forum:

    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."

    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.
     
  2. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,642
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    That is good news. and it shows what can be done when we act together against a perceived threat.

    Just like when they shitcanned the amnesty bill.

    Now I just have one question:

    Where were the ammunition manufacturers in all this?

    HM
     
  3. jnoemanh

    jnoemanh TS Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    526
    OHMIGAWD!! The sky didn't fall. LOL.
     
  4. pyrdek

    pyrdek Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,295
    I say that this is NOT the time to let up on the pressure. This is the time to INCREASE the pressure. Backing off simply gives the OSHA weenies who tried to pass this off in the first place a chance to retreat, regroup, rethink and reattack! When you have your enemy, and in this particular case using OSHA to try to eliminate ammunition sales and manufacture makes them my enemy, on the run, you continue the pressure to eliminate any chance of a counter-attack. How many times and in how many places have you seen someone or some army stop to give their offense a break and end up losing the battle because the enemy now knew how to better plan its second attack?

    I say keep the letters, phone calls, faxes, e-mails and personal contacts on the high burner till the OSHA/Bradylovers are wiped out! Make the pressure on Congress so intense that the only way the Congress Critters can get any sleep is to make sure that any and all responsible OSHA people who came up with this attack are gone, fired, kicked out, bounces, downsized, laid off, riffed or otherwise permanently banned, barred and forbidden from ever working in any governmental position!
     
  5. Tailbuster

    Tailbuster TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    254
    No, the sky didn't fall, thanks to the efforts of a lot of people who took the time to make sure it didn't. Liberties require vigilance.

    all the best,
    john
     
  6. Tailbuster

    Tailbuster TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    254
  7. Steve-CT

    Steve-CT TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    524
    thanks to those of us who rallied to the call. To those who didn't - please join us and be part of the solution rather than the problem.
     
  8. recurvyarcher

    recurvyarcher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,450
    Liberties require vigilance.

    Well said, Tailbuster, and worth repeating.
     
  9. alfermann66

    alfermann66 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    852
    Those who Pooh-pooh attacks on liberty are the first to squeal like pigs when those liberties are gone. Their smart remarks come back to haunt them.

    Buz
     
  10. Straight99

    Straight99 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    336
    When the democrats take our guns away, you will say where was the NRA?

    I will say where were you? !
     
  11. Roger IL

    Roger IL TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    323
    Another answer for,"What is the NRA doing for trapshooters"..........Roger
     
  12. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,642
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    I didn't see anything from the ATA on this brouhaha. Apparently this was in the works for a while, a newsletter Item would have been nice.

    HM
     
  13. revsublime

    revsublime TS Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,042
    Being new to shotgunning...this gives me hope and I will be sending in my NRA membership.

    I just wish the Bush supporters here would take heed of what Buz said...

    "Those who Pooh-pooh attacks on liberty are the first to squeal like pigs when those liberties are gone"
     
  14. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Kristine A. Iverson is a LIAR. She needs to be FIRED. Here's an analysis done by a friend of mine on another website. He hits the nail squarely on the head:<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    "...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..."<br>
    <br>
    It has been OSHA's intention to regulate small arms ammunition since March 31, 1972 (37 FR 6577). Moreover, in the proposed rule, OSHA states, "In addition, OSHA is also proposing to retain the provisions in Sec. 1910.109(j) that cover the storage of small arms ammunition and components of small arms ammunition. Although small arms ammunition and components of small arms ammunition, such as small arms primers and smokeless propellants, are explosives, ATF's explosives storage regulations do not apply to the storage of ammunition as defined in 27 CFR 555.11 (see 27 CFR 555.141(a)(4)). Thus, OSHA's existing Sec. 1910.109(j) covering the storage of small arms ammunition and components of small arms ammunition are not preempted by ATF's regulations."<br>
    <br>
    OSHA even went so far as to frame it's "Issue #1" of the proposed rule as follows: "As discussed above, OSHA is proposing to withdraw its requirements in Sec. 1910.109 covering the storage of explosives. OSHA is seeking comments on the following issue. Apart from small arms ammunition and related components, are there any explosives that are currently covered by the storage requirements in Sec. 1910.109 that are not covered by ATF's storage regulations?"<br>
    <br>
    In other words, OSHA was specifically trying NOT to cover traditional explosives but was trying to apply its regulation PARTICULARLY to small arms ammunition and components, which prevents Iverson's statement from even rising to the level of speciousness. If Iverson relies on the verb "block" to allege that OSHA was unaware of how onerous the proposed rule would be, then OSHA's ineptitude should , as a matter of public policy, bar OSHA from regulating small arms ammunition and components.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.