Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ATF now requires explosives license (Safe Explosives Act)
http://www.atf.treas.gov ^ | 12/10/2002 | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

Posted on 12/10/2002 11:35:19 PM PST by Myrddin

         
         For Immediate Release
         Contact: Jim Crandall 
                                   November 25, 2002
                                   FY-03-02 
                      Implementation Of the Safe Explosives Act, 
                                Applying Stricter Controls 
                          on The Purchase of Explosives in The 
                           Continuing Fight Against Terrorism

Washington, DC - The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) announces that on November 25, 2002, President Bush signed new legislation that restricts the availability of explosives to felons and other persons prohibited from possessing explosives, strengthens licensing and permitting requirements, and aids in the fight against terrorism. This legislation, the Safe Explosives Act, amends Title XI of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970.

Previously, a Federal permit to purchase explosive materials was necessary if a person wished to transport, ship, or receive explosives in interstate commerce. A permit, however, was not necessary if a person acquired and used explosives within his or her State of residence. The new legislation now requires that any person who wishes to transport, ship, cause to be transported, or receive explosive materials in either interstate or intrastate commerce must first obtain a Federal permit issued by ATF. This requirement takes effect May 24, 2003.

The new legislation creates a new category of permit -- a "limited permit" -- designed for the intrastate purchaser who buys explosives infrequently and does not intend to transport or use the explosives interstate. This permit will allow the purchaser to receive explosive materials from an in-State explosives licensee or permittee on no more than six (6) occasions during the period of the permit. The permit will allow ATF to better monitor explosives commerce in an effort to enhance homeland security, but is designed to not be overly burdensome to legitimate purchasers. The limited permit is valid for one year and is renewable. ATF intends to set the application fee for the limited permit at $25.

The new legislation requires that all applicants for explosives licenses and permits submit photographs and fingerprints so that ATF can perform thorough background checks. The legislation also requires that all applicants submit the names and identifying information of all employees who will possess explosive materials. In this way, ATF can conduct a thorough background check to ensure that these individuals are not prohibited from receiving or possessing explosives. Under previous law, no background checks were conducted for the employees of businesses that used explosives. The business owners or managers were required to be on record with ATF; employees such as warehousemen and drivers were not. The new legislation enables ATF to systematically identify and conduct background checks on such employees to reduce the risk that prohibited persons will gain access to explosives.

The new legislation also expands the categories of prohibited persons to include: (1) aliens (with limited exceptions); (2) persons dishonorably discharged from the military; and (3) citizens of the United States who have renounced their citizenship. The new prohibitions on possession of explosive materials are effective January 24, 2003.

Finally, the new legislation will require manufacturers and importers of explosive materials, including ammonium nitrate, to furnish samples of these materials to ATF, as well as information on their chemical composition or other information ATF may request. This will assist ATF in the identification of explosives found at crime scenes. This provision will be effective January 24, 2003.

Additionally, on January 24, 2003, ATF will be moved to the Department of Justice and will be known as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATFE).

For further information, including proposed regulations and specific questions and answers about the effect of the new law, check the ATF web site at: www.atf.treas.gov.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; guncontrol
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-137 next last
To: tacticalogic; Doctor Stochastic
tacticalogic suggests:   "IIRC, there is a definite dividing line between low and high explosives that is determined by the method required for detonation, and has nothing to do with the propogation rate."

I wouldn't be surprised that there exists a definition that has nothing to do with the propagation rate. And it would even be partly right. The field of explosives has more technical misconceptions than probably any other field. And as Doctor Stochastic correctly pointed out, "The dividing line between high and low is tenuous" (at best).

The real technical difference has to with whether the reaction zone propagates at the same rate as the pressure wave (or shock wave) propagates. In a low explosive, the reaction zone is wide and slow and propagates at a slower rate (or behind) the leading edge of the "shock wave", thus creating a much broader (and therefore lower intensity) shock wave, more properly referred to in this case as a pressure wave.

But in a high explosive, the reaction zone and the shock wave are coincidental with one another, resulting in a very narrow, high intensity, shock wave. Moreover, as the pressure within the shock wave increases, it causes a commensurate increase in the temperature of the gases within that wave, which in turn, causes a proportionate increase in the local speed of sound. This is why a shock wave, which is actually just a "longitudinal compressional wave" (i.e., sound wave), can so greatly exceed the speed of sound. HMX, for example, can produce shock wave velocities nearing 30,000 feet per second due to this effect.

The net result is that relative propagation rates actually do play a key part in the definition between high and low explosives.

As to whether smokeless powder is a propellant rather than an explosive, the only classification that matters (to people who want to avoid jail) is the ATF classification. Click on the link in #91 and you will see it is classified as an explosive.

Regards,

--Boot Hill

101 posted on 12/11/2002 3:10:26 PM PST by Boot Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: dd5339
See post 49.
102 posted on 12/11/2002 3:14:11 PM PST by matrix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: gnarledmaw
I don't argue that laws could and might be passed that will severely limit or ban reloading supplies. They tried to do it after OKC. But this isn't it, and the title of the thread is misleading.
103 posted on 12/11/2002 3:25:43 PM PST by Double Tap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
Obviously you are unfamiliar with administrative law. Ie. those myriad laws that are fabricated by unelected bureaucrats supposedly under the blanket authority of Kongress

The article specifically refers to "legislation".

104 posted on 12/11/2002 5:03:40 PM PST by verity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: matrix
I've not studied the bill or the information around it so I won't comment on it. I would caution one to gather all the facts before making conclusions.

If what you say is true, I'd have to say there was something attatched to the benefit clause that was causing it to be killed. I can't see Bush dumping on Veteran's, (and I am a vet).

Semper Fi
105 posted on 12/11/2002 6:10:46 PM PST by dd5339
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf
Additionally, on January 24, 2003, ATF will be moved to the Department of Justice and will be known as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATFE).

What's a tax collection agency doing in the Justice department? Don't they know they just eliminated what little Constitutional justification that existed for the National Firearms Act? (Machine gun tax and regulation amougst other things)

Shouldn't that be "BATFE", a downgrading from a 4 letter (even though they claimed 3) to a 5 letter agency. And get this:

On the same day, a corresponding entity will be created to handle the regulatory and taxation aspects of the alcohol and tobacco industries. This will be known as the Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), and will remain within the Treasury Department, where the current ATF and its predecessors have served honorably for some two hundred years.

Honorably? Gag me with a spoon!

106 posted on 12/11/2002 7:00:51 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bybybill
Why,oh, why are we fighting this fight?

"... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Having to get a permit to exercise a right is an infringment upon that right. What's next, a permit to publish a newspaper or a website?

107 posted on 12/11/2002 7:19:24 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ouachita
Also, the measure will not affect those who use black or smokeless powder for recreation, as the legislation does not change current regulations on those particular materials.

First of all, the link is from the sponser, Senator Kohl's, website, and reflects the state of the bill as it moved out of committee, when it was it's own legislation, not as incorporated into the final Homeland Security Act. I would check the wording of the actual law, before coming to any conclutions Even if the law doesn't mention gunpowders and doesn't change the regulations on them, doesn't mean that the new BATFE won't change those regulations tomorrow.

Here is the definition of "explosives" for section 841, title 18 of the US code, which is the section affected by the new provisions, which don't seem to change any of the relavent definitions:

Except for the purposes of subsections (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), and (j) of section 844 of this title, ''explosives'' means any chemical compound mixture, or device, the primary or common purpose of which is to function by explosion; the term includes, but is not limited to, dynamite and other high explosives, black powder, pellet powder, initiating explosives, detonators, safety fuses, squibs, detonating cord, igniter cord, and igniters. The Secretary shall publish and revise at least annually in the Federal Register a list of these and any additional explosives which he determines to be within the coverage of this chapter. For the purposes of subsections (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i) of section 844 of this title, the term ''explosive'' is defined in subsection (j) of such section 844.

those subsections of 844 all concern actually using explosives in a criminal manner, but here is 844(j) containing that definition:

For the purposes of subsections (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i) of this section and section 842(p), the term ''explosive'' means gunpowders, powders used for blasting, all forms of high explosives, blasting materials, fuzes (other than electric circuit breakers), detonators, and other detonating agents, smokeless powders, other explosive or incendiary devices within the meaning of paragraph (5) of section 232 of this title, and any chemical compounds, mechanical mixture, or device that contains any oxidizing and combustible units, or other ingredients, in such proportions, quantities, or packing that ignition by fire, by friction, by concussion, by percussion, or by detonation of the compound, mixture, or device or any part thereof may cause an explosion.

So it seems to me that the BATFE could change the defition in 841 to include smokeless powder anytime he wants, and black powder is already included in the definition even if the regulations concerning it are different. Smokeless powder is apparently only an explosive under the law if you commit a crime with it, but that could be changed without further legislation being needed. Thus Senator Kohl's explanation is at best disingenuous.

108 posted on 12/11/2002 7:44:53 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
total B$ .. I bought 3 lbs of H110 pistol powder Sunday ... no permit required.

Of course you did, that portion of the law doesn't go into effect until May of next year, presumably to give them time to get the permit and permit application forms all printed up.

109 posted on 12/11/2002 7:46:33 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Spandau
Smokeless gunpowder is not an explosive.

For some purposes under the law it is. Legal definitions and scientific/technical or even common ones, are often not the same. For example the National Firearms Act, the first federal gun control law, only concerns itself with some of what most people would consider a firearm, namely machine guns and short or short barrelled rifles and shotguns, along with some things that no one would normally consider a firearm, namely suppressors, but defines them all to *be* firearms for purposes of that law only.

110 posted on 12/11/2002 7:51:12 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
"So it seems to me that the BATFE could change the defition in 841 to include smokeless powder anytime he wants, and black powder is already included in the definition even if the regulations concerning it are different...."

There is another law---

"Public Law 93-639 (1975) allows nonlicensees/nonpermittees to purchase commercially manufactured black powder, in quantities of 50 pounds or less, solely fo sporting, recreational or cultural purposes for use in antique firearmes or antique devices outside of Federal controls...."

Source--ATF P 5400.7 (09/00)--Federal Explosives Law and Regulations [available within a few days by email order from BATF].

111 posted on 12/11/2002 8:02:02 PM PST by gatex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: reloader
Show me where Smokless Powder is classified as any kind of explosive.

Title 18 sectin 844 subsection (j) United States Code. see my post above. However this only applies to the use of "explosives" in a crime, not to mere purchase or possession of them. This likely means if you get caught cheating on your taxes, and you had a can of smokeless powder in the room with you when you filled out the forms, your penalty can be increased. (Well, maybe).

112 posted on 12/11/2002 8:05:30 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: dd5339
From the cross linked post in reply 12, this does not apply to blackpowder or smokeless powder.

Actually it does apply to blackpowder, but not in limited quantities and if it is to be used in small arms ammunition, including use in guns that don't use "ammunition", per se. Don't rely on what some policritter writes or says, check the actual law and set that against the current law, since these "acts" usually are incomprehensible without referance to what is being modified.

113 posted on 12/11/2002 8:10:24 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
When I read that the BATFinks were to become BATFE, I thought about you. I just pictured some cracky dood typing like mad, going, "Damn it all! They could've waited a few months, but no, now I gotta proof this damned thing all over again!"
114 posted on 12/11/2002 8:17:59 PM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: All
Reviewing the actual law it seems that smokeless gun powder is specifically listed as an explosive:

Section 844(j):
For the purposes of subsections (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i) of this section and section 842(p), the term ''explosive'' means gunpowders, powders used for blasting, all forms of high explosives, blasting materials, fuzes (other than electric circuit breakers), detonators, and other detonating agents, smokeless powders, other explosive or incendiary devices within the meaning of paragraph (5) of section 232 of this title, and any chemical compounds, mechanical mixture, or device that contains any oxidizing and combustible units, or other ingredients, in such proportions, quantities, or packing that ignition by fire, by friction, by concussion, by percussion, or by detonation of the compound, mixture, or device or any part thereof may cause an explosion.

Click here for Section 844

115 posted on 12/11/2002 8:26:33 PM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oldfart
Don't wait on your Senator's staff, the Act was part of the Homeland Security Act, it's in Title XI Subtitle C

You'll also need to reference the existing U.S. code which can be found at the Legal Information Institute of Cornell University (among other places, but I've found this site to be fairly user friendly)

116 posted on 12/11/2002 8:30:08 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: PatrioticAmerican
"...Reviewing the actual law it seems that smokeless gun powder is specifically listed as an explosive: --- Section 844(j):...."

But Section 845 exempts small arms ammunition and components thereof [see post 82].

117 posted on 12/11/2002 8:39:08 PM PST by gatex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
So it seems to me that the BATFE could change the defition in 841 to include smokeless powder anytime he wants, and black powder is already included in the definition even if the regulations concerning it are different. Smokeless powder is apparently only an explosive under the law if you commit a crime with it, but that could be changed without further legislation being needed. Thus Senator Kohl's explanation is at best disingenuous.

Actually I was a bit premature with this, section 845 exempts:

(4)small arms ammunition and components thereof;

(5) commercially manufactured black powder in quantities not to exceed fifty pounds, percussion caps, safety and pyrotechnic fuses, quills, quick and slow matches, and friction primers, intended to be used solely for sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes in antique firearms as defined in section 921(a)(16) of title 18 of the United States Code, or in antique devices as exempted from the term ''destructive device'' in section 921(a)(4) of title 18 of the United States Code;.

And as far I've been able to figure out, the new law doesn't change these exemptions...but then again I'm not a lawyer, although my daughter and her fiancee are.

118 posted on 12/11/2002 8:39:14 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: All
The new law keeps seciton 845(a)(4),(5) which specifically exempts gun powder as an explosive:

Sec. 845. - Exceptions; relief from disabilities
(a) Except in the case of subsections [1] (l), (m), (n), or (o) of section 842 and subsections (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i) of section 844 of this title, this chapter shall not apply to:

(5) commercially manufactured black powder in quantities not to exceed fifty pounds, percussion caps, safety and pyrotechnic fuses, quills, quick and slow matches, and friction primers, intended to be used solely for sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes in antique firearms as defined in section 921(a)(16) of title 18 of the United States Code, or in antique devices as exempted from the term ''destructive device'' in section 921(a)(4) of title 18 of the United States Code; and
...
(4) small arms ammunition and components thereof;

119 posted on 12/11/2002 8:40:31 PM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
Does anybody know of a public interest law firm that specializes in Interstate Commerce Cases?

Wrong source. We'll need one that specializes in the supremacy clause.

120 posted on 12/11/2002 8:41:10 PM PST by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-137 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson