Sorry to hear of your plight, but you guys need to organize and create a POWERFUL political machine to combat the restrictions being forced on you.
Compile lists of gun owners/hunters in each Province. Then go from there. It needs to be a grassroots organization.
Good luck to you guys/gals.
O/T Canadian Reloading Restrictions Coming!!
Moderator: Excalibur Marketing Dude
-
Howard
Proposed Changes to the Explosives Act
Here is a copy of an e-mail I sent to NR in response to their invitation to comment on the proposed amendments to the Explosives Act. I hope it helps.
20 August 2004
Juri Kasemets
Manager, Eastern Division
Explosives Regulatory Division
Natural Resources Canada
Dear Mr Kasemets,
I am writing in response to your invitation to stakeholders to comment on proposed changes to the Explosives Act. By way of introduction, I am, by profession, an historian. I have written books on the murder of Canadian prisoners of war in Normandy in June 1944 and on Canada's post-1945 immigration policies. When I have a spare moment from contract historical research which I regularly carry out for the federal government, I try to work on my third book, a biography of Louis Riel.
As an historian, I like to pursue activities that, for lack of a better description, 'take me back in time.' That is why I took up archery a while back and why, more recently, I have taken up black powder target shooting. In the interests of full disclosure, I should report that I own two flintlock rifles, each of which is a rough approximation of the type that would have been carried by late eighteenth or early nineteenth century fur traders. As a recent entrant into the sport, I have no claim to expertise. Moreover, not all of the proposed amendments affect me. Nevertheless, I shall endeavour to comment on each of them.
a) Handloading in detached dwelling only. The accidental ignition of 5 kilograms (kg) of black or smokeless powder can cause a fireball several metres across. This would undoubtedly initiate a rapid and intense fire in a normal room. We do not believe that residents in a multi-unit dwelling should be subject to the risk.
This obviously refers to the owners of firearms of more recent technological vintage than mine - that is, rifles that take cartridge ammunition that can be reloaded. In the case of my flintlocks, all loading is done at my local shooting range. That is because all of the components of the ammunition I use are loaded separately. There is the black powder used for the main charge, .50 cal roundballs, patches, and a finer black powder, a tiny amount of which is used as primer.
The black powder for the main charge, which is sold in one-pound metal cans, is transferred into a dispenser - usually a powder horn or brass flask - from where it is then placed into a single charge dispenser. Loading is only done from the latter. As I noted earlier, all of this is done at the range.
The same is true of the priming powder. I transfer that finer powder from its one-pound metal can into a smaller container. Then I transfer some from the smaller container into a brass priming device, which dispenses the tiny amount necessary for priming. Again, this is done at the range only.
Once I am all set up, loading for individual rounds can proceed. This is done by pouring (main charge) powder from my brass powder flask into my brass main charge dispenser. Then, with my empty rifle standing butt end on the ground and muzzle up and angled away, I use my brass main charge dispenser to pour the main charge downbore. Once it has settled, I put a spit-moistened patch over the muzzle, a round ball on the patch, and start the patched ball downbore. Near the muzzle, I move the patched ball down with a device called a short starter. Once the patched ball is down a few inches, I contine pushing it downbore with a ramrod until it is firmly seated on the main powder charge. At this point I lift the rifle, point it downrange at the target, and prime the pan with my brass priming device. Then I cock the rifle (a two-stage process), aim, and pull the trigger. This releases the hammer containing a piece of flint, which strikes a metal facing called the frizzen. This causes tiny hot curls of metal to drop on the priming powder, igniting it and sending a very thin jet of flame into a small vent leading into the bore. The jet ignites the main charge, propelling the patched ball out. As black powder burns rather inefficiently (usually half of the charge is left as solid or semi-solid fouling), I generally swab the bore out before attempting another shot.
Indeed, were black powder burned in the open, as opposed to being contained in the barrel of a rifle, it would not 'explode,' but instead would simply burn itself out rapidly. Therefore, the notion that lit black powder would create a fireball seems rather farfetched to me.
b) No more than 5 kg of propellant to be stored within a dwelling. According to handloading tables this is sufficient for 1500 (shotgun) to 20,000 (pistol) loads. This amount seems adequate.
As it happens, I have less than 5 kg of black powder in my home, and that small amount is certainly adequate for my uses. However, someone who owns a variety of firearms using different ammunition might find his or her ability to reload cartridges constrained by the proposed 5 kg limit. In other words, he or she might have to forego reloading (and therefore using) one or more firearms in order to keep an adequate supply of powder for the others.
c) No handloading within 15 metres of a neighbouring dwelling. Again, this proposed change relates to protecting neighbouring properties from the risks and hazards associated with ammunition loading activities.
Again, this does not apply to me and other traditional muzzleloader users as we do not reload, but rather only load, and then only at the range. Still, I can report to you that most of the single-family dwellings in my neighbourhood are almost all closer together than fifteen metres. Might it not be better to insist that handloaders follow certain sound safety procedures rather than penalize them for living in close proximity to their neighbours?
d) All propellants to be given a United Nations designation. There is nothing new here. All explosives made in or imported into Canada must be authorized and classified under the UN system.
I must say that I find this proposed amendment confusing. I was under the impression that the laws governing the storage, use, and classification of explosives were made in Canada.
Well, I hope that my comments prove helpful in the consultative process and in the deliberations that follow. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Regards,
...
20 August 2004
Juri Kasemets
Manager, Eastern Division
Explosives Regulatory Division
Natural Resources Canada
Dear Mr Kasemets,
I am writing in response to your invitation to stakeholders to comment on proposed changes to the Explosives Act. By way of introduction, I am, by profession, an historian. I have written books on the murder of Canadian prisoners of war in Normandy in June 1944 and on Canada's post-1945 immigration policies. When I have a spare moment from contract historical research which I regularly carry out for the federal government, I try to work on my third book, a biography of Louis Riel.
As an historian, I like to pursue activities that, for lack of a better description, 'take me back in time.' That is why I took up archery a while back and why, more recently, I have taken up black powder target shooting. In the interests of full disclosure, I should report that I own two flintlock rifles, each of which is a rough approximation of the type that would have been carried by late eighteenth or early nineteenth century fur traders. As a recent entrant into the sport, I have no claim to expertise. Moreover, not all of the proposed amendments affect me. Nevertheless, I shall endeavour to comment on each of them.
a) Handloading in detached dwelling only. The accidental ignition of 5 kilograms (kg) of black or smokeless powder can cause a fireball several metres across. This would undoubtedly initiate a rapid and intense fire in a normal room. We do not believe that residents in a multi-unit dwelling should be subject to the risk.
This obviously refers to the owners of firearms of more recent technological vintage than mine - that is, rifles that take cartridge ammunition that can be reloaded. In the case of my flintlocks, all loading is done at my local shooting range. That is because all of the components of the ammunition I use are loaded separately. There is the black powder used for the main charge, .50 cal roundballs, patches, and a finer black powder, a tiny amount of which is used as primer.
The black powder for the main charge, which is sold in one-pound metal cans, is transferred into a dispenser - usually a powder horn or brass flask - from where it is then placed into a single charge dispenser. Loading is only done from the latter. As I noted earlier, all of this is done at the range.
The same is true of the priming powder. I transfer that finer powder from its one-pound metal can into a smaller container. Then I transfer some from the smaller container into a brass priming device, which dispenses the tiny amount necessary for priming. Again, this is done at the range only.
Once I am all set up, loading for individual rounds can proceed. This is done by pouring (main charge) powder from my brass powder flask into my brass main charge dispenser. Then, with my empty rifle standing butt end on the ground and muzzle up and angled away, I use my brass main charge dispenser to pour the main charge downbore. Once it has settled, I put a spit-moistened patch over the muzzle, a round ball on the patch, and start the patched ball downbore. Near the muzzle, I move the patched ball down with a device called a short starter. Once the patched ball is down a few inches, I contine pushing it downbore with a ramrod until it is firmly seated on the main powder charge. At this point I lift the rifle, point it downrange at the target, and prime the pan with my brass priming device. Then I cock the rifle (a two-stage process), aim, and pull the trigger. This releases the hammer containing a piece of flint, which strikes a metal facing called the frizzen. This causes tiny hot curls of metal to drop on the priming powder, igniting it and sending a very thin jet of flame into a small vent leading into the bore. The jet ignites the main charge, propelling the patched ball out. As black powder burns rather inefficiently (usually half of the charge is left as solid or semi-solid fouling), I generally swab the bore out before attempting another shot.
Indeed, were black powder burned in the open, as opposed to being contained in the barrel of a rifle, it would not 'explode,' but instead would simply burn itself out rapidly. Therefore, the notion that lit black powder would create a fireball seems rather farfetched to me.
b) No more than 5 kg of propellant to be stored within a dwelling. According to handloading tables this is sufficient for 1500 (shotgun) to 20,000 (pistol) loads. This amount seems adequate.
As it happens, I have less than 5 kg of black powder in my home, and that small amount is certainly adequate for my uses. However, someone who owns a variety of firearms using different ammunition might find his or her ability to reload cartridges constrained by the proposed 5 kg limit. In other words, he or she might have to forego reloading (and therefore using) one or more firearms in order to keep an adequate supply of powder for the others.
c) No handloading within 15 metres of a neighbouring dwelling. Again, this proposed change relates to protecting neighbouring properties from the risks and hazards associated with ammunition loading activities.
Again, this does not apply to me and other traditional muzzleloader users as we do not reload, but rather only load, and then only at the range. Still, I can report to you that most of the single-family dwellings in my neighbourhood are almost all closer together than fifteen metres. Might it not be better to insist that handloaders follow certain sound safety procedures rather than penalize them for living in close proximity to their neighbours?
d) All propellants to be given a United Nations designation. There is nothing new here. All explosives made in or imported into Canada must be authorized and classified under the UN system.
I must say that I find this proposed amendment confusing. I was under the impression that the laws governing the storage, use, and classification of explosives were made in Canada.
Well, I hope that my comments prove helpful in the consultative process and in the deliberations that follow. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Regards,
...
I had another thought on this issue.
Two years ago, we lost one of our older members at the club who was in his early 80's.
"Louie" was in the army in WWII and missed Normandy by one month, going ashore in July 1944.
After D Day, as most Canadians here are aware, the Canadian Army swung north into Holland and he was involved in quite a bit of action until the end in the spring of 1945. Louie didn't talk too much about it, as many of these older gents don't.
If he was still alive, and they pass this latest foolishness, imagine them telling Louie "Well, you can't reload any more, you live in town and your house is less than 49 ft. from your neighbours"....yeah, right
Howard, thanks and congratulations on sending your comments in the the gov't.
To every other Canadian hunter/shooter, I ask you to consider sending firm, but polite comments (I know what I would like to write but that will do no good) on these issues to;
Juri Kasemets
Manager, Eastern Division
Explosives Regulatory Division
Natural Resources Canada
Tel: (902)426-9486
E-mail: [email protected]
Two years ago, we lost one of our older members at the club who was in his early 80's.
"Louie" was in the army in WWII and missed Normandy by one month, going ashore in July 1944.
After D Day, as most Canadians here are aware, the Canadian Army swung north into Holland and he was involved in quite a bit of action until the end in the spring of 1945. Louie didn't talk too much about it, as many of these older gents don't.
If he was still alive, and they pass this latest foolishness, imagine them telling Louie "Well, you can't reload any more, you live in town and your house is less than 49 ft. from your neighbours"....yeah, right
Howard, thanks and congratulations on sending your comments in the the gov't.
To every other Canadian hunter/shooter, I ask you to consider sending firm, but polite comments (I know what I would like to write but that will do no good) on these issues to;
Juri Kasemets
Manager, Eastern Division
Explosives Regulatory Division
Natural Resources Canada
Tel: (902)426-9486
E-mail: [email protected]
10Ring
My message, sent today to;
Juri Kasemets
Manager, Eastern Division
Explosives Regulatory Division
Natural Resources Canada
Tel: (902)426-9486
E-mail: [email protected]
The message...................
Mr. Kasemet
In regards to the items I have quoted for reference at
the end of this message;
General Comment;
- I completely fail to see the need or justification
for any regulatory change to the existing Regulations
with regard to Smokeless Powder, Black Powder &
Reloading of Ammunition based on knowledge/experience
of the products and number of reported incidents.
- The stated premise of the proposed changes to the
regulations on handloading is said to relate to
safety, not security. In actual effect, as written,
the proposals will serve to prohibit large numbers of
individuals from engaging in reloading, without any
clear cut benefit to safety in my opinion and impose
severe restrictions on those still able to engage in
reloading.
- I am not aware of any drastic increase in incidents
relating to reloading of ammunition and storage of
components. In fact, I have not heard of any
incidents with reloading supplies. The news media is
very quick to report incidents relating to firearms
and ammunition and the absence of reports is just one
indicator to me that they are very rare.
My Background;
I have 34 years of clay target shooting experience, I
have reloaded ammunition for that whole time period;
TOTALLY without incident.
I have worked in the field of engineering and
safety/environmental issues for the past 28 years.
Detailed Comments on the Items 1 through 4 from Quote
at bottom of this message;
1.) "Handloading in detached dwelling only. etc."
- This will put the majority of urban reloaders out of
operation who often have operated safely for years
without incident.
- "undoubtedly", this is speculative, it raises deep
concerns for me, that regulations are being drawn up
on speculation. Modern propellant powders are hard to
ignite outside of loaded ammunition; harder to ignite
and not as devastating as many products such as
gasoline, propane and paints which are commonly stored
in most homes.
Is it acceptable for someone in a townhouse to subject
their neighbours to the very real hazards of gasoline
and the other mentioned products in their dwelling but
somehow, powder for reloading is unacceptable?
2.)"No more than 5 kg of propellant to be stored
within a dwelling"
- people who load more than one gauge of shotgun
shell, for competitive purposes require at least two
types of powder, this is an insufficient quantity for
these individuals.
- immediately, this will eliminate the 12 pound keg of
IMR 700X that is favoured by many competitive shotgun
shooters and is the most economical way for them to
purchase this product. I have never heard of an
incident with a 12 pound keg of this product.
- "This amount seems adequate" Competitive shooters
can go through 5,000 to 20,000 shotgun shells a year;
1,500 shells is not a large supply for these people.
It is not adequate for many serious shooters.
3.) "No handloading within 15 metres of a neighbouring
dwelling."
- This will, as in No. 1, put the majority of urban
reloaders out of operation. Again, I am more concerned
about other products such as gasoline, propane, paints
and other solvents and in my experience, these are
very common and frequently, not too well stored.
4.) "All propellants to be given a United Nations
designation."
- I do not understand why this was included. The
powders I am familiar with already have the UN number
(UN with a 4 digit PIN)
10Ring (signed my real name on the original)
Quote follows, for reference;
The proposed regulations on handloading relate mainly
to safety, not security. Addressing each of the
proposals:
1.) Handloading in detached dwelling only. The
accidental ignition of 5 kilograms (kg) of black or
smokeless powder can cause a fireball several metres
across. This would undoubtedly initiate a rapid and
intense fire in a normal room. We do not believe that
residents in a multi-unit dwelling should be subject
to the risk.
2.) No more than 5 kg of propellant to be stored
within a dwelling. According to handloading tables
this is sufficient for 1500 (shotgun) to 20,000
(pistol) loads. This amount seems adequate.
3.) No handloading within 15 metres of a neighbouring
dwelling. Again, this proposed change relates to
protecting neighbouring properties from the risks and
hazards associated with ammunition loading activities.
4.) All propellants to be given a United Nations
designation. There is nothing new here. All
explosives made in or imported into Canada must be
authorized and classified under the UN system.
....end quote.
Juri Kasemets
Manager, Eastern Division
Explosives Regulatory Division
Natural Resources Canada
Tel: (902)426-9486
E-mail: [email protected]
The message...................
Mr. Kasemet
In regards to the items I have quoted for reference at
the end of this message;
General Comment;
- I completely fail to see the need or justification
for any regulatory change to the existing Regulations
with regard to Smokeless Powder, Black Powder &
Reloading of Ammunition based on knowledge/experience
of the products and number of reported incidents.
- The stated premise of the proposed changes to the
regulations on handloading is said to relate to
safety, not security. In actual effect, as written,
the proposals will serve to prohibit large numbers of
individuals from engaging in reloading, without any
clear cut benefit to safety in my opinion and impose
severe restrictions on those still able to engage in
reloading.
- I am not aware of any drastic increase in incidents
relating to reloading of ammunition and storage of
components. In fact, I have not heard of any
incidents with reloading supplies. The news media is
very quick to report incidents relating to firearms
and ammunition and the absence of reports is just one
indicator to me that they are very rare.
My Background;
I have 34 years of clay target shooting experience, I
have reloaded ammunition for that whole time period;
TOTALLY without incident.
I have worked in the field of engineering and
safety/environmental issues for the past 28 years.
Detailed Comments on the Items 1 through 4 from Quote
at bottom of this message;
1.) "Handloading in detached dwelling only. etc."
- This will put the majority of urban reloaders out of
operation who often have operated safely for years
without incident.
- "undoubtedly", this is speculative, it raises deep
concerns for me, that regulations are being drawn up
on speculation. Modern propellant powders are hard to
ignite outside of loaded ammunition; harder to ignite
and not as devastating as many products such as
gasoline, propane and paints which are commonly stored
in most homes.
Is it acceptable for someone in a townhouse to subject
their neighbours to the very real hazards of gasoline
and the other mentioned products in their dwelling but
somehow, powder for reloading is unacceptable?
2.)"No more than 5 kg of propellant to be stored
within a dwelling"
- people who load more than one gauge of shotgun
shell, for competitive purposes require at least two
types of powder, this is an insufficient quantity for
these individuals.
- immediately, this will eliminate the 12 pound keg of
IMR 700X that is favoured by many competitive shotgun
shooters and is the most economical way for them to
purchase this product. I have never heard of an
incident with a 12 pound keg of this product.
- "This amount seems adequate" Competitive shooters
can go through 5,000 to 20,000 shotgun shells a year;
1,500 shells is not a large supply for these people.
It is not adequate for many serious shooters.
3.) "No handloading within 15 metres of a neighbouring
dwelling."
- This will, as in No. 1, put the majority of urban
reloaders out of operation. Again, I am more concerned
about other products such as gasoline, propane, paints
and other solvents and in my experience, these are
very common and frequently, not too well stored.
4.) "All propellants to be given a United Nations
designation."
- I do not understand why this was included. The
powders I am familiar with already have the UN number
(UN with a 4 digit PIN)
10Ring (signed my real name on the original)
Quote follows, for reference;
The proposed regulations on handloading relate mainly
to safety, not security. Addressing each of the
proposals:
1.) Handloading in detached dwelling only. The
accidental ignition of 5 kilograms (kg) of black or
smokeless powder can cause a fireball several metres
across. This would undoubtedly initiate a rapid and
intense fire in a normal room. We do not believe that
residents in a multi-unit dwelling should be subject
to the risk.
2.) No more than 5 kg of propellant to be stored
within a dwelling. According to handloading tables
this is sufficient for 1500 (shotgun) to 20,000
(pistol) loads. This amount seems adequate.
3.) No handloading within 15 metres of a neighbouring
dwelling. Again, this proposed change relates to
protecting neighbouring properties from the risks and
hazards associated with ammunition loading activities.
4.) All propellants to be given a United Nations
designation. There is nothing new here. All
explosives made in or imported into Canada must be
authorized and classified under the UN system.
....end quote.
10Ring