Just another little thing from the gun grabbers

Lee Harker

Lee Harker

Well-known member
Found this little tidbit while searching the web...


http://www.shilohrifle.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9088

But who can argue? It's for safety....they don't really want to take away our guns!
 
isn't really a Government entity whose charter charges it with the safety of workers, in this case the people that handle it, (not to mention making sure that its not available to terrorists), but is, in fact, a cover for the gun control lobby, run by people who are insidiously at work undermining our gun rights underr the guise of Safety Requaltions in the Trucking Industry?

Thats what it seems to be saying if I didn't miss the subliminal smiley faces in your last sentence.....

And before anyone pops my question above doesn't imply that I agree with the ruling, or that I think thats what should happen, or that I'm pissed off cause Lee and I might have a different opinion....just asking a question.....

Steve
 
I guess I'm not the one who siad that but...Yes, OSHA is a federal agency with States having their own OSHA's that can be worse than the federal Osha. Osha has more power than the FBI , is staffed with appointees from "The Good Ol'boy" network and seems they just sit around and think up ways to make life miserable for business owners..who then have to make life miserable for their employees and then cost the consumer exponential increases. Why do you think stuff from China (Sum Ting and Miso) is so cheap? Let's level the playing field and require all products sold in the USA be manufactured under the same exact circumstances as we force on our own populace. That had nothing to do with the post but my mind went sideways for a second. If you read my post that way..then I guess that's what I meant.

Pissed off old man and that's the way I like it!
 
Last edited:
with way too much power and far too little accountability. Just don't think that part of the thought process of their "THOU SHALT NOT..." Commandments has anything to do with what the end results will be.....after all they are both "Government" and "autonomous", not to mention "infalliable"....

Steve
 
http://frwebgate5.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=06255051334+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

Here is the federal register proposed rule published on April 13, 2007. You have until July 12, 2007 to send in a comment.

In my first look at their reasoning behind the proposed changes it sounds valid. ATF, DOT, Coastys, and OSHA all had overlapping regulations for explosives. This is OSHA's attempt to stream line the rules and removed duplication. The one thing that stands out is that ATF does not have authority over small arms ammo and its components. WTF? And due to some sort of reverse preemptive regulations OSHA has always had control over them in the work place and will keep that unchanged in the new rule. It appears to have been this way for many years so the future will be the same as the past on this one.

The good news is that OSHA will be adopting the DOT explosive classification system. Which makes the "sky is falling" comments about why change it when we already use the DOT system on the Shilo forum moot.

I hate reading CFRs (regulations), but have learned that the only way to understand them is to read the preambles published in the Federal Register when ever they proposed a rule change or publish a rule change.
 
Steve, are you trying to tell me that some politicians aren't part of the anti gun lobby? That some of them don't look at this ruling and think "damn..this is great why didn't we think of this before"? I'm not worried about the "anti gunners" that don't hold office, I worry about the ones that do and use that power to do all they can to usurp their promise to uphold the constitution..and not just on the gun control issue..and not just Democrats and Independents..Republicans too. I am a Liberal Conservative...or maybe a Conservative Liberal (Centrist?)as I believe the vast majority of our population is and am sick and tired of the Far left and Far right causing our Government to be an inneffective entity without a seeming shred of common sense. I despise the media and how they make our elected officials dance and I despise the politicians that swing on those puppet strings. I see that our elected officials are fighting each other (yeah, right) on a COLA wage hike for themselves...a 170k isn't enough? Whose fault is that?
 
for, like you, I do believe that there are Politicians on both sides of the floor that are part of the gun lobby. Some of them are proud of it and say so publically at every chance and others pretend they aren't but are....

What I am saying is that I don't think that OSHA passed that bill with the intent of taking guns out of our hands because I don't think that thats the way that OSHA thinks. I know that you have extensive dealings with them since you own your own business and have seen, and been affected, by the things they do. I have as well having had to deal with them whe I was in the trailer leasing industry and now, even more so, that I am in the trailerr mfg. business.

In all my dealings with OSHA I've never seen them look beyond the exact rule that they are looking at when they formulated it. In my experience they look at a problem, in this case BLACK POWDER, and say....hmmm how do we figure out how to move this stuff with the utmost confidence in safety....and then they make a ruling to do that....beyond that they don't seem to care.....In this case it doesn't seem to be an issue to them as to the effect of the change, (and based on what Ray posted there might not even be one no matter how much a "conspirancy theory gun forum thinks there may be).

IMO OSHA approaches things from the view point of "we are going to "fix" something that we think needs fixing. It might well change the way that you do business. We don't care about that. Safety is our business and we have fixed that. Business is your business and you'll have to figure that one out yourself".....

The end result of this ruling may well be that BP is harder for people to obtain. I won't argue that. What I would argue is that OSHA did it with GUN CONTROL in mind.

Steve
 
"Fix a problem"...hmmm..can't remember the last time I saw on the news where a semi carrying black powder exploded and wiped out a town.Maybe it is the ham fisted UPS,DHL or FedX loaders and unloaders that have opened the containers to see whats in them and lit matches to see if the cans were empty?Does this happen often enough that it is "a problem that needs fixing?". When a bureaucracy sets around dreaming up "problems to "fix"..we are doomed.
 
"problem" was one of "jurisdiction" and this solves "that".....at lest thats what it looks like to me after Ray pointed out about the changes.

Like lead in bullets killing Raptors...some people see that as "Bueracracy dreaming up problems that need to be fixed", and some see it as a real problem that needs fixing. Depends on you're mind set I guess cause in this example there was a huge polarity in opinion.....

On th OSHA ruling if it turns out as Ray indicates it would seem that nothing much will change, other than the settlement of TURF OWNERSHIP, and it won't affect shooters....If thats the case then the "doom and gloom" post on the Shiloh site would have been a incorrect assumption leading to a "THe sky is falling" response, (I'm basing this on what Ray said as he seems to be able to decipher the goobledy gook of these things, plus he has experience, somethig I doubt the "chicken littles" on the Shiloh page have....

Course I've been wrong before and if this is the case then blame Ray on this one cause I'm still busy recoverring for the "public stoning" over the Condor and mandatory nueteing thread....

Whatever the outcome I'll stick to my original comment that "whatever" the reason for the new ruling it had nothing to do with them "wanting our guns".....

Steve
 
If "they" wanted our guns, then OSHA did a really good job of hiding that in the preamble to the proposed change.

Nearly all regulations these days are drafted by legislative aids based on the first draft by a lobbiest for the industry being regulated. The explosive manufacturing industry was neck deep in writing this proposed rule according to the preamble. It was refreshing to see that OSHA was clear on the fact that these proposed rules are based on what the industry wanted for themselves.

This means that if there is a big issue once it becomes law then all the explosive companies, and the lobbiest that respresent them, failed in seeing the big picture. It would be hard to believe that these companies would cut off their knose to spite their face if they can make all the explosives they want, but can't sell the stuff. I have yet to see a modern US business sector be that short sighted.

The real issue will be the workplace in a transportation business that has not thought of them selves as OSHA regulated since they were shipping stuff under DOT. DOT makes it pretty clear that they are in charge of the materials, but not the workers per se, once things are moving on a vehicle, and OSHA is clear that they are in charge of the workplace whether or not it is on a building or in the cab of a truck, but they are not incharge of the classification of the material for shipping. So what may happen is an over reaction by the shippers until they get some time under their belts and learn that nothing has changed.

This issue reminds me of when enforcment changed for airfreight shipping after the Value Jet crash. Environmental consultants ship lots of hazarous materials, and in Alaska there are few roads so we shipped by air all the time. We have training to deal with all kinds of hazardous stuff, so we picked up our DOT required 24 hours of shippers training, which made it legal for us to sign a HAZMAT bill of lading. It turns out that the guys at the air freight dock were years behind us shippers in knowing the rules. I remember getting into near fist fights with dudes at the AKAir terminal over the proper shipping name for some of our HAZMAT materials. I learned to come back after a shift change that favored the older union workers and things went smoothly. And then 9/11 happened and the enforcement changed again. The one thing I always keep in mind when working HAZMAT for airfreight is that I don't want to be responsible for another Value Jet like "accident". I hope that the freight dock dudes consider that just as hard as I do when processing a load.
 
thickens....now even the very industries that makes the powder for our firearms are being manipulated, witout their knowledge, by those "people" that want our guns.....now those are some damned cleverr peoples......

Thanks Ray for the continued imput on this....you're the very voice of reason in the Wilderness.....literally....

Steve
 
Ray may be right, hopefully, but after reading a little of the proposal it didn't comfort me any. They use as an example an explosion that didn't involve an explosive. Huh?!?! They say how dangerous explosives are because of a ship full of fertilizer that exploded 60 YEARS AGO! Yeah, that fosters a great deal of trust.

Since I can only find one or two distributors who are concerned I'm guessing OSHA isn't going to change much but if they do you know it will be hard to change back. Might be worth emails to gun friendly legislators just to have it in their minds if it ever does become an issue.

btw A question. When you pay a hazmat fee do shipping companies actually treat it any differently then any other item or is this just a fee to pay for paperwork and bureaucracy? I've heard the boxes are just as banged up but don't know.

Tim
 
at least from the "law" standpoint.

Documentation, and therefore tracking, is enhanced. Depending on the type of material quantities can be restricted to a specific amount in a single load, locations in the container can be specifed, and safety concerns like "who" loads and unloads, "where" its stored, and what equipment must be available in case of accidents are specified......Training is also required so certain types that is above and beyond just stacking boxes inside a trailerr.

That doesn't mean that those requirements are always followed but they are there.

Steve
 
All I know is; if you ever have to deal with OSHA, IRS or DOT all ya can do is hope they all perish. Slow and painfuly!
 
I started reading Steve's response then Lee's then Steve's then Lee's then the other ones...

I think its ME that needs to go take a poop unless thats against a law or an initiative or an ordinance or something...

HEY! What about making corn decoys or Swiss Army Egrets...no rules there yet

See how this all goes...I just said (in an earlier post) I can follow all of the rules, I just hate it when someone TELLS me I have to follow all of the rules
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top