Skip to main content

View Diary: NRA's lobbying creates policies that hamper criminal investigations (187 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The Proposal In the 1990s Wasn't For Cartridges (0+ / 0-)

    It was for black powder bought in bulk so the rather hysterical rant above isn't really relevant to the actual proposal.  

    •  What??????? (5+ / 0-)

      Exactly what does your comment have to do with the conversation that is currently on-going, which is about adding taggants to smokeless powder used in rifle and pistol cartridges?  What hysterical rant are you speakiing of?  Please explain yourself.

      And, in case you did not know, smokeless powder is also sold in one pound cans in sporting goods stores throughout the west.  Smokeless powder has been used by the military since right after the Spanish American War and cartridges for civilian use were loaded with it at about the same time.  Black powder nearly went the way of the Dodo for firearms, but there has been a resurgance of use in the past few decades.

      •  Like What Was Linked to the Article (0+ / 0-)

        Do you read or just start ranting like an idiot?

        This everyone is stupid but us gun fetishists is really old.  You don't read, you don't know anything about the actual proposal and you act like everyone else is an idiot while not knowing the first thing about the actual proposal being discussed.  

        Under current law, people can buy up to 50 pounds of explosive "black powder" with no background check, and can buy unlimited amounts of other explosive powders, such as "black powder substitute" and "smokeless powder."

        Lautenberg's bill would require a background check for the purchase of any of these powders.

        Read more:
        Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

        Now, if you want to whine I only called it black powder, good for you, but it misses the basic point the taggant issue was and is largely about bulk purchases of explosive powder including, yep, black powder.  
    •  rather than a "hysterical rant" reddog was simply (5+ / 0-)

      explaining why taggants might be problematic for the very precise use of smokeless powder that goes into making a rifle cartridge.

      Almost all (99% maybe) of the powder sold in stores is smokeless of the sort reddog described. If we are to claim to be the fact based community we should base our discussion on facts.

      How big is your personal carbon footprint?

      by ban nock on Fri May 10, 2013 at 04:47:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So none of you can read? (0+ / 0-)

        None of you bothered to read the actual article linked.  Why not?  Is it just too much fun to spout ignorantly?

      •  Not really simply explaining... (0+ / 0-)

        Simple would have been,

         Taggants create a problem for a couple of reasons.  Introducing a foreign substance to a precisely produced chemical, loaded precisely to produce a specific burn rate (pressure) alters the powder and charge to produce unpredictable results.  To complicate matters even more, unless the contaminate (taggant) is distributed perfectly evenly throughout the powder charge, there will be no way to ever determine precisely what pressure will be produced.

        All which preceded these statements was condescending and yes, sounded like a rant to me as well.  I AM a hunter and a target shooter and don't need a sophomoric lecture that throws around various caliber numbers in order to sound authoritative.

        “Ten people who speak make more noise than ten thousand who are silent.”

        by frenchy339 on Fri May 10, 2013 at 08:09:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Which Ignores That Black Powder (0+ / 0-)

        Is the most commonly used in pipe bombs according to the ATF.  So, yes, facts matter and black powder is an important part of the issue.  

    •  Facts of the Boston case, point towards fireworks. (6+ / 0-)

      As we can't get the Chinese to abide by copyright and patent laws, how do you expect to compel micro-batch identification.

      IF all "black cat" firecrackers have the same taggant code, it's useless.  I'd need a batch code small enough to know:

      Made in China.
      Shipped to the US.
      Distributed to the Northeast.
      Case #6 of 1800 distributed.  Sold to a store in Seabrook, NH.  Then, you'd need a firecracker registry with photo copies of State ID retained to purchase.

      Contrary to what Bloomberg (now there's an impartial news source) cites, taggants have been incorporated in SOME explosives where it does not adversely impact the predictable performance of the product.  (reddog1's point)

      ArchPundit, you may say:  

      fuck 'em.  If that gun blows up in your face?  Awesome.  You didn't get to gun-down a school full of children.
      Tell me how you will keep military and police ammunition taggant-free and safe to use - while also keeping those batches of ammunition out of the general supply chain.

      The country was in peril; he was jeopardizing his traditional rights of freedom and independence by daring to exercise them.” ~ Joseph Heller, Catch-22

      by 43north on Fri May 10, 2013 at 05:32:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nothing to do with Military or police ammunition (0+ / 0-)

        It has to do with bulk purchases of powder.  Read the goddamn article linked above.  

      •  Facts about bombings in the US. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        The following is an excerpt from the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering concerning what type of powders are most commonly used in bombings. 

        "Black and smokeless powders are widely used for sport and recreation throughout the United States. They are sold primarily for use in the reloading of ammunition and in muzzle-loading firearms. Large quantities of the powders are used for military purposes as well. But black and smokeless powders also are utilized to manufacture pipe bombs -- the type of illegal bomb most commonly used in the United States.

        Between 1992 and 1996, the number of reported actual and attempted bombings involving these types of powders averaged about 650 per year in the United States, the committee said. In these incidents, approximately 10 people were killed, 100 people were injured, and $1million in property damage was reported each year. A significant number of the deaths and injuries are suffered by the people who are constructing or transporting the bombs. Although these statistics may not warrant immediate restrictive policy changes, alternatives must be developed if the bombing threat increases."

        Bottom line: 650 pipe bombs a year, during the five year study, is a serious problem and has (had) nothing to do with fireworks.

        Further, to assert that nothing can now be done to address bombings because one set of bombers from Boston used  powder from Chinese fireworks is, at best, simplistic and at worst intentionally disingenuous.

        (BTW, Law Enforcement now believes that the bombs detonated and those remaining contain more powder than could have possible come from the fireworks)


        “Ten people who speak make more noise than ten thousand who are silent.”

        by frenchy339 on Fri May 10, 2013 at 07:59:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site