December open Letter ATF

[Don P]

December 2011 open letter from ther ATF,
http://www.atf.gov/publications/newsletters/fel/fel-newsletter-2011-12.pdf

The point that caught my attention is the part of the letter that is regarding "smokeless powder" Reading it it just proves the double talk in government regulations at best will confuse more than it clarifies. Is it me or am I correct in my opinion of the letter?

I went back and read it again. I must have missed something, I give up, they win.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

What's the problem?

• Smokeless powder for small arms is a propellant, not an explosive
• Smokeless powder for small arms is exempt from BATFE regulations for explosives
• Importers and manufacturers of smokeless powder for small arms must have an explosives license (even though, by definition, what they are manufacturing or importing is NOT an explosive)
• Smokeless powder qualifies for the exemption (which I thought was a definition) if it is designed for use in small arms ammunition

What don't you understand?

 

[Don P]

My point is what changes have been made? If none then why place the piece in the letter? Old news isn't it if no changes have been made.

Guess they needed to fill in some space. Its like stating that, that 1964 Chevy was made in 1964, duh!

 

[FrankenMauser]

They made changes to 27 CFR, and needed a little bit of filler material for the news letter. So, they brought out the smokeless exemption.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I was being sarcastic. To me, the information about the so-called exemption seems hopelessly self-contradictory. Smokeless powder is NOT an explosive, but to manufacture it or import it you need an explosives license. If you want to get the exemption, ...

Huh?

 

[Don P]

They made changes to 27 CFR, and needed a little bit of filler material for the news letter. So, they brought out the smokeless exemption.

Many thanks for cluing in a clueless one My day is complete now for I have learned something and now know how much more screwed up the ATF is