marine6680
New member
The legal brief released a video recently covering the subject. HERE
I had some thoughts on the whole deal.
It was my understanding that smokeless powder used in ammo is considered a flammable solid, and not an explosive. (OK... I just looked this up, when shipped in amounts exceeding 100lb its listed as a class 1.3C, fire/minor blast... the same as fireworks 1.3G.. 1.3 is the code and C is for propellants Here is one of many sources)
Explosives require a license to purchase... But we can buy modern gun powder over the counter... If it was classified as an explosive, reloaders would need a license.
Wetted nitrocellulose has more relaxed shipping regulations by the DOT...
But I think the letter was trying to convey that just because you wet the nitrocellulose, does not reclassify it as a non-explosive... Meaning it's sale and distribution is still regulated as an explosive.
In other words...
Basically, I think the letter was meant to say that just because you can reclassify wetted nitrocellulose as a Division 1.3 (fire/small blast hazard) rather than a division 1.1 (Mass explosion Possible)... That it does not change its classification for sale/distribution under rules and regulations regarding explosives. Or... The DOT may not consider it an "explosive", but the ATF does.
The problem may arise in their use of the 12.6% nitrogen content to determine classification... As modern powders range in nitrogen content, and some may exceed the 12.6% mark.
I had some thoughts on the whole deal.
It was my understanding that smokeless powder used in ammo is considered a flammable solid, and not an explosive. (OK... I just looked this up, when shipped in amounts exceeding 100lb its listed as a class 1.3C, fire/minor blast... the same as fireworks 1.3G.. 1.3 is the code and C is for propellants Here is one of many sources)
Explosives require a license to purchase... But we can buy modern gun powder over the counter... If it was classified as an explosive, reloaders would need a license.
Wetted nitrocellulose has more relaxed shipping regulations by the DOT...
But I think the letter was trying to convey that just because you wet the nitrocellulose, does not reclassify it as a non-explosive... Meaning it's sale and distribution is still regulated as an explosive.
In other words...
Basically, I think the letter was meant to say that just because you can reclassify wetted nitrocellulose as a Division 1.3 (fire/small blast hazard) rather than a division 1.1 (Mass explosion Possible)... That it does not change its classification for sale/distribution under rules and regulations regarding explosives. Or... The DOT may not consider it an "explosive", but the ATF does.
The problem may arise in their use of the 12.6% nitrogen content to determine classification... As modern powders range in nitrogen content, and some may exceed the 12.6% mark.