Reloading liability insurance ?

[Dalua]

Making ammunition in order to sell it, rather than disposing of it in the sale of a no longer wanted gun, is called trade or business, like it or not.

I think making ammuntion in order to sell it by way of trade or business would be called trade or business. But small-scale and essentially not for profit? Really? Who says so?
Next, you'll be telling us that I'm not allowed to pick up a few boxes of .270 rounds for my pal when I happen to be at the gunsmith's, since buying ammuntion in order to sell it (which is exactly what I'd be doing) would be 'by way of trade or business' as well?

...talk to YOUR FEO about it?

Well, mainly because FEOs are not a favourite source of accurate interpreations of firearms law. I'm fairly certain most FEOs would agree with you - but like Dogbert, I'm just interested to know why that might be the case.

If you think your FEO can produce chapter and verse on this, why not ask and pop the results on here? What I don't particuarly want is more confounding of 'by way of trade or business' with patently non-commercial undertakings, and the extension of CIP stuff to such undertakings when it is far from clear that that is the intention of those most worthy regulations.

The proof authorities naturally want as much business as possible - look at their opinion on threaded barrels, moderators and so on - so their opinion is unlikely to be entirely objective.

Just interested, and certainly not Dogbert!

[DanTheMan]

The auction houses regularly sell home reloaded ammo LINK

[Dalua]

The auction houses regularly sell home reloaded ammo LINK

Interesting. Perhaps they always have it proofed, although that is not mentioned: and they will certainly be selling by way of trade or business.

[tacfoley]

I think making ammuntion in order to sell it by way of trade or business would be called trade or business. But small-scale and essentially not for profit? Really? Who says so?
Next, you'll be telling us that I'm not allowed to pick up a few boxes of .270 rounds for my pal when I happen to be at the gunsmith's, since buying ammuntion in order to sell it (which is exactly what I'd be doing) would be 'by way of trade or business' as well?

Well, mainly because FEOs are not a favourite source of accurate interpreations of firearms law. I'm fairly certain most FEOs would agree with you - but like Dogbert, I'm just interested to know why that might be the case.

If you think your FEO can produce chapter and verse on this, why not ask and pop the results on here? What I don't particuarly want is more confounding of 'by way of trade or business' with patently non-commercial undertakings, and the extension of CIP stuff to such undertakings when it is far from clear that that is the intention of those most worthy regulations.

The proof authorities naturally want as much business as possible - look at their opinion on threaded barrels, moderators and so on - so their opinion is unlikely to be entirely objective.

Just interested, and certainly not Dogbert!

I'll be perfectly honest with you here, if you'll pay me the same amount of respect and restraint that I've shown over the last few days dealing with dogsbreath.

I have nothing to gain by this thread - you and dogshead, on the other hand, seem to be taking an uncommon amount of delight in prolonging it, for purposes that I cannot determine - perhaps in an attempt to make me look a total plawk, who knows? If so, then, IMO, you have failed to do so, and your attempts to p1ss in my hat have failed miserably.

What your agenda is, is something that has passed me by, so I'm letting you and whoever else remains here decide on the eventual outcome. Your emoticons are meaningless to me, as my keyboard sees them all as little squares. Are they laughing at me? Are they sad? Are they sarcastic? I'm being honest again and advising you that my DGAF-o-'meter has failed to register the slightest quiver.

Given your somewhat jaundiced opinion of the proof authorities, who do have the law on their side viz. the CIP rules, and notwithstanding your apparent collusion with dogsbreath in bombing this thread into a morass of verbiage and confusion that would make any snake-oil salesman proud, I'm prepared to leave you to it.

Enjoy and Goodbye.

tac

[Fenrir.2]

Like all areas of legal uncertainty, there really is no way to find the answer without testing it. Can I suggest that Dogbert and Dalua make up a few rounds and offer them for sale publicly.

Are you two up for the challenge?

In the unlikely event that not everybody is in agreement with your position, you will have the opportunity of telling the judge that because it is not expressly proscribed in statute there can be no offence.

[angrybear]

I think making ammuntion in order to sell it by way of trade or business would be called trade or business. But small-scale and essentially not for profit? Really? Who says so?
Next, you'll be telling us that I'm not allowed to pick up a few boxes of .270 rounds for my pal when I happen to be at the gunsmith's, since buying ammuntion in order to sell it (which is exactly what I'd be doing) would be 'by way of trade or business' as well?





Well, mainly because FEOs are not a favourite source of accurate interpreations of firearms law. I'm fairly certain most FEOs would agree with you - but like Dogbert, I'm just interested to know why that might be the case.

If you think your FEO can produce chapter and verse on this, why not ask and pop the results on here? What I don't particuarly want is more confounding of 'by way of trade or business' with patently non-commercial undertakings, and the extension of CIP stuff to such undertakings when it is far from clear that that is the intention of those most worthy regulations.

The proof authorities naturally want as much business as possible - look at their opinion on threaded barrels, moderators and so on - so their opinion is unlikely to be entirely objective.

Just interested, and certainly not Dogbert!

It has been decided, I think in Tax law, that a "Hobby" is done for pleasure alone, once done for payment or other benefit in lieu of payment it ceases to be a "Hobby" & instead becomes "Business" & must be declared.

[JB101]

Gents I hope this resolves the issue

http://www.cip-bobp.org/munitions

ATB

[Dalua]

Relax, tac: the emoticons are just smiling benignly.

I'm colluding only with those who wish to find the actual reasons for the pronouncments made re. the unlawfulness of selling home-loaded ammunition.

I'm certainly not suggesting that either buying or selling home-loaded ammuntion is a good idea, so unsurprisingly I'll not be taking up Fenrir.2's naughty challenge: though I appreciate his candour in pointing out that this is a legal grey area of a kind that requires case-law to sort it out.

It is interesting to note that respectable auction-houses offer home-loads for sale - something you would not imagine they'd do if it were unlawful.

As for 'verbiage and confusion', I must apologise if I've caused the latter, but the former has certainly been necessary to deal with repeated postings of bits of the Fireams Act which do not in fact address the point under discussion.

[ratshot5]

ok whos been killed with some ones home made ammo

[taz2]

ok whos been killed with some ones home made ammo :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Well, that's about the most stupid question I've seen asked for a good many days. I've seen a bolt explode and chuck a big lump of steel to graze an ear of someone standing behind. Didn't actually kill him, but 1 inch to the left....? That was a home load--- one of the shooter's own. Is that near enough to qualify?
If I give you some of my home loaded ammunition, would you fire it? You don't know me, or my skills. You haven't the first idea what's in them, etc etc.
The original question was whether one could obtain insurance for home loading.
OK that's fairly simple, EXCEPT that the rest of the question was, do you swap, sell home loads.
You'd be insured for home loading and third party injury by being in ,say, the NRA. Their insurance specifically mentions home loading.
I guess that if you can find anyone stupid enough to accept and fire them, you can give it away.
However, what you cannot do is SELL it. In doing that you become a trader---whether you actually make a profit on the deal. Despite protestations from some posters, CIP rules--we are signatures to this body--forbid the sale of ammunition without type approval, and proof firing, and regular re-testing.
It is a basic common sense attitude. Would you go into your local RFD and buy a box of random ammunition with no idea what it was except the calibre? I certainly wouldn't.
It doesn't matter what scale you sell on, 1 or 1000, you are still SELLING it.
As to anyone being killed, try some of my super hot 308 I run in my AW in your knackered old BSA stalking rifle. See how you get on-- I won't even charge you for them.
The last sentence should illustrate why ammunition is regulated by type approval, and proof firing.
Here I ought put some "roll eyes" but it's a bit more serious than that.

[tacfoley]

Well, that's about the most stupid question I've seen asked for a good many days. I've seen a bolt explode and chuck a big lump of steel to graze an ear of someone standing behind. Didn't actually kill him, but 1 inch to the left....? That was a home load--- one of the shooter's own. Is that near enough to qualify?
If I give you some of my home loaded ammunition, would you fire it? You don't know me, or my skills. You haven't the first idea what's in them, etc etc.
The original question was whether one could obtain insurance for home loading.
OK that's fairly simple, EXCEPT that the rest of the question was, do you swap, sell home loads.
You'd be insured for home loading and third party injury by being in ,say, the NRA. Their insurance specifically mentions home loading.
I guess that if you can find anyone stupid enough to accept and fire them, you can give it away.
However, what you cannot do is SELL it. In doing that you become a trader---whether you actually make a profit on the deal. Despite protestations from some posters, CIP rules--we are signatures to this body--forbid the sale of ammunition without type approval, and proof firing, and regular re-testing.
It is a basic common sense attitude. Would you go into your local RFD and buy a box of random ammunition with no idea what it was except the calibre? I certainly wouldn't.
It doesn't matter what scale you sell on, 1 or 1000, you are still SELLING it.
As to anyone being killed, try some of my super hot 308 I run in my AW in your knackered old BSA stalking rifle. See how you get on-- I won't even charge you for them.
The last sentence should illustrate why ammunition is regulated by type approval, and proof firing.
Here I ought put some "roll eyes" but it's a bit more serious than that.

Taz, you are trying to nail fog to water here, pal.

tac

[DanTheMan]

Despite protestations from some posters, CIP rules--we are signatures to this body--forbid the sale of ammunition without type approval, and proof firing, and regular re-testing.
It is a basic common sense attitude. Would you go into your local RFD and buy a box of random ammunition with no idea what it was except the calibre? I certainly wouldn't.
It doesn't matter what scale you sell on, 1 or 1000, you are still SELLING it.

How come RFD's can and do sell WW1 and WW2 dated ammo that's got dodgy cordite and iffy primers ? you know the click bang stuff that would not pass current standards.

[taz2]

How come RFD's can and do sell WW1 and WW2 dated ammo that's got dodgy cordite and iffy primers ? you know the click bang stuff that would not pass current standards.

You can put all sorts of how-comes? and what ifs? up,
but that ammunition WOULD have been made to a standard ( The, then, current MkV11/z spec).
Like anything else in life it will/ could deteriorate. It's not some back street, amateur reloader cobbling up something he thinks MIGHT work in 'most' rifles, it was/is made to a tight mil-spec to fit ANY 303 rifle built EVER, and not blow the thing up, ( at this point, some smart-arse will mention Metfords, 303 but black powder powered).
If you choose to shoot it, you'd must expect the odd 'click'.
As always, on this forum, there's any amount of clever sods who will cloud the basic issue over questions posed.

[sandy22]

ok whos been killed with some ones home made ammo

Serious question:

Does anyone know of any cases of injury or damage caused by the actual process of handloading, including corollary activities, e.g. storage of components, but excluding problems from using the handloads once assembled?

[tacfoley]

Serious question: Does anyone know of any cases of injury or damage caused by the actual process of handloading, including corollary activities, e.g. storage of components, but excluding problems from using the handloads once assembled?

Nope.

But then I've only been handloading since the late 60's. Aren't you presupposing that the people who reload are complete idiots who pay little or no regard to the safe handling of the 'components'? Would YOU walk
around with a live flame in one hand and a cup of petrol in the other? Probably not. And yet you are happy to drive a car where a controlled amount of flame and petrol provide the means of motion.

So what's going to happen to 'stored components?

Bullets are only going to hurt if you drop a box on your foot. They are inert lumps of lead, often with copper or cupro-nickel jackets on them.

Primers are DESIGNED to be safe enough to transport by air in their ORIGINAL packaging - the FAA and other air tranpsort regulatory bodies say so. They also require a serously hefty whack to set them off individually, and the packaging has been expressly designed to prevent this from happening in the first place. I suggest that you try to copy what the air transport regulatory authorities did in testing the packaging, and take a pack of regular primers, lay it down on a flat surface, and hit it.

Repeatedly.

Unless one goes off.

Unless you have nothing better to do, this will occupy you for some time, since the mavens in the FAA and other testing agencies showed that they were unable to do it. Taking out a single primer, on the other hand, and hitting it, is not beyond the wit of man, but quite why an otherwise sensible person would want to do it has passed me by.

I'm only a simple old soldier, and never was any kind of a mathematician, so I'll let you work out how much impact it needs to set one off. Hint - a one ounce firing pin travelling at about 500mph impacting on an area of the primer about the same size as this dot . Moreoever, each and every packet of primers I've ever seen has a notice on it that advises you - for safety reasons - to keep them stored in their original packaging.

Why ignore it?

Propellants are safely stored on the display shelves of many dealers. They are kept away from DIRECT sources of heat - they are flammable substances after all. I've never seen anybody walking around a propellant storage area with a naked flame, just to prove the makers packaging is safe. Storage of BP has its own strict set of rules - after all, it IS a class 1 explosive substance - but accidents involving correctly stored BP? Nope again.

Cases?

Well, if you can think of a way in which an empty case can cause you harm, please let us know - I've got a couple of thousand of them in ex-Walls icecream containers.

OTOH, you could look on the internet for 'accidents involving home reloading', and see what you come up with.

Those of us who reload do so for the best of reasons - often two or three reasons combined.

1. To make ammunition that is exactly tailored to our guns, and

2. for the economy of doing so, although that may be slightly misleading, since reloaders often shoot far more than buyers of factory ammunition.

3. Add to that the sheer fun of engaging in a technical subject that has tangible results every time you squeeze the trigger, and you'll see why most of the rest of shooting world, as well as those 40-something lucky persons in the Republic of Ireland who are 'licensed' to do it, do it.

As you can see, the whole 'safety deal' ends up relying on the degree of self-preservation of the reloader. Sure, you CAN have an accident, but you'd really have to work pretty hard at providing all the unlikely scenarios by which it might take place.

Remember that unlike genius, which has finite limits, stupidity has none, and it would not amaze me to learn that somebody, somewhere, has half-filled a bucket with a mixture of BP and NC propellants, garnished it it with the contents of a couple of packs of primers and a hundred bullets, stood back far enough to hopefully preserve his eyebrows, and tossed a lit blowlamp into the whole lot, just to see what happens next.

tac
President of the Vintage Classic Rifle Association of Ireland [www.vcrai.com]