Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)

10. I believe you are thinking of a legislative push to put taggants in ammonium nitrate fertilizer

Reply to blm (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 16, 2013, 04:22 PM

Apr 2013

It wasn't jut the GOP against that - Senators representing agricultural interests, e.g. Tom Harkin of Iowa, were opposed because it would have created onerous recordkeeping requirements and added significantly to the cost of common agricultural chemicals.

The NRA opposed putting taggants in cannister smokeless powders used by reloaders because it might have altered the performance characteristics of the powders, which can be critical in precision shooting. Or dangerous.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

33 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

delete [View all] cthulu2016 Apr 2013 OP

IIRC, we have the ability to put taggants in material used for explosives blm Apr 2013 #1

I believe you are thinking of a legislative push to put taggants in ammonium nitrate fertilizer slackmaster Apr 2013 #10

The NRA believes the word arms in the 2nd Amendment to also mean bombs. Lint Head Apr 2013 #2

Don't know if they're easy to get, but they seem easy to make. JaneyVee Apr 2013 #3

Or because you can... Bay Boy Apr 2013 #5

Probably less advanced, but more effective cthulu2016 Apr 2013 #7

I doubt commercial or military "explosives" were used in the Boston attack ..... nt rdharma Apr 2013 #4

I would guess commercial explosives were and military explosives were not cthulu2016 Apr 2013 #6

Black powder can make a powerful bomb hack89 Apr 2013 #11

No. It wasn't smokeless reloading powder. rdharma Apr 2013 #13

So what do you think it was? Black powder? ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #20

Cordite? rdharma Apr 2013 #26

That was what the ER doc was quoted as saying ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #30

You can buy big cans of gunpowder at your friendly neighborhood gun shop backscatter712 Apr 2013 #14

Black powder and Pryodex are sold in much smaller quantities than smokeless powders ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #19

How much do you need? I googled, and saw it in 1 lb cans. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #22

Black powder or smokeless? ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #23

Googling again - the federal laws kick in at 50 pounds. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #24

No, commercial explosives are pretty strictly regulated. slackmaster Apr 2013 #8

If the explosive used in Boston was "black powder," as some think, be aware of... Eleanors38 Apr 2013 #9

This does not appear to be commercial explosives at this time ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #12

Smokeless powder? rdharma Apr 2013 #15

Given that it is in a compression vessel, smokeless would work as well as ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #18

Smokeless is expensive and actually doesn't work as well as black powder for that type of device slackmaster Apr 2013 #16

My WAG is based on the amount of smoke and low level of blast ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #17

Smokeless is much easier to get on large quantities ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #21

That is because of bizarre shipping regulations. BP is regarded as a more hazardous explosive. slackmaster Apr 2013 #25

Oh, back off! rdharma Apr 2013 #27

My mission is to inform slackmaster Apr 2013 #28

Riiiiiight! rdharma Apr 2013 #29

I informed you that my mission is to inform slackmaster Apr 2013 #33

As I said, its my WAG based on what is in the media ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #31

OK, professor...... rdharma Apr 2013 #32