Hand loading

[shugie]

According to the latest NRA magazine, the chairmen of clubs that have safe shooter cards issued by the NRA will need to certify that club members who hand load are safe to do so. I can't see how this is going to work, some chairman may not themselves handload, and so have no idea of what is or is not safe.

And even if they do, how are they going to assess if someone is safe, are they going to check their reloading setup and ask them to demonstrate loading a round of every calibre they shoot? For most safety assessments, the assessor is required to be qualified to show that they are able to make an accurate assessment, if a chairman says to the best of their knowledge someone is safe tor reload, what happens if something does go pear shaped?

I can understand the thinking in some respects, but is this the start of a process by the NRA to ban hand loaded ammunition from being used at Bisley?

[Vossie]

I think it is more like they want to control the training of it, so a course would have to be undertaken run by them at cost for handloading to be added to SSC.
It's looked more about the money.

[dromia]

Aye the NRA has moved on from taking the shafting that the anti gun lobby dishes out to delivering their own shaftings to UK shooters.

I hope this latest money making extortion helps Mr Mercer meet his income targets and enhances the poor mans performance related pay.

Remember the NRA isn't here for you, you are here for the NRA.

[The Gun Pimp]

To know if someone is a competent and safe handloader you would surely have to watch them do it. But even then, you have no control over the powder quantity or bullet weight they may subsequently use.
I've seen everyone shoot for whom I've approved a Shooter Certification Card but never seen anyone handload - except for benchrest shooters loading on the point.

[Geek]

This is just going to open up a can of worms!

What if someone is deemed safe to handload and there is an 'incident' with what they have loaded, will someone be looking at who certified them safe?

[shugie]

This is just going to open up a can of worms!

What if someone is deemed safe to handload and there is an 'incident' with what they have loaded, will someone be looking at who certified them safe?

That's my concern, I think I would have to look very carefully at how the signing off works. And if I am the chairman, and I hand load, do I sign myself off?

I think this idea is doomed to failure, and I think it's because there have been a couple of instances where homeloads have caused serious injury, but with all the training in the world, people will still make mistakes. It won't matter if they've been on the NRA reloading course, if such a thing actually exists, if they aren't paying quite enough attention to one round despite having loaded thousands without a problem, and that round creates problems.

[artiglio]

My take on it.

There have been incident/s involving hand loaded ammunition on MOD ranges, the MOD have raised concerns.
NRA has to do something in response.
The first stage was the questionnaire.
The NRA now needs to come up with a system/process/procedure to satisfy the MOD.
( similar process was used for HME, was put forward approved and adopted)
An additional competency on the SSC is the obvious option, for which there needs to be some sortmof verification. If as suggested a club chairman could vouch for a shooters proficiency then all well and good, but there would need to be a paper trail of some sort to justify the approval. If a club feels that such a move is difficult or leaves it or individuals liable in any waythen another option needs to be available, at which point a course/assessment from the governing body would seem sensible ( syllabus, teaching, proficency etc recorded and verified).
It will obviously not stop someone making a mistake or doing something they perhaps should not ( as having taken lessons and passing a driving test doesn’t stop someone breaking the rulesmof the road and being a danger to other road users), but it will show that the shooter should have known better and that any cause of an incident intentional or accidental lies with them alone.

Or would people prefer that the MOD takes the lead?

[Alpha1]

My take on it.

There have been incident/s involving hand loaded ammunition on MOD ranges, the MOD have raised concerns.
NRA has to do something in response.
The first stage was the questionnaire.
The NRA now needs to come up with a system/process/procedure to satisfy the MOD.
( similar process was used for HME, was put forward approved and adopted)
An additional competency on the SSC is the obvious option, for which there needs to be some sortmof verification. If as suggested a club chairman could vouch for a shooters proficiency then all well and good, but there would need to be a paper trail of some sort to justify the approval. If a club feels that such a move is difficult or leaves it or individuals liable in any waythen another option needs to be available, at which point a course/assessment from the governing body would seem sensible ( syllabus, teaching, proficency etc recorded and verified).
It will obviously not stop someone making a mistake or doing something they perhaps should not ( as having taken lessons and passing a driving test doesn’t stop someone breaking the rulesmof the road and being a danger to other road users), but it will show that the shooter should have known better and that any cause of an incident intentional or accidental lies with them alone.

Or would people prefer that the MOD takes the lead?

I don't think you are going to get any Club Chairman to sign of any of there members as safe re loaders my Club chairman certainly wont. My local Club will not have anything to do with Reloading training courses because of the legal implications if one of its trainees get it wrong.

[dromia]

Aye the MOD thing twill no doubt bring forth another NRA scam just like the RCO thing. Two courses for the same thing to appease the MOD and doing nothing to improve safety whilst at the same time doubling the income from the RCO courses for the NRA.

It may be MOD driven but to the NRA it is another cash cow, all this nonsense is just adding to the pressure on shooters to pack it all in. More and more conditions to shoot on MOD ranges which access to is getting less and less along with poor targetry, surly unhelpful wardens and limited range access.

I have all but given up on MOD ranges as it is such a poor quality experience.

[mag41uk]

At least artiglo sees the bigger picture. The NRA wont be making money from it.
No one is being forced to pay for a handloading course unless you want to.
The idea is that some form of tuition/assessment can be done at club level following guidelines. Yet to be decided AFAIK.
Club secs are already signing your scc`s which allows you access to MOD ranges with rifles you are all competent with. You all are aren't you?
This has already just about been done to death on a previous thread.
The MOD dont give a toss about handloading until 3 finger Pete blows his gun up on one of their ranges.
Imagine the bleating " that useless NRA - why didnt they do something".
Some of the things written above are laughable.