Tackling Gun Bans from a Different Angle

Tackling Gun Bans from a Different AngleHave you ever been to an indoor range?  Apparently, the Office of Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) thinks they are unhealthy.  At least that is the case for Illinois Gun Works, a gun store and indoor range.  OSHA issued 28 violations, and fines could be in excess of $100,000!  What did they cite?  13 different violations for lead exposure.  Again, have you ever been to an indoor range?  Of course there is lead exposure!  That is why many people who shoot often, or work at a range, such as instructors and RSOs have their blood checked regularly to monitor the lead levels, and why we don’t eat or drink on the line.

OSHA also cited noise exposure.  Again, it is a range, there is shooting.  That is why we wear hearing protection.  In OSHA’s 63 page report one of the recommendations suggest banning larger caliber handguns, such as 9mm Luger and .45 Colt and substituting .22LR.  They also recommended banning rifles and shotguns.  The citations continue with references to the electronic hearing protection instuctors were wearing as inadequate and calling for dual hearing protection (presumably in the ear protection covered by muffs).  Frankly, this could compromise safety on the range if an instructor can not communicate with a student because they have blocked out all sound.  We need to be able to hear something, included an emergency “Cease Fire” command!

The report cited the range for not providing safe eyewear for people with prescription lenses based on an instructor wearing their eyeglasses, without goggles over them, while standing close to a student and being subjected to potential injury from “hot, sharp, flying spent ammunition cartridges being ejected by the semi-automatic handguns.”  I will give them credit for correct terminology but not logic. As an instructor, I do not recommend that students wear their street glasses without over the glasses protective shooting glasses, but only because the brass could chip an expensive lens and the plastic is cheap!

The report further cited the range for not labeling each bottle of Hoppes #9 solvent as a “hazardous chemical”.  The range rents guns and therefore they must clean them, using what so many of us use on our guns.  Shouldn’t the markings on the bottle be sufficient?  They actually wanted the range to relabel the product.

The report goes on, but those are the highlights.  Just makes you want to open a shooting range, doesn’t it?  Could that be the idea?  Gun rights are under attack from multiple angles.  Banning sale of “Assault Weapons” (still waiting on the definition for that), limiting magazine capacity, banning on-line ammunition sales…This appears to all be part of the anti-gun movement that is prevalent in the current administration.  If you want to preserve your rights, you need to make your voice heard.  VOTE!

Lynne Finch-Charlesworth

Peritus Holdings, Inc., the owner of the Firearms Network, encourages a free and open exchange of ideas by guest blog posts to provided various educational perspectives on the topics within the firearms’ community. However, placement of any such blog post on any of our sites, including this blog post, is not an official endorsement of the good and service and any and all use and reliance by readers is at their sole discretion and should be independently evaluated.

Subscribe to Gun Shows Near You