Powder limits

**A-R** · 12-02-2016, 16:14

Originally Posted by Andycap

Cool.

Well 2016 - 2003 = 13 years, unless you use government maths, then it is last week *facepalm*

A friend who works in the explosives section, and who helped to draft parts of the new act, tells me they are just as frustrated as we are. The regs have been submitted to the gubbermunt a few times already, and every time, after a long delay, they find something they want changed...

**Andycap** · 12-02-2016, 16:19

Originally Posted by A-R

A friend who works in the explosives section, and who helped to draft parts of the new act, tells me they are just as frustrated as we are. The regs have been submitted to the gubbermunt a few times already, and every time, after a long delay, they find something they want changed...

Then why dont they just jump in and give letters to the DSS guys?

Surely they are the ones that police the system, so if they make exceptions then everyone is happy

**A-R** · 12-02-2016, 16:25

Originally Posted by Andycap

Then why dont they just jump in and give letters to the DSS guys?

Surely they are the ones that police the system, so if they make exceptions then everyone is happy

Simply because the Regs for the new act are not law yet. We will be stuck with the old act (and regs) untill the new regs are promulgated.

**Andycap** · 12-02-2016, 16:34

Originally Posted by A-R

Simply because the Regs for the new act are not law yet. We will be stuck with the old act (and regs) untill the new regs are promulgated.

Maybe your guys can talk to the Gosa guys....pressure from both sides?

**carlp** · 14-02-2016, 13:26

Originally Posted by Andycap

Maybe your guys can talk to the Gosa guys....pressure from both sides?

This is a good idea.

**ravingDIODE** · 22-05-2019, 13:07

Thread Necro

- I don't like duplicate posts.

Any news yet regarding proposed ammendments and being able to apply for a permit to store more powder than the 2.4kg limit?

**Cockroach** · 22-05-2019, 16:38

Originally Posted by ravingDIODE

Thread Necro

- I don't like duplicate posts.

Any news yet regarding proposed ammendments and being able to apply for a permit to store more powder than the 2.4kg limit?

Nada

**Rodrage** · 24-05-2019, 14:51

Perhaps purely on a legal question, it may be asked whether or not the Minister is allowed to make regulations dealing specifically with the amounts that individuals may possess. Sec 33 confers on the minister the power to make regulations concerning various matters, but nowhere is it stipulated that he is empowered to deal with such amounts that have been subsequently promulgated.
To my jaundiced eye, there are only possibly three subsections dealing with his powers in this regard,viz.
"The Minister may make regulations regarding-
b)the use ...of explosives:
e) the storage of explosives:
s) any other matter which must be regulated for the protection of life and property against explosions or for the achievement of the objects of this Act."
If one can argue that the minister is acting ultra vires (beyond the scope of his powers conferred on him by the Act) in fixing an amount which may be possessed by individuals, the limits would be nul and void. For a start, I certainly don't believe he is allowed to fix amounts which can be bought at one time in the regulations. Neither has anything to do with the use or storage of powder.
Subsection s) deals with other matters which MUST be regulated- irrelevant here.

If one considers that in a boarding house with 50 licensed firearm boarders each may currently possess at least 500g powder each, 25 kg could be legally stored in that boarding house. That quantity is not considered a safety risk. In fact if they all had enough firearm licences each and could store/possess 2.4kg each at the "current " rate, there would be 125 kg of powder stored in that one premises. 100 boarders =250 kg.
This would still constitute a legal amount on those premises.
It can't be argued then that the amount of powder stored in a single spot constitutes a risk according to this. So from a safety point of view,is there any need to draw a distinction between one occupant of the premises possessing 25 kg of powder or the above household/premises having that amount.Or even 250 kg.
If there is no need to draw the distinction, why is the minister permitted to fix limits.
The stated purpose of the act is to "provide for the control of explosives" and by fixing a totally arbitrary amount each person may possess does not appear to have any basis if one looks at the above example.
This is either irrational or ultra vires. There are other ways to provide sufficient control of explosives that are dealt with in the Act. If one looks at Sec 10 in the Act (as opposed to the regulations) dealing with Keeping, storage possession or transportation of explosives, a permit may be issued by an inspector where the explosive is stored otherwise than in "an explosive manufacturing site or an explosive magazine." The inspector can stipulate the conditions for the possession, storage etc., it does not need to be done by the Minister in a regulation.There is no reason why under the Act (Sec 10), a permit can't be obtained from an Inspector on an ad hoc basis after a normal motivated application which would be subject to review/appeal if refused.
The Chief of the explosives unit does not need to wait for any regulations because the Act makes provision for it anyway.
Sorry, Rant over.

**Paul** · 24-05-2019, 14:59

Originally Posted by Rodrage

Perhaps purely on a legal question, it may be asked whether or not the Minister is allowed to make regulations dealing specifically with the amounts that individuals may possess. Sec 33 confers on the minister the power to make regulations concerning various matters, but nowhere is it stipulated that he is empowered to deal with such amounts that have been subsequently promulgated.
To my jaundiced eye, there are only possibly three subsections dealing with his powers in this regard,viz.
"The Minister may make regulations regarding-
b)the use ...of explosives:
e) the storage of explosives:
s) any other matter which must be regulated for the protection of life and property against explosions or for the achievement of the objects of this Act."
If one can argue that the minister is acting ultra vires (beyond the scope of his powers conferred on him by the Act) in fixing an amount which may be possessed by individuals, the limits would be nul and void. For a start, I certainly don't believe he is allowed to fix amounts which can be bought at one time in the regulations. Neither has anything to do with the use or storage of powder.
Subsection s) deals with other matters which MUST be regulated- irrelevant here.

If one considers that in a boarding house with 50 licensed firearm boarders each may currently possess at least 500g powder each, 25 kg could be legally stored in that boarding house. That quantity is not considered a safety risk. In fact if they all had enough firearm licences each and could store/possess 2.4kg each at the "current " rate, there would be 125 kg of powder stored in that one premises. 100 boarders =250 kg.
This would still constitute a legal amount on those premises.
It can't be argued then that the amount of powder stored in a single spot constitutes a risk according to this. So from a safety point of view,is there any need to draw a distinction between one occupant of the premises possessing 25 kg of powder or the above household/premises having that amount.Or even 250 kg.
If there is no need to draw the distinction, why is the minister permitted to fix limits.
The stated purpose of the act is to "provide for the control of explosives" and by fixing a totally arbitrary amount each person may possess does not appear to have any basis if one looks at the above example.
This is either irrational or ultra vires. There are other ways to provide sufficient control of explosives that are dealt with in the Act. If one looks at Sec 10 in the Act (as opposed to the regulations) dealing with Keeping, storage possession or transportation of explosives, a permit may be issued by an inspector where the explosive is stored otherwise than in "an explosive manufacturing site or an explosive magazine." The inspector can stipulate the conditions for the possession, storage etc., it does not need to be done by the Minister in a regulation.There is no reason why under the Act (Sec 10), a permit can't be obtained from an Inspector on an ad hoc basis after a normal motivated application which would be subject to review/appeal if refused.
The Chief of the explosives unit does not need to wait for any regulations because the Act makes provision for it anyway.
Sorry, Rant over.

Very interesting.

I take it from the above that you have a legal background?

Can I, or preferably you (to avoid me mangling your message) put this to the GOSA legal team?

**Gleock** · 24-05-2019, 15:39

Originally Posted by Rodrage

Perhaps purely on a legal question, it may be asked whether or not the Minister is allowed to make regulations dealing specifically with the amounts that individuals may possess. Sec 33 confers on the minister the power to make regulations concerning various matters, but nowhere is it stipulated that he is empowered to deal with such amounts that have been subsequently promulgated.
To my jaundiced eye, there are only possibly three subsections dealing with his powers in this regard,viz.
"The Minister may make regulations regarding-
b)the use ...of explosives:
e) the storage of explosives:
s) any other matter which must be regulated for the protection of life and property against explosions or for the achievement of the objects of this Act."
If one can argue that the minister is acting ultra vires (beyond the scope of his powers conferred on him by the Act) in fixing an amount which may be possessed by individuals, the limits would be nul and void. For a start, I certainly don't believe he is allowed to fix amounts which can be bought at one time in the regulations. Neither has anything to do with the use or storage of powder.
Subsection s) deals with other matters which MUST be regulated- irrelevant here.

If one considers that in a boarding house with 50 licensed firearm boarders each may currently possess at least 500g powder each, 25 kg could be legally stored in that boarding house. That quantity is not considered a safety risk. In fact if they all had enough firearm licences each and could store/possess 2.4kg each at the "current " rate, there would be 125 kg of powder stored in that one premises. 100 boarders =250 kg.
This would still constitute a legal amount on those premises.
It can't be argued then that the amount of powder stored in a single spot constitutes a risk according to this. So from a safety point of view,is there any need to draw a distinction between one occupant of the premises possessing 25 kg of powder or the above household/premises having that amount.Or even 250 kg.
If there is no need to draw the distinction, why is the minister permitted to fix limits.
The stated purpose of the act is to "provide for the control of explosives" and by fixing a totally arbitrary amount each person may possess does not appear to have any basis if one looks at the above example.
This is either irrational or ultra vires. There are other ways to provide sufficient control of explosives that are dealt with in the Act. If one looks at Sec 10 in the Act (as opposed to the regulations) dealing with Keeping, storage possession or transportation of explosives, a permit may be issued by an inspector where the explosive is stored otherwise than in "an explosive manufacturing site or an explosive magazine." The inspector can stipulate the conditions for the possession, storage etc., it does not need to be done by the Minister in a regulation.There is no reason why under the Act (Sec 10), a permit can't be obtained from an Inspector on an ad hoc basis after a normal motivated application which would be subject to review/appeal if refused.
The Chief of the explosives unit does not need to wait for any regulations because the Act makes provision for it anyway.
Sorry, Rant over.

I interpret it differently, the max amount is per premises and not per person.
If they intended it to be per person, they would have worded it as such.

(2) A person contemplated in sub-regulation (l), may keep on his or her
premises smokeless powder, provided that the net mass of smokeless
28 No.27820 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 22 JULY 2005
powder does not exceed 2,5 kilograms.