walkingprop Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Hi... Can anyone help clarify where the (UK) law draws its line between legal preparation of pyrotechnic effects and illegal manufacture of explosive devices? Obviously combining chemicals to form an explosive mixture is illegal (as with imported binaries). At the other end of the spectrum, wrapping some nitrocellulose round an igniter (perhaps with some touch paper and a smoke pellet, for those who recognise the exercise) and placing that into a suitable container is something which - unless I'm mistaken - causes no legal problems. So where does preparing an effect become an 'act of manufacture'? Presumably it's not as simple as whether chemicals are combined to alter the explosive behaviour, since titanium powder can be added to a nitrocellulose hand flash ok (again, unless I'm mistaken). But as I understand it anything that could risk changing the behaviour of an off-the-shelf device is something Not To Be Done. Does it depend on the materials involved, for example? Can anyone shed any light and/or provide any suitable references? Many thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Can anyone help clarify where the (UK) law draws its line between legal preparation of pyrotechnic effects and illegal manufacture of explosive devices? SNIP So where does preparing an effect become an 'act of manufacture'? Presumably it's not as simple as whether chemicals are combined to alter the explosive behaviour, since titanium powder can be added to a nitrocellulose hand flash ok (again, unless I'm mistaken). But as I understand it anything that could risk changing the behaviour of an off-the-shelf device is something Not To Be Done. Does it depend on the materials involved, for example? Can anyone shed any light and/or provide any suitable references? From the proposed MSER regulations... “manufacture†includes — (a) in relation to explosive articles, their repair, modification, disassembly or unmaking;(b) in relation to explosive substances, their reprocessing, modification or adaptation;but it does not include the packing, unpacking, re-packing, labelling, testing of explosives or the division of an amount of explosives stored in bulk into smaller amounts and the placing of those smaller amounts into containers; however, it goes on to say...Explosives not to be manufactured without a licence9.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), no person shall manufacture explosives unless he holds a licence for that manufacture and complies with the conditions of that licence.(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to — SNIP (f) the preparation, assembly and fusing of explosives commissioned for use in theatrical, television or cinematic special effects; So, take for example the smoke pellet exercise you refer to, which might have taken place in a south coast town last week, this would fall under the 'fusing' exemption. It's the same exemption from manufacture that makes firework displays possible. The MSER proposals can be found here. [EDIT]Yes, I know MSER is yet to become law but I couldn't find my copy of the 1875 act and MSER gives a quite concise definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkingprop Posted March 31, 2005 Author Share Posted March 31, 2005 Many thanks for your help, Brian! Is there a specific reason, then, that stuff like preparing binary mixtures wouldn't be considered "preparation" under exemption (f)? Or is it just one of those cases where to cover your back (and stay safe) you should only do things likely to conform to the regulations under a legal 'reasonableness' test, and that mixing compounds is too risky to be considered reasonable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Is there a specific reason, then, that stuff like preparing binary mixtures wouldn't be considered "preparation" under exemption (f)? Or is it just one of those cases where to cover your back (and stay safe) you should only do things likely to conform to the regulations under a legal 'reasonableness' test, and that mixing compounds is too risky to be considered reasonable? As they stand, each component of a binary powder system are not considered as explosives. However, once you mix them the end result is an explosive; you have manufactured an explosive. I guess that's why they don't like them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.