black powder safety

[Scota4570]

California Health and Safety Code Section 12101-12112

12102.  This chapter does not apply to any possession or use of 20
pounds or less of smokeless powder, or one pound or less of black
sporting powder, provided that:
   (a) Smokeless powder is intended only for hand loading of small
arms ammunition of .75 caliber or less.
   (b) Black sporting powder is intended for loading of small arms or
small arms ammunition of .75 caliber or less.
   (c) All such powder is for private use and not for resale, and, in
the case of black sporting powder, there shall be no gift, delivery,
or other disposition to another person.
   (d) The storage, use and handling of such smokeless and black
powder conforms to rules, regulations, or ordinances of authorities
having jurisdiction for fire prevention and suppression in the area
of such storage, use, and handling of such explosives.

[Kermit]

Yup, so you can have one pound or less of black powder, the way I read it. This law is dumb, and widely ignored. But God and a really good lawyer help you if you should ever need to make an insurance claim and they can demonstrate possession of 1.1 pounds of a legally restricted explosive.

[Daryl]

Using black powder is safer than golf those most don't believe it.  As long as one doesn't get in a hurry, smoke, become distracted or forgets basic safety, shooting black is about as safe as it gets. 

Many of the "gun just went off" incidents have a real cause, touched trigger, cocked, cap on nipple, over charging or something really stupid.  Most of us have had our own little "incidents", maybe "tattooing", or even a broken ramrod in the hand but the serious ones are still uncommon.  We who have much experience know the rules and have common sense.  But occasionally we all slip up a bit.  The horror stories that are spread around are quite rare - which is amazing considering some of the idiots that "give it a try" who can't be trusted with anything sharp much less a firearm - and this rarity puts them in the spotlight.  Our hobby and our supplies are quite safe. 

I'm quite sure you and Wade had hit the nail, smack dab on the head, Hanshi

[Kermit]

I don't think it's any of us that create the restrictions on BP, but the few idiots and criminals who use it for pipe bombs and other such fun little experiments and terror devices, in spite of the fact that it's been things like fertilizer and airliners that have caused the real terror.

[Virginiarifleman]

Several years ago at a shooting match I witnessed a competitor loose a thumb from a discharge while ramming down a ball. after investigating the range office found the gent had his flintlock hammer on full cock while loading. and the force caused the hammer to fall on a ...........get this...........closed frizzen.

[bob in the woods]

Now, back in my youth..when kids were allowed to play with firecrackers, run with scissors, eat glue, have BB gun wars in the back lane …ride standing up in the back of pick ups, and not to forget….no seat belts along with hard metal dashboards..
etc  …the point is, a kid grew up with experience. If one of those kids had been at the range, he would have looked over and nonchalantly said " you're going to blow your thumb off ..better stop "     But now, "safety" is legislated, so the average person thinks all is OK no matter what they do. After all, it's not their fault.     Better pass some more laws .

[Dphariss]

  I've been reading some old posts on this forum about accidents happening with black powder, and the one which troubles me is about an triple-loaded
gun which went off when someone tried to pull a ball without soaking the powder first, and it apparently went off when he rammed it hard with the puller.  This got me to thinking about some shooters' habit of throwing the ramrod down onto the rammed charge a number of times, getting it to go ping ping ping.  I think this is unwise because it would tend to deform the ball, resulting in loss of accuracy.  But is there also a chance of the load going off from the compression caused by hammering the load so forcefully?  I see a number of shooters doing this at the loading table of my BP club, and it sort of scares me.  I mark my ramrod so I know the ball is correctly seated, and never give it any additional shock after that.  With a flinter, it might be best to not compress the powder that much anyway, so ignition is more thorough.  I feel like standing far away from the guys who hammer their balls.

Its very unlikely that the powder went off due to impact. There are a host of possibilities. I would avoid the guys pounding on the loads cause they don't know what they are doing.
Moderate, consistent compression will give the best accuracy. Light pressure I would not do. The powder does not have to be "loose" to burn right and likely will be less consistent loose than moderately compressed.
Dan

[Chris Treichel]

If you follow the gun safety rules you should be safe.  That and dont hang out with fools crazyer than yourself.

Only time I have really been suprised was once when I had a flint failure, brushed out the pan on loaded gun, installed a new flint and with an empty pan tried to see if it would spark (with the gun pointed downrange). It not only sparked but went off as well.

This story are they reading too much about fire pistons and imagining that you could create that much pressure?

[moleeyes36]

If you follow the gun safety rules you should be safe.  That and dont hang out with fools crazyer than yourself.

Only time I have really been suprised was once when I had a flint failure, brushed out the pan on loaded gun, installed a new flint and with an empty pan tried to see if it would spark (with the gun pointed downrange). It not only sparked but went off as well.

This story are they reading too much about fire pistons and imagining that you could create that much pressure?

What Chris experienced is not unusual at all.  It's not too hard to get a loaded flintlock to fire without powder in the pan, especially with a good sparking lock.  This is very true if the vent hole is a little large. 

This is also the case if you have a vent liner that is coned either inside or outside so that the main charge is close to the pan.  This is a good thing for quick and dependable ignition and I put Chambers' White Lightning vents in all my guns.  But folks should keep in mind that it's a lot easier than you'd think for a spark to enter the vent hole and ignite the main charge. 

A lot of state game laws define unloaded muzzle loaders as percussion guns without a cap on the nipple or flintlocks without powder in the pan.  Consequently, a lot of people transport them in vehicles that way thinking they're completely safe.  My advice is when hunting and transporting a flintlock with a charge in it in a vehicle, empty the pan then leave the frizzen open and completely lower the cock.  Sticking a feather in the vent isn't a bad plan either. 

I might be a little sensitive about gun safety from being a Range Safety Officer for so long, but the saying, "It's better to be safe than sorry" is very true. 

Mole Eyes

[WadePatton]

Blocking the vent with quill or pick or hairpin, bubblegum, works for me.  (tangy!)

I'll repeat myself somewhat by saying that I don't think anyone who has ever BUILT an actual fire-piston will EVER think that M/L are "going off" that way.  And that "incidents" appear to be very much more likely where "have to wipe" and/or complicated breeches exist (smoldering crud theory "SCT").

That learning to load such that fouling never has to be wiped (aside from the loading patch) minimizes the potential of the barrel to hold any embers, at all.  Safer, faster, more consistent/accurate, what's not to love?

[Daryl]

Its very unlikely that the powder went off due to impact. There are a host of possibilities. I would avoid the guys pounding on the loads cause they don't know what they are doing.
Moderate, consistent compression will give the best accuracy. Light pressure I would not do. The powder does not have to be "loose" to burn right and likely will be less consistent loose than moderately compressed.
Dan

As to throwing the rod onto the powder, that was the way the military in the States taught their men to load their muskets - 3 times the rod was thrown onto the ball to make sure it was seated it their 'fouled' bores. When the European "Tige" and "Delvinge" patent rifles were purchased by the US Government, the 'old rule about throwing the rod onto the powder to seat the ball' worked well with both of these systems, as the "Tige", with it's internal post and the "Delvinge" with it's inner 'step' made the ball obdurate into the rifling with that previous loading drill.

Unfortunately some people today still load in this manner, that of throwing the rod onto the ball - perhaps a holdover from the military re-inactors when they still used loading rods and followed the old loading drill?

We have such a person who shoots with us - no matter which gun he's shooting, he throws the rod onto the ball until the rod bounces.  He's done this with close to or over 10,000 rounds on each of his guns - probably 3 or 4 of them anyway. That's a lot of 'throws' with never having a" charge go off of itself" to coin a phrase of the 1800's. Even if the charge did 'manifest itself', the muzzle is pointed away from him and he would not be hit by the rod or ball.  The 'going off of itself' was usually due to an ember in the breech and usually happened when loading a cannon without swabbing it - or when loading some of the early breechloaders (Sharps) with nitrated paper ctgs.

[Vomitus]

  A tight ball patch bore combo with a lube saturated patch eliminates worry of embers,no need to blow down the barrel.(flintlock)Cap shooters,dunno.

[Jerry V Lape]

Heinz, I agree my friend was ignorant of muzzleloading procedures and safe practices.  Several of us intervened and brought him to proper instruction and lots of mentoring by trained instructors.  And the instructors went to the event the following years to supervise the firing points.  Identifiable powder was used.  There have been no problems in the following years.  Approximately 1000 students participate each year. 

But the mystery still persists - how could the middle load of three be the one that fired?  The top load had been pulled just prior to this.  The bottom load had to be pulled as well after the middle one fired.  He did not know to soak the load first. We set him up with an air compressor for any load removal required but it has not been necessary except for a couple of dry balls.  If I did not know the guy as well as I do I would be thinking B.S. on his account.  But he has enough ego control to share exactly what happened and admit to his lack of knowledge as well.