Fertilizer Registration

[JohnRich 4]

News:

Panel approves bill creating fertilizer registry at DHS

A Homeland Security Prevention of Nuclear and Biological Attacks Subcommittee Wednesday approved a bill that would regulate production and sale of ammonium nitrate, which is typically used by farmers as a fertilizer, but could be used to create a bomb.

The measure calls for any individual who produces, sells or buys ammonium nitrate to register with the Homeland Security Department.

An amendment added record-keeping requirements, including requiring sellers to record the purchaser's drivers' license number or other photo-identification and the amount of ammonium nitrate purchased. Sellers would have to keep these records for at least three years.

The legislation calls for the Homeland Security Secretary to monitor and audit the records periodically. Purchasers, producers or sellers found to be in violation would be fined up to $50,000 per violation.

Source

I feel more safe already.

Be prepared to show your driver's license when you make your spring lawn fertilizer purchase.

Of course, the terrorists will just use a fake I.D., or steal it. But hey, what's important is that the innocent people be inconvenienced, and honest buisnessmen be fined $50k for simple record-keeping errors.

[shropshire 0]

And dont ever dare to sneeze in public or someone may turn you in as a Bio-Terrorist - Welcome to a brave new century....

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[MarkF 0]

Quote

News:

Panel approves bill creating fertilizer registry at DHS


I feel more safe already.

We've got that bullshit here and let me tell you that farmers are NOT happy. We've got to keep fertilizer under lock and key, we have had to have police criminal records checks (which we have to pay for) just so we can purchase the stuff AND we have to account for every kilogram of it. It's no surprise that the price has gone up about a buck a bag as a direct effect of the new handling, purchasing and auditing requirements.

Farmers everywhere use shit-loads of super and diesel, the costs of which have risen a LOT over the last couple of years. Can we pass on the costs - hell no. Grain buyers will take as much protein and as little moisture as they can get for the lowest cost possible. These rules WILL price some smaller farmers out of the market and off their blocks.

For example - this year I had a good crop - not great but a good yield with good protein and not quite low enough moisture to make the Aust. Hard One grade. Over the last four years I've had no farm income, in fact we lost a good deal of money. This year I'll gross around $4 million for the crop and by the time I take out costs I'll have enough left over for just about minimum wages. (zero wages for the last 4 drought years) An extra $0.50 / bag for super would've left us with less than the poverty line for income. We are, in size, an above average to large cereal crop holding at 14.5k hectares (~36k acres) and have kept our losses to a minimum and we're struggling. How the hell a small blocky is to survive on the land is well beyond me.

Ooroo
Mark F...

[jumpinfarmer 0]

Well at least I'm not alone.

We had a great corn crop but with the price of fuel and fertilizer for next year turning a profit doesn't look promising in 06.

[ROK 0]

IMO

This is just a government answer to placate the public and have them believe that something substanial is being done to protect Americans. There are a lot of other "over the counter" items that will produce an explosion very nicely.

Registering fertilizer has a certain amount of humor to it too.

[Guest]

There is only one peculiar variety of nitrate fertilizer that makes things go boom. It's a very pure type (10-0-0? I can't remember), and it's easy enough to introduce inert components (or just moisture) to inhibit its ability to absorb fuel oil or nitromethane, and no amount of lower-order ignition will make it produce the kind of rapid decomposition that high-order explosives need in order to be effective.

This bill is just another example of guvmint overkill; RIFWs don't need fertilizer when they can easily get their filthy, ass-wiping hands on Semtex, RDX or any other explosive that will do the job with a whole lot less mass (McVeigh needed a Ryder truck to haul his ANFO bombs to the Murrah building - it wouldn't all fit in a car).

And I don't recall those planes being hijacked on 9/11 by cowards armed with bombs, or even firearms. They were cowards armed with box-cutters. Guess we'll be banning those too.

mh

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[LouDiamond 1]

I wouldn't fret too much as the only ones I can see having to do this is the ones using fertilizer thats at least 33 1/3 % Ammonium nitrate. Which very well could be a good deal of farmers out there but the average Joe shouldn't be effected. This really isn't anything new as this talk has been kicked around for some years now. There is even a chance that taggants will be added to fertilizer that meets the AN % rate so that it can be traced if it is used in the production of an explosive device.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Guest]

Scott,

I wasn't going to mention the taggants initiatives because they're a different, although not separate, issue.

It's just clueless politicians not knowing the difference between fertilizers that can be used for ANFO (or Nitromethane) explosives, and those that cannot.

mh

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Scott,

I wasn't going to mention the taggants initiatives because they're a different, although not separate, issue.

It's just clueless politicians not knowing the difference between fertilizers that can be used for ANFO (or Nitromethane) explosives, and those that cannot.

mh

Chalk up another entry for the "It's the government, it doesn't have to make sense" file.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.