Responsibilities of using dealer made hand loads

[whert]

First up, not accusing anyone of anything, Just asking hypothetically on some unconfirmed info...

Some guys will know a while ago at the Little River range in Victoria someone had a failure of some sort and ended up being struck by his bolt, taken away in an ambulance and the rest. I think he was shooting a .338 so there was plenty of *bang* when it went bad.

Apparently he was shooting hand loads done by his LGS.

When you reload your own ammo, if something happens it's on you.

Anyone know what the story is with something going wrong due to a mistake by the store? I just wonder if the guy's on his own with this or if the should would be obliged to cover some medical bills or whatever?

[1290]

As I understand dealers can only sell ammo, to load/reload they'll need a worksafe licence to manufacture explosives,

On this basis, and of course assuming the dealer does not possess the licence, the dealer is absolutely in the wrong.

I think it would be reasonable for the shooter to assume the dealer was legit in disposing of the loads, unless he was advised by the dealer otherwise...

Even if the dealer was properly licensed, if the ammo was faulty then is a defective product and the dealer would be liable

[scrolllock]

As I understand dealers can only sell ammo, to load/reload they'll need a worksafe licence to manufacture explosives,

I dunno about the worksafe side of things but there are definitely dealers doing it.

I was at one of my locals (probably 8-9 months ago now) in here in VIC and they were offering the service.

[Atter]

The problem with all this would be proving it (assuming some wrong doing by the loader).

Tough to prove the cartridge was at fault when it's burned up and everything, cartridge, rifle and all is in pieces.

[Norton]

This has been queried before, I've never know of someone taking a dealer to court though?

I'm not sure how you would prove the load was at fault after it was fired? Like Atter said, the evidence was just blasted away.

A dealer could easily argue that there was potentially a blockage in the barrel, weakness or flaw in the rifle, a few other things if you put your mind to it I expect.

[whert]

Hmm,

Sounds right about it being tough if not impossible to prove. Suck to be left alone on the receiving end then I guess if something went wrong

[paps]

I was at one of my locals (probably 8-9 months ago now) in here in VIC and they were offering the service.

That sounds like the worst job ever

Loading thousands of rounds all day long, I'd be crossed eyed by the end of a day.

[Grrzrr]

Loading thousands of rounds all day long, I'd be crossed eyed by the end of a day.

Buying hand loads isn't an idea I'm keen on, and that's why.

Churning them out all day long for other people would be very tedious.

Someone gets tired, careless for a second, makes a mistake or whatever...

They're not going to be the ones shooting it, you can't help but wonder if a little less care goes into the process when they expect to never seem them again.

[sneaker]

As I understand dealers can only sell ammo, to load/reload they'll need a worksafe licence to manufacture explosives

It wouldn't be covered by their worksafe license to store those large volumes of powder would it?

Maybe that covers reloading in some way?

[1290]

It wouldn't be covered by their worksafe license to store those large volumes of powder would it?

Maybe that covers reloading in some way?

There are different scales of explosive storage with different licensing requirements small scale is satisfied by longarm licence... loading/manufacturing of explosives is a different kettle of fish, addition requirements from worksafe...

[Baldrick314]

There are different scales of explosive storage with different licensing requirements small scale is satisfied by longarm licence... loading/manufacturing of explosives is a different kettle of fish, addition requirements from worksafe...

A while back my pistol club offered reloaded ammo at a bargain price ( I think it was about $20 a hundred and you got $5 back when you returned your brass) but it only lasted a little while before they got told to stop by FAR/ police. I assume it was for not having the correct licence to manufacture ammo.

[Westy]

Seems as if everyone here assumes it was the fault of the guy reloading the bullets?

It more than likely was the fault of the components used and then it becomes the fault of the manufacturer? Pigs Ass LOL! If they even look like admitting fault it would open up a can of worms going back decades.

Then you have to wonder about the quality of the rifle he was using and if it had any faults and if the owner new about the problems with the rifle?

This is a legal minefield but you could negotiate it. Even if some of the evidence has been blasted down the barrel of the rifle some crucial evidence should still exist in establishing were the fault lied!

That's my 2 cents anyway And if it is the dealers fault nail his Ass to the wall

[1290]

I recall a Victorian pistol dealer (who was convinced out of the industry back when the pistol revolution ensued) offered reloads.... you'll probably be lucky to find the same today from above the sales 'table'...

Anyway, the 338LM failure at Eagle Park could have been anything, I've never shot a Blah-za, but perhaps the bolt wasnt forward enough and the round fired, who know, perhaps there was a round stuck in the chamber, with another following, underload/no-load, overload?? Maybe someone will fill us in one day.

Too many ifs here....

[whert]

Seems as if everyone here assumes it was the fault of the guy reloading the bullets?

Not me. That was one of the things going through the grape vine and it just got me wondering.

I wasn't there, didn't see it, done know anything about the rifle or ammo.... Not assuming or accusing anyone of anything.

Just asking on the subject in general.

[bluerob]

I'm not sure as to how the law works in other states, however, the Civil Liability Act was created in NSW in a response to the Public Liability Insurance crisis that occurred a few years ago. Dirt bike parks closed down and anything that had a hint of risk, couldn't get insurance. On top of this, there's Trade Practice law, Firearms Laws, WH&S laws etc etc to also comply with.

Net result - get involved in something that is considered or known to be a dangerous pursuit, it's difficult to blame someone else.

If your an importer of anything into Australia, you are deemed to be the actual manufacturer. If you import a faulty product that causes personal injury or property damage, you can be liable for the damages.

If you are knowingly involved in a pursuit that is known to be risky, then it's a bit harder to prove negligence against the "wrong doer." I'm not a lawyer, but, for example did you know that getting hit with splash back can be considered being shot?

If someone purchases ammunition from a LGS and the ammunition causes an issue with your firearm, you have a claim against the ammo seller, no matter whether he assembled it or imported it, already made. Sure, they may try and say "not my problem," however, it is.

As with most things "legal," you can discuss issues for hours (sometimes years.....) on end and still not have a result.

[agentzero]

Net result - get involved in something that is considered or known to be a dangerous pursuit, it's difficult to blame someone else.

...

If someone purchases ammunition from a LGS and the ammunition causes an issue with your firearm, you have a claim against the ammo seller, no matter whether he assembled it or imported it, already made. Sure, they may try and say "not my problem," however, it is.

Unless I'm misunderstanding something that's a contradiction isn't it?

If you buy and use ammo, you know there is a potential danger, so does that remove responsibility from the dealer?

When you say 'get involved with something known to be dangerous', do you mean the dealer selling ammo? or the shooter using ammo?

Does that apply to consumers or only to suppliers/manufacturers/retailers?

I've gotten lost here...

[twoforty]

As with most things "legal," you can discuss issues for hours (sometimes years.....) on end and still not have a result.

Yep, usually the only winners in legal battles are the lawyers.

[AusC]

Too many ifs here....

Yep.

It will be interesting to see if anything feedback comes out from the guy involved on what he thinks happened.

I guess he's back on his feet by now? Haven't heard anything more but hope/assume he's ok...

[bluerob]

Unless I'm misunderstanding something that's a contradiction isn't it?

If you buy and use ammo, you know there is a potential danger, so does that remove responsibility from the dealer?

When you say 'get involved with something known to be dangerous', do you mean the dealer selling ammo? or the shooter using ammo?

Does that apply to consumers or only to suppliers/manufacturers/retailers?

I've gotten lost here...

That's the fun bit with the law. It contradicts itself in many areas.

If you lawfully reload and sell ammo and you blow up someone's gun, if you proved that you followed standard industry practices and safety precautions (your own experience and knowledge would be questioned) it would be difficult to lose, however, participating in an activity that is known to be dangerous (factory made ammo can blow a bolt out) could restrict the claim for damages/personal injury if it was proven that the reloading was done incorrectly.

The circumstances leading up "to the incident" would need to be fully considered.

I've read many stories over the years of mates loading for mates which resulted in tears, but, I'm yet to read of any actual law suit involving personal injury or damages following a reloading disaster.

I have wondered what would be the result of a mate loading for a mate and something goes drastically wrong (personal injury) and whether the Public liability Insurance that's included with membership of whatever shooting association your a member of would respond? If your running a commercial reloading business, I'd imagine that you would carry Public & Product Liability Insurance. Don't know that $10m would be enough cover though.

[twoforty]

The circumstances leading up "to the incident" would need to be fully considered.

I've read many stories over the years of mates loading for mates which resulted in tears, but, I'm yet to read of any actual law suit involving personal injury or damages following a reloading disaster.

Takes me back to the lawyers being the only winners.

Spend a few days 'investigating circumstances' and $300 and hour and then decide their isn't enough for legal proceedings.

Lose / lose.

[VICHunter]

Don't know that $10m would be enough cover though.

Is it $10m or $20m?

Could just be co-incidence but everything I've ever had between cards, houses, business, SSAA insurance etc. were all $20 million.

I assumed that $20m was 'the norm'.

[Lorgar]

Not sure there is such a thing as a normal figure?

I'm involved with a Tutoring business and I believe they required a $60m insurance policy to operate?

TBH I don't know what the conditions or coverage etc. were behind that. I wasn't involved with that side of things, just learned it through casual conversation.

I dunno?

[whert]

Sorry to revive old thread but thought this was interesting...

A bit more info on what apparently happened. This was recently posted on BlaserBuds who've been following it more closely and collecting info.

We have been following this behind the scenes for a bit. Now it seems that as much information is available, as may ever be available.

A Blaser blow up occurred in Australia.

The caliber was a 338 Lapua.

It was shot using ammo manufactured by a local, commercial enterprise.

The user had decided that his firearm did not extract as slick as he desired. He was using Hornady, One Shot case lube, in the chamber, and on the collet fingers between shots. Even after damage to collet fingers was observed, he continued to use the firearm, and lube between shots. Out of six shots, two case head separations occurred. The shooter continued to use the firearm. On the 7th shot, the firearm decided life was too short to put up with, and ended the shooter/blowupees range experience for that day. Not documented, but persons closer to the situation, have mentioned, that a Blaser barrel, in another caliber, this same shooter was treating with the case lube, had shown signs of similar bolt head finger damage, as the one that blew up.

The shooter/blowupee, has refused to allow Blaser access to rifle, and ammunition.

While this information has come from local, and reliable sources. Things sometimes get lost in translation, and while we feel this information to be fairly accurate, it may not be 100% exact. If we need to make corrections, or additions to this report, we will as needed.

All firearms have design parameters. Exceeding them, when the firearm is telling you, that you are doing so, is ill advised.

We will edit, and add information if things become clearer than what we have.

No further comments, or participation by members is needed at this point. This is posted for information only.

There you go, all the info we're going to get apparently. Will have to draw your conclusions from that...

[1290]

OMFG

He was using lube in the chamber??

Granted, this is interwebs third hand info, but if that was the case, then this is a good example for all shooters;

DO NOT LUBE the chamber, you chamber should be BONE DRY.

Why?

The expanding gases cause the brass to tend to move in a rearward direction(due to the slope of the case, think of the sidewall as a hill that a ball tends to roll down) and it is the FRICTION between the chamber and the case that reduces the force on the lugs...The amount of force that is transferred is proportional to the 'slopeyness' of the case, the Lapua is up there, which means this coupled with the higher pressure of the case is a recipe for disaster when you add a measure of lube....

Note a slopey case is generally easier on extraction, when there are extraction issues..... there ARE issues....

[jackles]

1290,

The expanding brass when fired grips the walls of the chamber does it? Grips with friction that is, partly stops some of the force applied to the bolt?

Interesting. Assumed all the force just went backwards onto the bolt face.

[1290]

1290,

The expanding brass when fired grips the walls of the chamber does it? Grips with friction that is, partly stops some of the force applied to the bolt?

Interesting. Assumed all the force just went backwards onto the bolt face.

Gripping the wall is correct, takes a great deal of load off the lugs.

The pressure is exerted in all directions out from the centre.

Think of a balloon, if you put it in a drinking glass, one with an opening larger than the base then blow it up - force is exerted on the base, the sides and the open end.

If you lubricated the sides then the balloon will tend to pop straight out once inflated or as inflating.

Your hand holding the balloon in the glass represents the bolt face; no lube on the glass - less effort to hold the balloon in.

[jackles]

Ýeah I got it.

Interesting stuff like I said. You don't think of the sides doing much to stop the backwards force of it.

Cool

[Kipper]

The shooter/blowupee, has refused to allow Blaser access to rifle, and ammunition.

That's a shame.

Not interested in blaming anyone either way but it would have been nice to know what made it go so wrong exactly.

[Old Fart]

Even after damage to collet fingers was observed, he continued to use the firearm, and lube between shots. Out of six shots, two case head separations occurred. The shooter continued to use the firearm.

If that's that the case, well... What else would you expect with repeat firing?

(assuming 'interwebs' quality info to be accurate)