April, 23 2013, 11:28am EDT
NRA's Long-Running Opposition to Regulation of Common Explosives Threatens Public Safety While Benefiting Its Gun Industry "Corporate Partners" New VPC Report Reveals
Since the 1970s, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has worked to block federal regulation--including background checks on transfers--of black and smokeless powder.
WASHINGTON
Since the 1970s, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has worked to block federal regulation--including background checks on transfers--of black and smokeless powder. The NRA's decades-long campaign against regulating these two common explosives today benefits the gun industry "corporate partners" that help fund the organization according to the new Violence Policy Center (VPC) report, Time Bomb: How the NRA Blocked the Regulation of Black and Smokeless Powder to the Benefit of Its Gun Industry "Corporate Partners" Today (https://www.vpc.org/studies/timebomb.pdf). According to numerous news reports, the explosive devices used in the Boston bombing most likely utilized black or smokeless powder.
Kristen Rand, VPC legislative director and study co-author states, "For decades, the NRA has effectively blocked public safety measures in order to protect the profits of the gun industry. In the early 1970s, when Congress acted to regulate explosives in the wake of bombings by radical groups, the NRA rushed in to protect the interests of manufacturers of black and smokeless powder. The NRA's actions to stop the regulation of black and smokeless powder is a time bomb that threatens all Americans."
How the NRA Blocked the Regulation of Black and Smokeless Powder
The VPC study details how in 1970, in response to a wave of bombings throughout the country, Congress, with the support of the Nixon Administration, moved to consolidate and increase federal regulatory oversight of the explosives industry and its products, including black and smokeless powder. Despite the clear threat posed by black and smokeless powder, the NRA--joined by other pro-gun organizations such as the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF)--worked to ensure that resulting legislation contained an exemption for "small arms ammunition and components thereof" which applied to most smokeless powder as well as to "black powder in quantities not to exceed five pounds." In 1974, over the protestations of the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), the NRA successfully lobbied to increase the amount of black powder exempted from federal regulation from five pounds to 50 pounds.
The continuing danger posed by the exemptions for smokeless and black powder has been noted by experts. In a review of the implementation of the "Safe Explosives Act" (SEA) passed in the wake of the September 11th attacks, the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Justice identified "several issues related to the regulation and safeguarding of explosives in the United States that while not addressed in the SEA nonetheless are relevant to public safety." Among the issues identified was ATF's limited authority over smokeless and black powder. The report noted, "Because black powder is relatively inexpensive (between $5 and $15 per pound), it is the most common explosive used in pipe bombs. Additionally, the ATF does not regulate smokeless powder, a more expensive explosive used in the manufacturing of firearms ammunition."
ATF acknowledges the threat to public safety posed by the unregulated sale of black powder and smokeless powder. In a letter sent to Federal Firearms Licensees in July 2004, the agency wrote: "As you may know, explosives are frequently used by terrorists to cause destruction. Some of the products you may carry in your inventory, such as black powder and smokeless powder, could be used in acts of violence. While smokeless powder and black powder generally are exempt from the Federal explosives laws, these products are often used to make illegal or 'improvised explosives devices' and pipe bombs." The letter included a flyer headlined "BE AWARE FOR AMERICA....." and set out tips to help dealers identify suspicious buyers.
Examples of NRA Leaders and NRA "Corporate Partners" That Benefit From the Sale of Smokeless or Black Powder
Today, the NRA's longstanding efforts in opposition to the regulation of smokeless and black powder have financially benefited its self-described "corporate partners," including its top donor, Larry Potterfield of MidwayUSA and board member Pete Brownell of Brownells. [For more information on the NRA's Ring of Freedom "Corporate Partners Program" for the gun industry, please see the 2011 Violence Policy Center report Blood Money: How the Gun Industry Bankrolls the NRA, https://www.vpc.org/studies/bloodmoney.pdf.] MidwayUSA stocks "[j]ust about everything for shooting, reloading, gunsmithing and hunting." Through its "Round-Up" program MidwayUSA has channeled nearly $10 million to the NRA and is the "official sponsor" of the NRA's annual meeting which begins on May 3 in Houston. As a "corporate partner," Brownells, the "world's largest supplier of firearms accessories and gunsmithing tools," has contributed between $1 million and $4.9 million to the NRA. Additional NRA gun industry "corporate partners" that sell smokeless or black powder and help fund the organization include: Cabela's; Graf & Sons, Inc.; Ellett Brothers; Hodgdon Powder Company; Natchez Shooters Supplies; Sinclair International, Inc.; and, Widener's Reloading and Shooting Supply, Inc.
NRA leaders and corporate partners also benefit from the sale of components that rely on the use of smokeless or black powder such as reloading equipment and accessories, bullets, and brass casings. For example, NRA Board Member Robert Nosler is the chairman and president of Nosler, Inc., which sells bullets for the handloading of ammunition. Nosler, Inc. has contributed between $250,000 and $499,000 to the NRA as a "corporate partner." Hornady Manufacturing Company, headed by NRA Board Member Steve Hornady, sells a wide range of ammunition components and reloading equipment. Hornady Manufacturing Company has contributed between $25,000 and $49,000 to the NRA as a "corporate partner." NRA Board Member Ronnie Barrett is the owner of Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, which manufactures primarily 50 caliber sniper rifles and sells brass casings and bullets. Barrett Firearms Manufacturing has contributed between $50,000 and $99,000 to the NRA as a "corporate partner." "Corporate partner" Dillon Precision Products, Inc. sells a wide range of reloading equipment and has contributed between $500,000 and $999,000 to the NRA. "Corporate partner" Cheaper Than Dirt sells bullets, ammunition casings, and other reloading materials and has contributed between $100,000 and $249,000 to the NRA.
The Violence Policy Center (VPC) works to stop gun death and injury through research, education, advocacy, and collaboration. Founded in 1988 by Executive Director Josh Sugarmann, a native of Newtown, Connecticut, the VPC informs the public about the impact of gun violence on their daily lives, exposes the profit-driven marketing and lobbying activities of the firearms industry and gun lobby, offers unique technical expertise to policymakers, organizations, and advocates on the federal, state, and local levels, and works for policy changes that save lives. The VPC has a long and proven record of policy successes on the federal, state, and local levels, leading the National Rifle Association to acknowledge us as "the most effective ... anti-gun rabble-rouser in Washington."
LATEST NEWS
Trump Ripped for 'Absurdly Low' and 'Racist' Refugee Cap Prioritizing White South Africans
"Let's call this what it is—white supremacy disguised as refugee policy," said the head of the Haitian Bridge Alliance.
Oct 30, 2025
After months of reporting, President Donald Trump's administration on Thursday officially announced that it is restricting the number of refugees for this fiscal year to 7,500, with most spots going to white South Africans—a policy swiftly denounced by human rights advocates and Democrats in Congress.
"This decision doesn't just lower the refugee admissions ceiling. It lowers our moral standing," said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge. "For more than four decades, the US refugee program has been a lifeline for families fleeing war, persecution, and repression. At a time of crisis in countries ranging from Afghanistan to Venezuela to Sudan and beyond, concentrating the vast majority of admissions on one group undermines the program's purpose as well as its credibility."
The Trump administration's notice in the Federal Register doesn't mention any groups besides Afrikaners, white descendants of Europeans who subjected South Africa's majority Black population to a system of apartheid for decades. Multiple rich Trump backers—including Tesla CEO Elon Musk, venture capitalist David Sacks, and Palantir founder Peter Thiel—spent time in the country during those years.
The 7,500 cap, initially reported earlier this month, is a significant drop from both the 40,000 limit that was previously reported as under consideration by the Republican administration, and the more than 100,000 allowed under former Democratic President Joe Biden.
Four congressional Democrats who serve as ranking members on related committees—Reps. Jamie Raskin (Md.) and Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), along with Sens. Dick Durbin (Ill.) and Alex Padilla (Calif.)—issued a joint statement condemning the new cap, which they noted is "an astonishing 94% cut over last year and the lowest level in our nation's history."
"To add insult to injury, the administration is skipping over the tens of thousands of refugees who have been waiting in line for years in dire circumstances to come to the United States, and it is instead prioritizing a single privileged racial group—white South African Afrikaners—for these severely limited slots," they said. "This bizarre presidential determination is not only morally indefensible, it is illegal and invalid."
The four lawmakers continued:
The administration has brazenly ignored the statutory requirement to consult with the House and Senate Judiciary Committees before setting the annual refugee admissions ceiling. That process exists to ensure that decisions of such great consequence reflect our nation's values, our humanitarian commitments, and the rule of law, not the racial preferences or political whims of any one president.
The reason for this evasion is evident: The administration knows it cannot defend its egregious policy before Congress or the American people. While nearly 130,000 vetted, approved refugees—men, women, and children fleeing persecution and violence—wait in limbo after being promised a chance at safety, Donald Trump is looking to turn refugee admissions into another political giveaway for his pet projects and infatuations.
We reject this announcement as both unlawful and contrary to America's longstanding commitment to offer refuge to the persecuted. To twist our refugee policy into a partisan straightjacket is to betray both our legal obligations and our moral identity as a nation.
"Let's call this what it is—white supremacy disguised as refugee policy," declared Guerline Jozef, executive director of Haitian Bridge Alliance. "At a time when Black refugees from Haiti, Sudan, the Congo, and Cameroon are drowning at sea, languishing in detention, or being deported to death, the US government has decided to open its arms to those who already enjoy global privilege. This is not just immoral—it's anti-Blackness codified into federal policy."
This week alone, Hurricane Melissa killed more than 20 people in Haiti, and health officials said that the Rapid Support Forces, which are fighting against Sudan's government, killed over 1,500 people—including more than 460 systematically slaughtered at a maternity hospital—in the city of el-Fasher.
"We reject the idea that whiteness equates to worthiness," Jozef said of Trump's new refugee plan. She also took aim at the president's broader anti-immigrant policy, which has included deporting hundreds of people to El Salvador's so-called Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT).
"From Del Rio to Lampedusa, Black migrants and other immigrants of color have been criminalized, beaten, caged, and disappeared in CECOT camp in El Salvador—while their humanity is debated like a policy variable," she said. "This moment demands our humanity, our resistance, not silence."
Amy Fischer, Amnesty International USA's director for refugee and migrant rights, also tied Thursday's announcement to the broader agenda of the president—who, during his first term, faced global condemnation for policies including the forcible separation of families at the southern border.
"Setting this cap at such an absurdly low number and prioritizing white Afrikaners is a racist move that will turn the US's back on tens of thousands of people around the world who are fleeing persecution, violence, and human rights abuses," said Fischer. "Refugees have a human right to protection, and the international community—including the United States—has a responsibility to uphold that right."
"This announcement is yet another attack by the Trump administration on refugees and immigrants, showing disregard for international systems meant to protect human rights," she added. "The Trump administration must reverse course and ensure a fair, humane, and rights-based refugee admissions determination."
The announcement came just days after Trump's nominee to be ambassador to South Africa, far-right media critic Brent Bozell, faced intense criticism for refusing to say whether he would support or oppose repealing laws allowing Black Americans to vote during his Senate confirmation hearing.
Keep ReadingShow Less
North Carolina GOP Official Uses 'Connections With the Trump Admin' to Threaten ProPublica Journalist
“I’m sure you’re aware of our connections with the Trump administration,” said the North Carolina GOP's communications director. “I would strongly suggest dropping this story.”
Oct 30, 2025
Republican Party officials are now using their "connections" to the Trump administration to threaten journalists into dropping critical coverage.
That's what Doug Bock Clark, a reporter for ProPublica, recently discovered as he worked on a feature-length story on the rise of Paul Newby, the Republican chief justice of North Carolina's Supreme Court, who has become one of the most quietly influential jurists in the nation.
The piece published Thursday examines how Newby, a born-again Christian who was elected to the bench in 2004, believes he was called by God to exact what he calls "biblical justice."
Over the past two decades, Clark wrote that Newby has "turned his perch atop North Carolina’s Supreme Court into an instrument of political power" and "driven changes that have reverberated well beyond the borders of his state."
Newby's most significant contribution has been the landmark decision that legalized partisan gerrymandering in North Carolina, a state that had long had some of the strongest laws in the country against partisan redistricting.
The change led the state's Republican-controlled Legislature to draw up wildly slanted maps that netted the GOP an additional six seats in the US House of Representatives in 2024, handing the party a national trifecta at the beginning of President Donald Trump's second term, which has allowed him to wield extraordinary power almost totally free of oversight from Congress.
It's just one of the ways, Clark said, that "Newby has provided a blueprint for conservatives to seize most of the nation’s state supreme courts, which have increasingly become the final word on abortion rights, LGBTQ+ rights and voting rights."
The report drew from more than 70 interviews with those who know Newby professionally and personally. But he was unable to get in contact with Newby himself.
"I reached out to Newby multiple times during the course of my reporting and was even escorted out of a judicial conference while trying to interview him," Clark wrote on social media. "The court’s communications director and media team also didn’t respond to detailed questions."
When Clark attempted to contact Newby's daughter for comment, he instead received an ominous message from that aforementioned communications director, Matt Mercer.
Mercer ranted that ProPublica was waging a “jihad” against “NC Republicans,” which would “not be met with dignifying any comments whatsoever.”
He continued: “I’m sure you’re aware of our connections with the Trump administration, and I’m sure they would be interested in this matter. I would strongly suggest dropping this story.”
As Clark pointed out, "He bolded and underlined 'strongly,' in case we missed his point."
After the story, which made note of Mercer's threat, was published, Mercer then doubled down on social media, urging Trump to "feed ProPublica to the USAID wood chipper," referencing the president's near-total stripping of funds from the foreign aid agency.
Trump has issued an executive order slashing federal funds for media organizations supported by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, like NPR and PBS, in response to critical coverage of his administration. But it's not entirely clear how he would actually go about doing such a thing to ProPublica, which does not receive government dollars but instead subsists on private grants and donations.
At any rate, Mercer's messages were widely perceived as a not-so-veiled attempt to coerce ProPublica into ceasing its inquiries.
Travis Fain, a freelance reporter who previously worked for Raleigh's NBC News affiliate, WRAL, expressed disbelief at Mercer's belligerence on social media: "Well, there you go," he said. "The North Carolina Republican Party officially threatens journalists now."
Wiley Nickel, the former Democratic US House representative for North Carolina's 13th District, lamented that it was "not normal" for a party official to "threaten ProPublica with retaliation from Trump" for writing a profile about another GOP official.
Despite the threats, Clark says "ProPublica persisted" with the story that Mercer "warned [it] not to tell."
"I'm always amazed when grown-ups with jobs say things like this to journalists," said Jessica Huseman, a former ProPublica reporter. "Like, do you think that's gonna do anything but make us more eager to publish the story?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Platner Mobilizes Mainers to Fight Billionaire-Funded Attack on Absentee Voting
"Right-wing billionaire Leonard Leo is pouring money into Question 1, which would shred absentee voting in Maine. But our movement is fighting back."
Oct 30, 2025
Graham Platner isn't on the ballot until next year, but while campaigning across Maine for the June Democratic primary, the US Senate candidate is rallying opposition to Question 1, which state voters are set to decide on in Tuesday's election.
If approved, the ballot measure would "eliminate two days of absentee voting, prohibit requests for absentee ballots by phone or family members, end ongoing absentee voter status for seniors and people with disabilities, ban prepaid postage on absentee ballot return envelopes, limit the number of drop boxes, require voters to show certain photo ID before voting, and make other changes" to state elections.
Platner is running against multiple Democrats, including term-limited Gov. Janet Mills, for the opportunity to try to oust longtime Republican Sen. Susan Collins by railing against the oligarchy and prioritizing the needs of the working class. On Thursday, he released a 30-second animated advertisement against Question 1.
"I work on the water, so November can be a very busy time of year for me," Platner, a military veteran who now works as an oyster farmer and harbormaster, explains in the ad. "That's why sometimes, I vote absentee."
Platner then takes aim at Leonard Leo, an island-dwelling "right-wing billionaire" spending big on Question 1. The candidate didn't name Leo in the ad, but made clear in a related social media post that he was the target.
As Maurice T. Cunningham, a retired politics professor who authored Dark Money and the Politics of School Privatization, wrote for CentralMaine.com earlier this month, "Concealed behind layers of dark money fronts funding Question 1 are the far-right billionaires and Christian nationalists who fueled the rise of President Donald Trump and MAGA." Among them is Leo, the lawyer and activist who masterminded Trump's effort to shift the federal judiciary to the right. He has a house on Mount Desert Island, known for Acadia National Park and Bar Harbor.
"He wants to make it harder for students to vote, for members of our tribes to vote, harder for those who serve our country. Question 1 will make it harder for all of us to vote," Platner warns in the ad. "Don't let a right-wing billionaire on Mount Desert Island screw up absentee voting in Maine. Vote no on Question 1."
As the Maine People's Alliance Beacon reported Thursday, "Platner will also host a 'Save Absentee Voting' concert and rally featuring Griffin William Sherry and The Ballroom Thieves in Portland on Sunday, November 2 at 1:00 pm at the State Theatre."
Last year, more than 370,000 Mainers sent in absentee ballots. This year, early voter turnout "is outpacing the last off-year election," with over 76,000 voters having turned in ballots as of Tuesday afternoon, according to the Maine Morning Star.
Organizations from across Maine "who believe that fair, open, and accessible elections are the cornerstone of our democracy" have come together to form the Save Maine Absentee Voting Coalition. They include the state chapters of the ACLU, AFL-CIO, and League of Women Voters as well as Maine Conservation Voters, Maine Education Association, Maine Equal Justice, Maine People's Alliance, Natural Resources Council of Maine, Planned Parenthood Maine Action Fund, and more.
"This measure isn't right for Maine," says the coalition's website. "We all want our elections to be as secure as possible. Instead of making it harder for Maine citizens to vote and tying the hands of our town clerks, we should focus on giving state and local elections officials the resources they need."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular