§ 555.182. Exceptions.
208 words·~1 min read·
/us/cfr/t27/s§ 555.182·A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
It is an affirmative defense against any proceeding involving §§ 555.180 and 555.181 if the proponent proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the plastic explosive---
(a)Consisted of a small amount of plastic explosive intended for and utilized solely in lawful---
(1)Research, development, or testing of new or modified explosive materials;
(2)Training in explosives detection or development or testing of explosives detection equipment; or
(3)Forensic science purposes; or
(b)Was plastic explosive that, by April 24, 1999, will be or is incorporated in a military device within the territory of the United States and remains an integral part of such military device, or is intended to be, or is incorporated in, and remains an integral part of a military device that is intended to become, or has become, the property of any agency of the United States performing military or police functions (including any military reserve component) or the National Guard of any State, wherever such device is located. For purposes of this paragraph, the term "military device" includes, but is not restricted to, shells, bombs, projectiles, mines, missiles, rockets, shaped charges, grenades, perforators, and similar devices lawfully manufactured exclusively for military or police purposes. \[T.D. ATF-387, 62 FR 8377, Feb. 25, 1997\]
Connections1 cite this
Cited by 1 section
Citation graph
cites case law
§ 555.182
Exceptions.
C.F.R.×1
Cites 0Cited by 1 across 1 source