flare disposal (again)

[Talulah]

Explosives aren't necessarily things that explode under normal conditions. Pyrotechnics use explosive mixtures to burn - that is, they use mixtures that contain both fuel and oxidizer. Under the wrong conditions, they can explode - of course, they are carefully designed not to! But put a flare in a steel pipe, arrange a means of setting it off and seal the ends, and you'd have a pretty good pipe-bomb, I reckon. Not that I intend to experiment with it!

But you have had to take additional steps.
Similar to collecting flares in itself is not illegal but collecting flares with intent to make an explosive device would be. If you went on to make the explosive device that would also be illegal.

 

[winsbury]

Please quote legislation.
It keeps coming up that it's illegal. It isn't.

RYA document: http://www.rya.org.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/cruising/Web%20Documents/Regulations%20and%20Safety/TEP%20FAQs.pdf

"What’s to stop me throwing my flares overboard or setting them off?
It is an offence to dump pyrotechnics at non licensed sites and at sea therefore
out of date flares should be landed ashore as soon as possible after the date of
expiry for safe disposal.
It is also an offence to fire distress - signal pyrotechnics on land,
in harbour or at sea for either testing purposes, practice or as fireworks
(whether the pyrotechnics are out of date or not)"

This also references an MCA document but the URL is broken so not sure which one its referring to.

 

[Talulah]

RYA document: http://www.rya.org.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/cruising/Web%20Documents/Regulations%20and%20Safety/TEP%20FAQs.pdf

"What’s to stop me throwing my flares overboard or setting them off?
It is an offence to dump pyrotechnics at non licensed sites and at sea therefore
out of date flares should be landed ashore as soon as possible after the date of
expiry for safe disposal.
It is also an offence to fire distress - signal pyrotechnics on land,
in harbour or at sea for either testing purposes, practice or as fireworks
(whether the pyrotechnics are out of date or not)"

This also references an MCA document but the URL is broken so not sure which one its referring to.

I've read the page on the RYA site but it's just a generic statement.
Bit like saying it's illegal to keep a vehicle on a road without a tax disc. The devil is in the detail and that's why I try and get people to drill down to the legislation and not just repeat generalisations they've seen elsewhere.
People then usually go off talking about what is right/wrong and side step.
If it was an offence there would be a charge of "Mr xxx you are charged that on the yyyy you did discharge a flare contary to zzzz of the hhh act."
What you will find is the above statement relating to football matches (see below) .
Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol etc)
Act 1985
–2A. —(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he has an article or substance to which this section applies in his possession—
–(a) at any time during the period of a designated sporting event when he is in any area of a designated sports ground from which the event may be directly viewed, or
–(b) while entering or trying to enter a designated sports ground at any time during the period of a designated sporting event at the ground.
•(3) This section applies to any article or substance whose main purpose is the emission of a flare for purposes of illuminating or signalling (as opposed to igniting or heating) or the emission of smoke or a visible gas; and in particular it applies to distress flares, fog signals, …., but not to matches, cigarette lighters or heaters
•(4) This section also applies to any article which is a firework

If there was legislation prohibiting the discharge of a flare full stop (with exceptions for alerting distress etc) you wouldn't need the above legislation.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I've read the page on the RYA site but it's just a generic statement.
Bit like saying it's illegal to keep a vehicle on a road without a tax disc. The devil is in the detail and that's why I try and get people to drill down to the legislation and not just repeat generalisations they've seen elsewhere.
People then usually go off talking about what is right/wrong and side step.
If it was an offence there would be a charge of "Mr xxx you are charged that on the yyyy you did discharge a flare contary to zzzz of the hhh act."
What you will find is the above statement relating to football matches (see below) .
Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol etc)
Act 1985
–2A. —(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he has an article or substance to which this section applies in his possession—
–(a) at any time during the period of a designated sporting event when he is in any area of a designated sports ground from which the event may be directly viewed, or
–(b) while entering or trying to enter a designated sports ground at any time during the period of a designated sporting event at the ground.
•(3) This section applies to any article or substance whose main purpose is the emission of a flare for purposes of illuminating or signalling (as opposed to igniting or heating) or the emission of smoke or a visible gas; and in particular it applies to distress flares, fog signals, …., but not to matches, cigarette lighters or heaters
•(4) This section also applies to any article which is a firework

If there was legislation prohibiting the discharge of a flare full stop (with exceptions for alerting distress etc) you wouldn't need the above legislation.

The charge would be under the Explosives Acts - you don't have a license to discharge flares except in a distress situation as defined by the Merchant Shipping Act, as it isn't covered by the Fireworks Act.

The legislation you quote relates to possession of a flare or firework in certain circumstances, not to letting it off, which would be illegal anywhere except in the specific situations covered by the Merchant Shipping Act and the Fireworks Act.

So, someone who is found in possession of a flare at a football match is guilty of an offence, regardless of whether they let it off or not. If they actually discharge it, they are probably ALSO guilty of offenses under the Explosives Act. The intent of the act is clearly to allow the authorities to pre-empt dangerous use of flares at football matches. But if you are in possession of flares anywhere BUT at a football match, you are not breaking the law - but if you let it off (except under defined circumstances) you are.

 

[Talulah]

In your statements above you treat it as fact that it would be an offence against the Explosives Act.
I disagree.
So my challenge would be to formulate a charge using that Act.
I will then dis-prove it.
This is what happens in Court of course. People are charged with an offence and the defence show that no offence has been committed. i.e. No case to answer.

The first thing you would have to prove is that the flare is an explosive or intended to be used in some way as an explosive. Sometimes it comes down to a matter of opinion and that's where expert witnesses come in.
If a flare is not an explosive in itself but has been modified/adapted to be used as an explosive or the possession of it was with intent to use it as an explosive then you're on to a winner. If not you'll fail at the first hurdle. The act defines definition of Explosive so for the charge to work you have to prove that the flare falls within the definition of being an explosive in its own right. i.e. exclude all bits relating to risk and/or intent.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

In your statements above you treat it as fact that it would be an offence against the Explosives Act.
I disagree.
So my challenge would be to formulate a charge using that Act.
I will then dis-prove it.
This is what happens in Court of course. People are charged with an offence and the defence show that no offence has been committed. i.e. No case to answer.

The first thing you would have to prove is that the flare is an explosive or intended to be used in some way as an explosive. Sometimes it comes down to a matter of opinion and that's where expert witnesses come in.
If a flare is not an explosive in itself but has been modified/adapted to be used as an explosive or the possession of it was with intent to use it as an explosive then you're on to a winner. If not you'll fail at the first hurdle. (The act defines definition of Explosive.)

Flares are made with explosives, as are fireworks - they are functionally very similar. Trying to claim a flare is not made of explosives is whistling in the wind; I am quite sure that the manufacturers would provide the relevant expert witness whenever asked. It would also (as I noted above) be very easy to adapt a flare to make a bomb. IANAL, but I think this applies if there was any uncertainty about whether they were explosive:

Section 9 of the 1883 Act contains a useful extension to the definition of "explosive substance" to include "any materials for making any explosive substance; also any apparatus, machine, implement ,or materials used, or intended to be used, or adapted for causing ... an explosion in or with any explosive substance; also any part of any such apparatus... " This would enable a prosecution to proceed in respect of a collection of chemicals suitable for the production of explosives. It is not clear, however, that it would extend to the possession of information, such as a manual or internet download (In these circumstances, the Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division may consider charges under Section 57 0r 58 of Terrorism Act 2000).

 

[Talulah]

Flares are made with explosives, as are fireworks - they are functionally very similar. Trying to claim a flare is not made of explosives is whistling in the wind; I am quite sure that the manufacturers would provide the relevant expert witness whenever asked. It would also (as I noted above) be very easy to adapt a flare to make a bomb. IANAL, but I think this applies if there was any uncertainty about whether they were explosive:

Section 9 of the 1883 Act contains a useful extension to the definition of "explosive substance" to include "any materials for making any explosive substance; also any apparatus, machine, implement ,or materials used, or intended to be used, or adapted for causing ... an explosion in or with any explosive substance; also any part of any such apparatus... " This would enable a prosecution to proceed in respect of a collection of chemicals suitable for the production of explosives. It is not clear, however, that it would extend to the possession of information, such as a manual or internet download (In these circumstances, the Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division may consider charges under Section 57 0r 58 of Terrorism Act 2000).

Well you are kind of proving my point. Flares can be adapted in the same way I can adapt petrol to make a petrol bomb but setting fire to petrol is not in itself an offence.
The material inside a flare is not explosive. It is rapid burn. The same material can be adapted to make an explosive device but it still brings us back to square one. Discharging a flare as it stands is not setting off an explosive device and ipso facto is not an offence in itself. It requires more.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Well you are kind of proving my point. Flares can be adapted in the same way I can adapt petrol to make a petrol bomb but setting fire to petrol is not in itself an offence.
The material inside a flare is not explosive. It is rapid burn. The same material can be adapted to make an explosive device but it still brings us back to square one. Discharging a flare as it stands is not setting off an explosive device and ipso facto is not an offence in itself. It requires more.

The difference between a pyrotechnic and an explosive is merely one of packaging and ignition; the range of compositions is similar. The gunpowder in a banger is exactly the same as the stuff in a coloured fountain; just differently packaged. Dynamite burns safely if lit with a flame; it only explodes when used with a detonator. Does that mean that Dynamite is not an explosive unless it comes with a detonator? Or Gunpowder is not an explosive if it isn't in a strong tube? No, it doesn't - and I speak as someone who was once responsible for the management of a dynamite magazine, with appropriate licensing under the Explosives Act. The stuff in a flare is an explosive; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrotechnic_composition for a list of ingredients and compositions. All of the compositions listed are potentially explosive mixtures containing both fuel and oxidizer; they wouldn't function as pyrotechnics if they weren't. Place those mixtures in an enclosed space and use a detonator and the vast majority will explode very happily; perhaps not very efficiently, but still an explosion.

Your analogy with petrol doesn't fly; petrol on it's own does not contain an oxidizer, and so is not explosive unless vapourized in air. Inflammable, yes - explosive, no. Flour will explode if mixed with air, as will coal dust and many others. The point is that all require a lot of air to make them explosive; they are not explosive on their own.

The stuff in a flare does contain it's own oxidizer, and so can burn in a sealed container without air. That property on its own is sufficient to move it into a different league; for example, as I mentioned before it means that ANY pyrotechnic can be used to make a pipe bomb. As I said above, once you've got a pyrotechnic/explosive, it's all in the packaging and method of ignition; there is no real distinction between the two.

 

[Talulah]

I don't disagree with what you have written above. But a flare as it stands is not an explosive.
Now this is in 'my opinion'.
I also accept there are different views on this and you and I and many others would argue back and forth on that point. This is what keeps barristers in work.
To this date I do not know of anyone, ever who has been charged with discharging a flare other than covered by other offences. All of these other offences requiring something else like intent/risk/actual harm etc or those with a specific offence under the Merchant Shipping Act or Sporting Events Act. Hence, I can only conclude that 'others' have also decided that the chances of a successful prosecution under the Explosives Act would be doubtful.
It is interesting to note that Fireworks are specifically mentioned in the Firearms Act (Discharge of firework in a public place) is an offence and if I was a prosecutor I would be arguing that if someone set off a flare in public in such a manner that it could be treated as a firework then it should be treated as a firework. But that is in a public place. So again 'in my opinion' I can set off flares all day long in my back garden without commiting an offence unless I committed some other crime in the process.

 

[auditdata]

I have loved reading the above posts.
It has brought me to two conclusions.
1. Out of date flares are a bugger to dispose of.
2. Lawyers will never go hungry

 

[Talulah]

I have loved reading the above posts.
It has brought me to two conclusions.
1. Out of date flares are a bugger to dispose of.
2. Lawyers will never go hungry

It's the sort of debate we rarely see on these forums and it's interesting to get contributions from a wide range of people who each bring their own profession and experience without resorting to insults.
I hope I haven't spoken too soon.

 

[auditdata]

It's the sort of debate we rarely see on these forums and it's interesting to get contributions from a wide range of people who each bring their own profession and experience without resorting to insults.
I hope I haven't spoken too soon.

I think that is why I enjoyed it, factual, conjectural, informative and all done in the best possible taste. Lets hope anchor threads can aspire to this level of debate

 

[AntarcticPilot]

It's the sort of debate we rarely see on these forums and it's interesting to get contributions from a wide range of people who each bring their own profession and experience without resorting to insults.
I hope I haven't spoken too soon.

I've enjoyed it too - glad we were able to glad to debate the issues!

 

[djyacht]

How times change - here`s a quote from my Skipper`s Pocketbook (Pub. 2001): "Out of date flares may still work and can be kept on board marked `reserve`"

 

[winsbury]

How times change - here`s a quote from my Skipper`s Pocketbook (Pub. 2001): "Out of date flares may still work and can be kept on board marked `reserve`"

I considered doing exactly that as I initially thought it must surely be better to have an out of date one than none at all should the need arise however after reading particularly about some tests on old rocket flares and how dramatically some these have misfired I changed my mind.

I imagine there will be a significant margin for error built into all these safety related things. Although not directly related, my EPIRB self activated recently and to disable it I had to dismantle and disconnect the batteries - I took the opportunity to do a little detective work to see how the huge prices for replacement batteries might be justified. It turned out out there were absolutely bog standard lithium cells inside ( total value about £20 ) which had been welded into small packs of three cells. The manufacturers website confirmed that each cell is rated for 7 years shelf life, the unit is retailed with 4 year operational life and distributed with a 5 year life (to allow the retailer a full year to turn around the stock.)

Now, the problem is that if one accepts that a flare wont normally cease to work on the exact expiry date, when is it reasonable to suppose that it become significantly unlikey to work as advertised or becomes hazardous ?... This data is clearly commercially sensitive and retained by the manufacturer but I also suspect that this marks a difference between brands - a good one from PW versus some cheapy model from China probably might have very different 'decay' characteristics after the use by date or may indeed be identical. It would certainly be interesting to know the details so buying decisions can be based on real performance data rather than one's 'feel' for the quality of a brand or simply judge on price.

 

[halb]

I have just got off the phone to my local police firearms dept, they informed me that it is an offence to transport out of date flares on land and it might be on board, as once flares have passed date they come under land laws and out of the maritime law.
To cut a long story short, they are going to meet me to collect them from the boat, so if anyone needs to dispose of flares get onto the fuz, this will entail a round trip for them of 140 miles!!!

 

[cygnusv]

I have just got off the phone to my local police firearms dept, they informed me that it is an offence to transport out of date flares on land and it might be on board, as once flares have passed date they come under land laws and out of the maritime law.
To cut a long story short, they are going to meet me to collect them from the boat, so if anyone needs to dispose of flares get onto the fuz, this will entail a round trip for them of 140 miles!!!

I'd be interested to know whether the Police will 'charge' for this service. I've been told that to get shot of ours I will have to do a 160 mile round trip to the east coast, which sounds illegal.

 

[halb]

Hi, no mention of cost was made. Yes from what I was told it IS illegal to own on board or to transport on land out of date flares, talk about being between a rock and a had place, dammed if you don't and dammed if you do!!! It would be interesting to be hauled into court and get the opinion of the beaks, typical modern laws.

 

[halb]

For information, Devon & Cornwall police collected my old flares this afternoon, no charge, no hassle. The officer said they would rather collect than have them delivered to a police station and also to ensure that very dangerous items are kept from falling into the wrong hands!!

 

[KINGFISHER 9]

So ... do out of date flares float ... or do they sink?