A couple of questions on LEUP

You quoted two completely unrelated issues. Why? What exactly is your point? Are you saying that flashbulbs and pyrodex are regulated by ATF now? I've neither seen nor heard any evidence of that.

l

Or if you ask them, or read their website, or if you advertise yourself as a motor manufacturer or vendor, or if you're a "certifying authority". For an individual flyer, it's pretty easy to avoid contact with ATF unless you seek it out. For others, avoiding them is not so easy.

But that's irrelevant to what Greg asked about, which was, "why is it depending on who you ask".

I agree. ATF doesn't. Hence, "depending on who you ask".

The only advise I offered was to talk to the vendors about what _they_ require for purchase. If you think that's bad advice, tough.

The case isn't settled yet, so don't jump to conclusions. As you have been told many times, we've only gotten partial rulings so far, and the judge has contradicted his own rulings.

You're the one ignoring reality here. You pick the things you want to believe and ignore the rest.

LOL! Jerry, that's one of the stupidest things you've ever said. Here's a little reminder for you about how things work in the real world:

"Unfortunately, our system of laws is set up so that an agency's own interpretation of its regulations is valid unless you show it to be otherwise. You do that by convincing a court that the agency's interpretation is arbitrary, capricious or without authority." -- Harold Gilliam, Skylighter Inc.

2

You wish.

"Unfortunately, our system of laws is set up so that an agency's own interpretation of its regulations is valid unless you show it to be otherwise. You do that by convincing a court that the agency's interpretation is arbitrary, capricious or without authority." -- Harold Gilliam, Skylighter Inc.

Stop asking morons as a means to replicate your moronic behavior.

Why are these morons (TRA list participants) even using LEUP's at all?

Here are the judge's words!!

"In addition, the Court finds that the ATF's pronouncement that sport rocket motors are not PADs is invalid because it was made without compliance with the notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures of the OCCA and the APA."

Here is the court order that is from:

Jerry

The law is sooo NOT gray

Here's the law that shows that:

27 CFR 555.11, Propellant Actuated Device. Any tool or special mechanized device or gas generator system which is actuated by a propellant or which releases and directs work through a propellant charge.

27 CFR 555.141 exemptions (a) (8) Gasoline, fertilizers, propellant actuated devices, or propellant actuated industrial tools manufactured, imported, or distributed for their intended purposes.

List them and endorse them.

Shun them AND publicly ostracize them.

No.

Incorrect.

Incorrect.

Wrong again. Consumer (non-commercial) is DOT exempt.

ALL sport rocket goods and related tools are ATF exempt.

Nope. Getting an ATF permit for EXEMPT goods CONFUSES all authorities and inappropriately puts you on the very treadmill these incompetent folks keep posting about re ATF etc.

Warning.

Jerry

File a police report and bring an action for contempt of court (NAR/TRA will cheerfully pay attorney fees). There may be further violations of an administrative, criminal, and employment basis.

Prosecute every little detail you possibly can.

Correction: We _had_ a clear ruling from the court. The 4/22/04 ruling stated that the PAD exemption for hobby rocket motors remained valid. The subsequent 10/15/04 ruling muddied the waters again:

"ORDERED, that the plantiffs' request for the Court to (1) order the ATF to recognize sport rocket motors as propellant actuated devices and (2) order that the Question and Answer sheet currently posted on the ATF's website either be removed or revised are DENIED. It is further ORDERED, that the parties shall proceed with the litigation of this case as previously scheduled by the court."

"First, we again strongly recommend that members in the field report in detail any actions taking by ATF personnel in the field, particularly if they use the ATF's "Questions and Answers" as the basis for their action. Forward to either of us the dates, times, names and offices involved, along with a complete description of your experience. Be factual and complete in your message. If we need additional information, we'll contact members individually."

Which has now occured re 27 CFR 555.141-a-8.

Unless you deny the obviuous too?

And I aassume you do, of course.

It doesn't have to be "closed" for an order to have been issued.

Jerry

question.

having

Again you are asking things for which the answers will depend on who you ask. The law says all Propellent Actuated Devices are exempt, so if you go by what the law says, you don't need a LEUP and you don't need a magazine. Obviously, the ATF would say that you need a LEUP and storage, because the ATF believes that high power motors are not PADs and are not exempt. Does this mean the ATF is going to kick your door in and drag you off to jail if you have an H motor in your house without permits and storage? No! The ATF doesn't even know you exist unless you make yourself and your activities known to them. Would you be completely 100% risk-free if you do not conform to ATF policy? Probably not.

So there's what the law says, there's what the ATF says, and there's what you can actually do regardless of either the law or the ATF. Only you can decide which route to take. Only you can decide what level of risk you are comfortable with. If you're the kind of person who doesn't want any risk of being considered in violation, no matter how remote the odds, then get yourself a LEUP just to cover your butt. If you're a more rational kind of person, you can just continue business as usual, and wait to see how the lawsuit turns out before inviting the ATF into your life.

It's all up to you. No one here can make the choice for you.

r

Nope, it's not illegal. They can demand whatever they want, as long as they demand the same from everyone, to avoid discrimination issues.

I can insist that everyone who buys a product from me submit their orders on blue paper, or have a driver's license, if I want. That's my decision.

I can also refuse to sell to anyone who's not a licensed pilot.

-Kevin

An electric match is not a squib. A squib has a metal jacket and usually contains a secondary composition. If you use the term squib when dealing with matches or fuse heads, you may complicate your situation unnecessarily.

Anthony J. Cesaroni President/CEO Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace

887-2370 x222 Toronto (410) 571-8292 Annapolis

Care to test that theory?

I just hope nobody is foolish enough to listen to you.

Jerry

Hope springs eternal.

This should be in the FAQ.

Incorrect.

Incorrect.

If it was as easy as forking over $100 to keep the JBGTs off my ass, I'd be happy. Every time there is a press piece they keep throwing out the $25 permit price. I've tried to get a reporter to follow up on htat, nad have offered to pay the $25, pluss the cost of a rocket and motor. All the rest of the costs and headaches of compliance would be up to the reporter and part of the story.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

If you ask the regulator, then everything is regulated. Regardless of what the law says. I'd really like to see some effort focused instead of the national BATFE regulations, on PROSECUTING LOCAL JBGTS FOR THEIR ILLEGAL ACTIONS. Perhaps that will stop this mess.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!