A stupid question

Why is it that I can go out and buy 100 pounds of mixed volatile fireworks every 4th of July and not need a LEUP but I need one to buy a APCP H motor
reload that weighs far far less, is less combustible/harder to ignite then my fireworks?
Just wondering....
Joe
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
http://www.atf.gov/explarson/safexpact/documents/consumerfireworks.pdf
Joel. phx

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You don't.
The variance is in how your associations (NAR/TRA) ASK YOU TO ACT.
THEY ARE WRONG.
Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I think that it has something to do with 1) the fact that you're American, and 2) you let politicians make rules//laws based on the emotional unstability of a vocal minority and call it Democracy. We have a similar problem in Canada. You can race around in 2 tons of over powered metal running over pedistrians, but you get fined $200 for not buying a licence for your cat.
*Your hard earned dollars well wasted*
p.s. In Canada we can't even buy basic firecrackers. Let's all move to Europe.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip>

Europe.
FIRECRACKERS?! In Arizona, even sparklers are illegal. After all, some kid might burn his fingers, or burn down his parents' house, or poke his eye out!
Wouldn't want parents to actually have to take responsibility for supervising their kids, so lets just make it all illegal.
--
...The Bit Eimer [remove keinewurst to email me]

"My goal in life is to be the kind of person my cat thinks he is"
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
sparklers, however, are the one ban that i would be most likely to agree with. i used to deal fireworks for a little under 10 years and the one item that would cause the most injuries were sparklers (this was in lake county, IL so no explosives and no projectiles). while these are not likely to explode as some of the poorly-made fountains and other displays would nor shoot at you like an aerial/candle/rocket might--they would lull people with their benign appearance. think about how many parents you have witnessed allowing little children (often just toddlers) to run around waving a sparkler or two with no one watching them. when you have a wire burning at >1000F, you can be sure that no good can come of shoving it into Timmy's eye. i would rather not see any off these devices banned and just have stiff fines or preferable prison time for these parents that are too "busy" to supervise their kids--but at least i can see where you might be coming from if you supported the ban. Sorta'.
bit eimer wrote:

--
--arc

my address does not taste like fish
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 07:53:19 GMT, Ajna Cackovic

To be honest, if a parent's under supervised child is harmed, the parent has already been punished. However they should have no recourse to sue the manufacturers or event holders.
I wouldn't ban them just because they can cause harm if used incorrectly. Logically, that leads to a ban on most things.
--
Darren J Longhorn http://www.geocities.com/darrenlonghorn /
NSRG #005 http://www.northstarrocketry.org.uk /
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Which is precisely what the government has tended to do in the USA for the past 20 years. Then jail the parent for neglegence.
So much for rights or freedom, eh?
Freedom INCLUDES the freedom to fail.
Today is NANNYSTATE instead.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
We can buy fireworks in out town, but its a $250 fine if your caught using them.
wrote:

fireworks
motor
then
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

and
of a

Goofus puts firecrackers in pop bottles blowing them up. He might put his eye out.
Gallant collects pop bottles and saves the money for his college fund.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Joe Policy wrote:

The fireworks that you are purchasing are class C(consumer) product. Apcp on the other hand is classified as class B (low explosive), involving greater regulation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Moron.
DOT=/ATF
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

It is this kind of post on RMR that REALLY, REALLLY gets on my nerves!
Sheesh! The guy was just stating some facts that he knew about, trying to answer "Joe Policy"'s question. Then Jerry/Skippy turns right around, not even missing a beat, and calls him a moron!
WHY WHY WHY!!!
Give me a straight forward answer, non-biased, as to WHY this must go on and on and on!
Thanx much!
Jason
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@tampabay.rr.com (Jason Toft) wrote:

False.
APCP is regulated by DOT in several common forms as 1.4C and 1.4S and other lower classes such as 4.1.
ALSO it's DOT class has no relation to it's ATF treatment. Hence my "moron comment" which was accurate re Grayvis. I know because I have known him personally since high school.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Grayvis wrote:

That is not a reason for the stupid regulation, that is just re-stating the stupid regulation in different words.
The rule IS STUPID.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.