action: legal liason

legal liasion - maintain a proactive stance toward regulatory constraints on rocketry

this may well fall under a specific "committee" heading (see action: due diligence) but I thought it deserved separate treatment due to its import

although TRA NFPA committee members had some "inside" information into what brews at those meetings, and so have an opportunity get a reading on the various parties attending (esp. BATFE and State Fire Marshals), the membership seemed blindsided by the HSA/SEA and subsequent NPRM 968. This despite some first hand observations that the BATFE has this in its sights.

and then there are the challenges of the lawsuit, and the legislative initiative

a coherent (and open) approach to remaining abrest of, and proactively dealing with regulatory challenges will continue to be critical to the survival of rocketry. Administrations come and go, and public sentiment vacillates as well. We must be vigilant and become/remain a part of the process.

one thing that will be important is to determine the scope of our interests, i.e.; what rocketry are we intent on preserving

but irrespective of that scope, in order for a "New TRA" to rise as a leader it will have to defend other rocketry-related interests, e.g.; the impact of regulation on secular educational programming

as any committee function or organizational activity, both oversight and performance measures must be integrated from the onset, to insure the effectivess of the "legal program", assure members and the public that their interests are being pursued, and the competency and productivity of the liasion and research "staff".

comments?

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed
Loading thread data ...

Maintain audio recordings of EVERY meeting, even informal ones.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

More of the same from you know who:

You're conveniently forgetting that your Fearless Leader was "blindsided" by the SEA's inclusion in the HSA. Mr. Wickman himself had posted that the SEA was a dead issue and no longer a threat.

This was never a surprised to anyone. The ATF been trying to enforce a 62.5g limit illegally for years. We took them to court over that, so now they're trying to do it legally. Do you really believe that no one expected them to do that??

The lawsuit became more of a "challenge" when the ill-timed Wickman legislative initiative failed.

It seems unlikely that there could ever be complete consensus on that. Those who have more personal interest in one type of rocketry will always be more inclined to preserve that. Some are willing to sacrifice a little of one type of rocketry to preserve more of another, and some are willing to see all rocketry go down the tubes in pursuit of an unrealistic "nirvana".

Reply to
RayDunakin

Right, and just like corporate handwringers, rocket handwringers are going down the same tubes.

so all hand wringers out their, shut up. all anal retentives out their, retent in your own house. leave the rest of us in peace.

now, they (iz and others) may have points, but no reason to burn the house down over their points, let them retent over them at their crib.

Reply to
Al Max

yes, I like that. And make transcripts available.

- iz

Jerry Irv> Maintain audio recordings of EVERY meeting, even informal ones.

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

irrelevant and off topic. Information obtained through a paid lobbyist was only selectively available, and only after pressure from members was brought to bear.

I merely gave examples. How do your comments contribute to the conversation about a "New TRA" legal liason function

off-topic naysaying

you started with opinion, but interestingly proceeded to identify possible conflicts or trade-offs pertinent to the subject of scope. Much better, d0od!

might this be addressed? multiple organizations for different rocketry practices, each with an independent legal function? How does that prevent the cross-purpose situation we see now?

however unlikely, is it possible? what would have to happen in order to make it more likely?

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

off-topic naysaying

did you have something on-topic to contribute, Al?

- iz

Al Max wrote:

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

You gave an example claiming that TRA should have somehow known that the SEA was going to be tacked onto the HSA. I responded with an example that showed you precious Mr. Wickman was just as ignorant of this event as anyone else. Yet my response is labled, "Off-topic and naysaying". Right.

Reply to
RayDunakin

Bundick/Kyte was following it and didn't inform ARSA orIEAS and to the best of my knowledge TRA.

Further NAR took no steps considering it, therefore the Kyte money was a total waste.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

well, at least your naysaying is on-topic here

TRA has representation on the NFPA, has experience in negotiating with the BATFE, and prides itself on its professional lobbyist through whom they access every Senatorial office with regular frequency, and through whom are confidantes of Senator Enzi, knowing both his official and "unofficial" positions

while TRA claims that John Wickman is an outsider

if TRA is truthful about their "finger on the pulse of Washington", isn't it reasonable to expect that they would be better informed? They were in fact, specifically in the matter of the DOJ letter to the SJC, which they obtained days before JW; to which neither delivered a substantive response in a timely fashion to, nor which they forwarded to JW for his response.

ultimately John Wickman did respond, but TRA made sure that it would be too late to mobilize and empower rocketeers to influence the committee

thats what you call "cooperation", Ray?

see "ARSA Publishes Reports To Dispel Myths On Dangers Of Rocketry By Department of Justice and ATFE" at see

formatting link
BTW: I am prevented from giving additional examples due to the TRA listserv confidentiality agreement

- iz

RayDunak> Iz wrote:

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

This is TYPICAL TRA tactics. Hold critical information close to the vest and do NOT make it public even though this type of thing is the very sort of thing that SHOULD be made public. A public agency correspondence to a citizen representative that is false and fraudulant.

TRA is broken.

But they certainly exist. And are also being kept secret by the same broken TRA system.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Iz check your time line. I think you will find that Kyte was not on board until after JW started the legislative route. This was after the HSA/SEA debacle caught everyone by surprise. Bill Richardson

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed wrote:

Reply to
BRich

Frankly, I see no reason why Wickman should have expected any cooperation when by that time he had already repeatedly refused to cooperate himself. Not that it would have made any difference in this case anyway, since Hatch and Kohl were beyond reasoning with.

Reply to
RayDunakin

So, Izzy,

Would your "new TRA" answer questions like I asked you about ARSA, or not?

I find it so very interesting that you won't answer even the most basic questions about ARSA, even though you are the "communications facilitator" (your term) for ARSA.

- George Gassaway

----------- repeat of questions that Izzy refused to answer

Izzy,

I?ve had some problems locating some things on the ARSA website.

Where can I find the ARSA by-laws?

Where can I find any information as to when/where ARSA was officially created as regards public/state (or federal?) documentation or recognition?

Where can I find info on when the last ARSA election was held, and who ran?

Where can I find info on when the next ARSA election will be held?

Where can I find a list of who is on the ARSA board, which positions are held by what people, and how does the ARSA board operate if for some reason the ARSA by-laws website link didn?t load?

As ARSA communications facilitator, I?m sure you won?t mind answering these.

- George Gassaway

Reply to
GCGassaway

Ok, here's an on-topic, non-confrontational, unbiased 100% constructive question -- a couple of them, in fact:

  1. In a perfect world, there would be no regulation of rocketry by the ATF, and very little by any other agency except as relates directly to safety of materials and operations (FAA waivers, for instance). Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world. So... what level of regulation should be considered an acceptable compromise?
  2. How can this be achieved? Note: Pep talks about standing firm, maintaining your resolve, etc are not answers to this question. Neither are complaints about past attempts to achieve this goal. You want to have a constructive "brainstorming session", here's your chance.
Reply to
RayDunakin

yes, you are accurate

Mr. Kyte's ineffectiveness did not precede his arrival

TRA/NAR's did

while the HSA/SEA specifically 'may' have caught TRA by surprise, BATFE's intent to pursue many of its objectives was ignored by TRA for some time (years)

- iz

BRich wrote:

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

an off-topic, attempt to impede a open inquiry into whats possible for rocketry and rocketers in an desperate attempt to prevent reflection on and contrasts with your ineffectiveness

I answered your transparent questions

- iz

GCGassaway wrote:

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

thanks (that's refreshing)

this an an oversimplification:

identify various groups of people with concerns, open a dialog, learn about their concerns, educate them where they are ignorant or confused, identify common goals, establish partnerships, and work together to achieve them so everyone's fear is assuaged

comments?

- iz

RayDunak> So... what level of regulation should be considered an acceptable compromise?

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

No TRA and NAR actually baited ATF. Directly.

They on the one hand "volunteered all of their members to get ATF permits (world class secret buttfuck) for then and now "exempt articles and substances", and, then let AT run continuous public full page ads describing arbitrary ATF ez access and restricted access the ATF itself had no law, rule, letter or even input in.

Jerry

After we are done poking the ATF in the eye with a sharp stick for 10 years, can we move on and poke yet another rogue federal agency with teeth? We need the "RMS style" "interaction".

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

As it is right now so you have arrived.

Only DOT is "officially" broken.

formatting link

You know,the site criticized by some rmr'arians.

Many HARD specifics there. And more to come.

Based on your track record I cannot help but think this post is itself a troll.

Jerry brought you LMR and HPR to begin with by PROPOSING THEM (that likely constitutes inventing at least in the regulatory and club policy sense)

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.