assessment of the vote on perm. certs.

Ferrell Wheeler · 2004-04-14T15:20:25+00:00

All,Thanks for participating in the vote on permanent certifications.The thread seems to have gone off topic so I thought I would givemy assessment. My curiosity is satisfied.I don't know what the tally is so far, but there were clearly manymore "No"s (keep cert procedure dependent on membership) than "Yes"s(make certs permanent). I was puzzled by this. Why do people wantmore regulation instead of less regulation? Finally a "No" voterexplained the situation to me in private email. Political RMR postsare seen by many (most?) as either "supportive of the rocketryorganizations" or "whining about the rocketry organizations".So really the vote morphed into the question "do you support therocketry organizations?" ("No" vote being you do support the rocketryorganizations). Seen in this light, the results make perfect sense.Another way the vote was skewed is the fact that many of the votersare "hardcore" rocketeers, meaning they fly as often as possible andare probably officers in their local section or prefecture. They don'tgo in and out of participation in the hobby. But, I suspect the majorityof rocketeers don't read RMR and don't fall into this category.I, for example, can easily see myself leaving the hobby for a coupleof years and then when my brother visits me he'll see one of my oldrockets in the garage and ask to see it fly. That would be a situationwhere it would be alot of fun for us to drive to a local launch, paythe necessary dues and flight fees, and watch the rocket fly. Itwould be absolutely no fun, ie, it would be a show stopper, if I hadto go through a bunch of bureaucratic nonsense (recerting L1, L2, L3,tap members, written tests, etc. etc.) just so me and my brother couldhave a good time seeing one of my old rockets fly. I suspect thereare alot of LX rocketeers that have been out of it for awhile, and areput in the exact position above, but don't go fly with their family/friendbecause of the above (unnecessary) hassles.So I guess I would like...

Apr 14, 2004 24 Replies

Rate this thread:

Jerry Irvine 22 years ago

Moron.

Remainder of drivel ignored.

Vote

Don Hooker 22 years ago

Right.

Vote has been taken get onto the next proposal as this one has been voted on and rejected. Don

Vote

RayDunakin 22 years ago

Once again, you are forgetting that ATF is only one part of the regulatory picture. User certs won't get you out of a LEUP, but they do get you out of hassles with CPSC and state/local fire authorities.

I'd much rather have the current system then something produced and managed by the government, which would undoubtably be far more expensive, inconvenient, and restrictive.

Vote

Don Hooker 22 years ago

As compared to your chant "Two (TRA mostly, NAR sometimes) legs bad, four (JI, an all who agree with you) legs good."

Vote

Jerry Irvine 22 years ago

That claim is NOT supported by any fact or experience.

Vote

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required