Compromise S724 Bill Developed by ARSA

Using some of his own medicine, so why is it different coming from another direction? Selective criticism shows bias.

By reference to the "mirror" should be obvious. Who is this group of secret all-encompassing stakeholders? Unless he feels like announcing the names, we can only assume they're carbon-copy blissful followers.

Why do you think it wasn't being addressed by anyone else? Hmmm, I wonder.

And how does the fact that he "took it upon himself" fit with the concept of "let's all work together"?

I just don't get this unquestioned lock-step following. Let's just leave it at that.

-John

You brought it up - where's the evidence to support your assertion?

I see that 100%, but I don't think that suing the government is the way to go. I think I was misunderstood in my original post. I think that moving through the senate is going to be the most productive way to get things done in the log run. The court system in America can be very slow moving, and these days people can sue you for having an accident on your land after they illegally trespassed (we have that problem). I think that the TRA.NAR lawsuit in the senate somehow would have been absolutely wonderful.

Refer to my reply to Chris

It would be nice if you needed a LEUP just to buy an N motor, then all M's would be LEUP free.

I think that's an overly harsh assessment.

Good point.

If we have to compromise, I think this makes a lot more sense than weight-based limits.

Actually, we've been trying to tell them they have no jurisdiction over either the device or the content -- the device, because it is a PAD; and the content, because it is not an explosive.

That's OK, I'm not putting myself in a position of pretending to represent the whole interest of the hobby. John Wickman and his lock-step followers are, and I don't care to be insulted by expecting to sit back and not question your patronizing ignorance. If you truly want people to believe this crap, then back it up with facts. Who was this all-encompassing committee of Wickmanites that were so informed to be capable of coming up with the same bill (plus complications) and have the nerve to call it 'new'?

Blah blah blah. Revisionism based on previous idealistic ignorance.

Yeah, when people who know what they're talking about start telling Wickman he's missed some details and have to spend time and money in DC working on the hard parts... while John Wickman sits back and complains that others are taking over and won't let him play.

I can keep records now and only notify if something comes up missing. This is a whole new layer of "giving up control" and opens the door to admitting the BATFE should control rocket motors and not just explosives. Listen to this, read this again, and don't tell me "oh yeah, that was thought of and will be taken care of". Start thinking for yourself.

No whining from me. Just leave us alone and don't keep taking giant steps backwards and shoving it in our faces as either someone else's fault or telling us something new and secret is on it's way. Disingenuous self-importance can only take you so far. Back to the 'filter' you go.

-John

So then, when this one gets out of committee we should have a limit somewhere around....oh, probably something like 62.5 grams.

Giving them the idea, and the likelyhood that a lower limit will only be acceptable, we may all have to do this for much smaller motors. Talk about progress!

-john

I don't think the money has been coming from the tooth fairy. ;) If you're a member of either organization, go ahead and ask them for an accounting. It's obvious to me from the activity that's been reported.

-John

Sure - I think we can "agree to disagree"... :-)

don't hold back, Shockie! Why don't you tell me how you really feel?

I'm certain that you [guyz] will have much to criticize in the month ahead, so I'm putting on a change of dress ...

- iz

Number one would be the fact that a bill cannot be controlled. You can write it anyway you want, but the politicians can change it, twist it, distort it as they please. Once a bill enters the political machine, there's no telling what's going to come out, and you're stuck with it.

Second would be that politics have nothing to do with facts, science, logic, or sense. Most politicians don't give a rat's patoot about such things. It's easy to forget this sometimes though -- we'd all like to believe it isn't true.

So far, TRA/NAR has been pretty good about telling us what they think is the best path, and why they think so. Mostly what we get from other side is "TRA/NAR bad! John good! Do what we say!" They aren't giving us much substance on which to make a decision.

Yes, but you also have to get a LEUP and storage. If that were eliminated and all you had to do was notify someone when a very large motor is transfered, it seems to me that would be a step forward. There would be no ATF permits, no storage hassles, and no forced entanglements with local authorities.

I just don't see how they expect to pass this bill when they couldn't even get the first one through the SJC. If Hatch, Kohl and the other cronies/obstructionists could be mollified by such a simple change, why wasn't it done the first time?

Not necessarily, but I agree it could certainly be viewed that way. Which of course, is why it probably would have been better to hold off on the legislative attempt until after there was a decision on the lawsuit.

he is right. you can not ususually win against the government. this is a FACT by design.

what you need to do is soundly CONQUER and SPANK the government into submission with a HUGE following of votes/resistance.

but us lazy americans ? what was the percentage of valid voters that actually voted last year ? I believe it was UNDER 30%

The NAR's participation in the lawsuit has, to date, been funded with $30,000 of general funds that were allocated and spent back in 2000 and 2001. The remainder of our share of the litigations expenses have been funded with donations.

I have reported several times, both here and at NAR Town Hall meetings, about the status and amounts of this funding.

Additional donations will obviously be needed and welcome. Prior to the legislative effort beginning, the relative rate of donations to the NAR Legal Fund were running steadily, and continue at approximately that level. After NARAM, I will probably however begin additional pleas for funding the litigation.

The legislative expenses committed to John Kyte's engagement are $30,000, funded from the General Fund, and were approved by an NAR Executive Committee vote in March. That Committee vote must be ratified by the entire NAR Board at our upcoming NARAM meeting.

The Executive Committee is empowered by the NAR By-Laws to take action between meetings and consists of Trip Barber, Mark Johnson and myself.

The Board will also conduct a full financial review and assessment at NARAM. We'll obviously be assessing all expenses and income items to adjust our budget and dues, as required.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Mark B. Bundick mbundick - at - earthlink - dot - net NAR President www - dot - nar - dot - org

Your last sentence makes absolutely no sense at all.

I think I see what you're trying to say, but it's based on a complete lack of understanding of how the American government works.

Ted

And they did this by trying to take credit for it...? They should offer advice, not say "Lookit what we're doing..." :-)

If that's the case, then why are they still asking for donations to the legal fund. If there's nothing more we can do but wait, we're giving them money that won't be effective.

True enough. but, if I'm going down a path that you're not, I don't want you to keep telling me - "No, no... you're doing it wrong. Here - let me show you how it's done." That kind of condescending attitude, trying to push me in your direction, also does great harm.