ok, before i even start. lets try not to turn this into a rant about all the things that went wrong or havent been done inthe past to keep rocketry out of the regulators hands. you got the whole of RMR ro do that.
lets try to work out a bill.
First off, the ATF seems bound and determined to regulate model rocketry. either by declassifying motors as PADs or trying to regulate propellants such as APCP.
what we need is a bill (or number of bills) that we can introduce to our heads of rocketry organizations so they can pass them allong to the bill committee.
I suggest we find bills already introduced that are similar and adapt them to our needs (why re-invent the wheel?)
anyone got any ideas? or maybe some places to point to so we can see how we can proceed?
Hmmm... Enzi tried that, directly... what can be put in legislation that Senate committees will pass? It appears that Judiciary is so inclined to give "absolute benefit of the doubt" to the Federal Law Enforcement establishment that they won't want to pass through a bill that BATFE wouldn't like: it appears that the notion of "checks and balances", of a government intentionally at odds with itself, has been forgotten in such quarters; committees such as Judiciary seem more inclined to facilite, than to restrict, the authority of the established bureaucracy... it would be seen as Politically Dangerous to "look like we're making the job of the Police more difficult".
Since anything legislative will absolutely get filtered through this committee system, I am wondering what sort of relief you think could be had by such a route?
It's as simple as (and ineffective as well) writing letters to your elected officials in Washington. We had a massive, coordinated campaign of letter writing for the other bill. It was dashed in a heartbeat after an emotional speech by a Senator looking to gain some popularity using the "Explosives = Terrorists" logic. The rest of the Senate, and the american public at large, ate it up with glee.
That would exclude most of the people who have to vote on it!
Let's assume it is reintroduced and somehow gets through committee. What has changed that will keep the clownheads from NY/NJ from putting a hold on it? What has changed to prevent the ATF from cranking up THEIR lobbying effort?
Unless you can force a floor vote, what difference does it make WHO gets involved and who doesn't? And the only way to force a floor vote without the hazards encountered last time would be to tack it on to another bill that is already on the floor.
This isn't a rant, it's an appeal to reason: Learn from the past! Legislation is dangerous business, especially when the people opposing rocketry are in control. Look what happened to the Wickman/Enzi bill -- right off the bat it got butchered in committee, and even the butchered version wasn't good enough to get past the fear-mongers.
Don't give in to impatience. We've seen the results and they aren't pretty.
According to a reliable source, the way the NAR ended up in bed with the NFPA in the first place was they got impatient with trying to get generic "recoverable aero model" exemptions passed on a state-by-state basis...
the actual terminology is as follows and it applies ONLY in its context that it exempts model rocket and model rocket motors from state fireworks laws, no help to us today....
Model rockets and model rocket motors designed, sold, and used for the purpose of pr>>
Which is EXACTLY what Harry figured out before most of the RMR readers were born. Without NFPA 1122 we'd have 50 different states and thousands of local regulations, none consistent in any way, and none written with our input.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Bob, yes. the original 1122 was always a great thing
but you also know the below to be true.
lets travel back in time to the junk bond decade and look at that situation again.
we had NFPA 1122. it worked for Model Rockets. it was grand.
And it exempted Universities, government and Corps from doing rocket activities.
Those fleeing the Nar's "anything bigger then a F and your banned" at the time were at first lone rangers, and later came to find out about a Corp that was engaged in rocket activities under the NFPA 1122 exemption. The Tripoli. (What's a Tripoli ?)
wow, they could join and become confirmed consumers and fly under the law, instead of being lone rangers.
This concept attracted lots of HPR flyers and the sport was booming.
many still in the NAR got interested in what this group was doing. they called it outlaw biker rocketry, Renegades etc.
They also stated a few things.
We can't just let anyone buy these motors. We have to have these motors certified. Bogus corporation loop holes must be closed. This can not be safe, we must fix it.
NAR started out to go to NFPA and close the loophole for HPR, via the bogus corporation as they called it in a memo. that would have put Tripoli in a bad spot, ie not longer exempt to fly.
a counter strike action might have taken place.
All 9(?) NAR board members were up for a vote at the same time. and only 145 members had voted in the last election.
Instead of Mutual Assured Destruction, they agreed together that both NAR and TRA could have a say in drafting up the new NFPA rules and the changed
1122, new 1125, and new 1127 came to being.
On a side note, the NAR changed to only have 3 board positions expire at any one time.
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.