[ FS] Hangar 11, Inc. Motors and Delay stock as of 8/31/2003

Jerry

This is only in your little world, this has been gone over and over and over and over etc.. tired of hearing it.....ATF communication I have in hand specifically indicates otherwise. If it was otherwise then why is there a bill called S.724?? Why is there a law suit??? Is the world WRONG and JI correct??????

Tell you what, if this is not the law then how about you ship a few M motors to the ATF compliments of USR and prove it all to US...????

Once the ATF accept your motors as PAD's I'll be the first in line to offer USR MOTORS for sale.

NOT to worry NAR / TRA will not be an issue...... I'll host the launches on my own......and provide insurance.....

PUT UP or SHUT UP......

Bobby B

Not exactly.

See the David Schultz post of the TRA/NAR reply to motion for summary judgement.

It CLEARLY shows the CURRENT law exempts ALL rocklet motors and motor reloading kits from ANY ATF regulation whatsoever.

I just did. Do you also want me to email the document to you?

Thank you for your cooperation.

Not to mention it would quadruple your sales.

Jerry

Okay.

Jerry

CHOSE to not HAD to according to the LAW.

Jerry

Mr. Kaplow

Thanks You for your reply.. Please read on..in particular my closing......

I consider John W. an excellent source RE: the current state of regulation. This is why I communicated with him via email RE: in June 2003 on this exact subject. [ please see attached ] I very much wish there was definitive proof proving the info I have from tha ATF, John W and many others wrong on this matter.. but it simply does not exist in trustworthy form. I mentioned that I have info from the ATF on this matter. I also have info cleary stating that a J-350 is not a regulated motor AND a documented conversation with a person in the ATF Public safety branch that clearly feels that ALL hobby rocket motors of any size / construction are exempt as PADS [ EZ does it Jerry I think she is married and blonde ] ALSO have clearly staed info which backs up what John W. indicates below. Intended use is the reasonable assumption. If the intended use is over 62.5 its regulated.

Bottom line my agent is up on the matter and I am not in a position to fight city hall regarding this matter in the face of what I consider to be overwheliming proof to the contrary. If EZ access really exisits why was S.724 written????? What is a J350 once it is asembled????? under or over

SOAP BOX ON There is much disinformation in this hobby. Many form opinions based upon one source without checking deeper. We all know that even the ATF agents are all not up to speed on this matter. As a flier its not to big a deal... As a dealer there is alot at stake in the way of investment and literally being put out of business if you do not get it right. There are many dealers who ship motors over 30gr. via the USPS which is clearly illegal and can bring them thousands of dollars in fines. I was with a dealer in CT yesterday who lost a sale for this very reason.... Some guy wanted a pack of G35's and didn't want to pay a hazmat fee. ROL was hosting motor sales galore after the AEROTECH fire people were shipping motors all over the place with no hazmat training, no hazmat packing and in general putting themselves and the hobby at large at greater risk. Do you think this mght have anything to do with all of the attention our little group is getting right now???? Think about it....... Probably said way more than a few people wanted to hear but seriously we are by any reasonable account harmless as compared to any hobby / sport. AP is by composition an oxidizer not an explosive, APCP in the form we use in in cannot explode and we cannot make it explode. It burns more like a fast candle unconstrained. All this being said, just how did we make it up so high on the ATF's radar screen???.... RC groups which are GIANTs as compared to us aren't even on the screen regulation wise....black powder shooters can keep up to 50 #s of powder in a house w/o a mag yet we need a mag and LEUP to store 1 gram.... Ok I said way too much.. just getting tired of hearing the whining [ not you Bob K, one other person in particular] .... I guess it was my turn to whine.... SOAP BOX OFF

EMAIL from John W. dated 6/22/2003

Bobby, Easy Access has not been the policy of the ATF for several years. The ATFE does not accepted the 62.5 gram slug rule that Aerotech promoted. They announced this last summer so 5/24 had nothing to do with it. The assembled motor propellant weight has to be equal or under 62.5 grams for the ATFE exemption to apply. You sell a motor/reload to someone with an assembled propellant weight over 62.5 grams and they do not have an ATFE permit, you and they have broken the law.

John Wickman

In closing, NO we should not have any restrictions or regulations. We should have to follow shipping regulations and FAA regs to keep the hobby and public at large safe.The ATF's propaganda RE: rocketry is criminal. To say they lied would be a gross understatement. They have adversly effected legal commerce in all 50 states and internationally should be forced to make a retraction. I thought you had to tell the truth went you were reporting to congress. They should be ashamed of themselves. I kinda expect the reason for the lies is that the truth is so weak [ they look like weapons and if they wanted to launch a payload, they could but they could not hit anything specific ] it would get laughed out of congress. I'm following the rules as I believe they are intended. I am writing to congress when asked to do so. I want this hobby to grow and prosper. dealing with the law and getting the laws in place to allow us to grow is important. I have faith that there are enough good rocketeers to get us thru this.... If not the alternative is a dismal end to the sport as we know it.

BOBBY [ I hope I still have a business and an LEIL after this] B

"Bob Kaplow" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@eisner.encompasserve.org...

writes:

I know that the "ATF interpretation" varies. But clearly the law does not and the law is required to be "common man language".

To address black powder charges.

Not and as far as I am concerned, because of 55.141-a-8 and a-7 simply does not apply.

Get an agent, your agent, to read and undrstand the orange book, which is their bible, to clearly agree 55.141-a-8 and the associated definition of a PAD 55.141.

YOU NEED THE BUSINESS.

Nope. Different agency who could care less about it.

So act like it!!!

1. TRA/NAR had a provision added to NFPA-1127 that required APCP to be stored "as a low explosive per the ATF low explosives distance table". That was the first hard step. There were previous soft steps where they would turn in manufacturers they did not favor to try to get them run out of business (unsuccessfully).

Get a clue. The source of the problem is TRA and NAR. They alone can solve it with a stroke of a pen or three. They refuse!!

The 55.141-a-7 exemption only.

There is no should. There is only reality as experienced.

And pay damages. Ready to be party to a suit?

Lying to congress is a crime, but finding a prosecutor is hard. File a criminal complaint? I have successfully filed and promulgated criminal complaints and obtained convictions.

Turn in your LEUP and go naked and legal for a change!

That letter is 11 years old. Is Anthony Pleming(sic?) still part of the BATFE? If so would he acknowledge that letter? I'm not doubting that the letter is real BUT I would be real curious if this guy would still honor that letter.

Seems to me that finding out wouldn't be *that* hard.

Ted Novak TRA#5512

The law has not changed. The ATF position has. And you have seen, in writing, in lawsuit papers how far they have to stretch to overcome it.

Judge for yourself. A judge will.

Jerry

He has proven to be an unreliable and misinformed source of information several times.

This is not a fact. It is his speculation. Others have written, documented BATFE exemption letters in hand.

Of course, it is your responsibility to act upon the information you have for the sake of your business and liability. If you're selling mostly to people at launches, the LEUP requirement isn't a problem anyways (easy access or otherwise).

It's great to see another NY State dealer with lots of new stock coming in!

-John DeMar