HPR Magazine

Our local vendor will not _store_ motors for other people because he doesn't have the room to spare. But we can still buy and fly at the site.

After. I love surprises. Especially promised 12 and delivered 6 or less surprise.

It wasn't under attack then.

It wasn't under attack then.

Well except from within TRA itself.

Well except from within AT itself.

Zero?

Huh? At what point do you non-pay for a non-product published by a non-intellect?

That is definitely the good news on this post but it does NOT rationalize the mismanagement of HPR magazine in the very least.

It's not worth reading. It has no HPR content and painfully few ads.

Thank god you are worried about your job!

Yes I agree.

Jerry

You are the sole and only help!!

Gee I wonder why?

TRA invited BATFE to the party.

ATinvited BATFE totheparty

NARinvited BATFEtotheparty.

The politicians can ignore us, and if we merely are allowed to follow the law contrary to NAR/TRA/AT policy we would be in double digit growth.

By NAR/TRA/AT policy.

NAR/TRA/AT

snip

Agreed.

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Exactly.

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Because they are certified morons. At least they are certified!

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

No enforcement at all.

Yet it is there, but as I claim and as omitted in the NAR/ATF lawsuit, ONLY when containing 1.1D AP which is 45 microns or smaller which IS on the explosives list.

Unless NAR and TRA fail or refuse to claim the above defined position.

UNLESS having a burning rate uinder 2.2mm/s. ELSE 4.1 Flammable Solid.

You can store flammable solids, oxidizers, flammable liquids, corrosives in residential areas up toa certain weight limit, typically 500 pounds or so (one drum) (each).

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

You have no LEGAL choice.

Motors are EXEMPT explosives per 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

Natch.

Yes not guilty,the law itself is the precident. It would not have survived the preliminary hearing.

Unless NAR or TRA or an interested third party file a motion to compel a hearing on summary judgement.

They refuse because NAR and TRA love the abuse to vendors. They started it with the whole voluntary LEUP thing, why in hell would they want to actually stop it? The only reason the pleadings are so convincing toward my position is the attorneys for NAR and TRA would have been derelict of duty if they did not advocate the very laws NAR and TRA have been breaking for almost 10 years.

Just Jerry

Sometimes attorneys ARE your freinds, and your friends are your worst enemies. This is precisely one of those cases.

Donate to the lawsuit!!! Heck, pay the attorneys directly to prevent the typical skim to the Kelly needs a truck fund.

I already got volunteered. I won.

Jerry

I think everyone has to weigh the risks, and be responsible for their own decision

that is a decision that only he can make. Everyone has their own personal circumstances, and tolerance for risk (to disruption of their lives and finances)

yes, absolutely! quickly enough to make said disruption tolerable? I can't say. A judge may await a finding on the pending TRA/NAR suit.

theoretically, but even to be charged has implications at your job, community involvement, etc. For example, I've seen questionaires that ask if I have ever been arrested or charged with a felony. Although the next question was whether I was acquitted or convicted, I would already suffer a bias against me. So my position is that only the individual can make that choice.

bear in mind that I tend to be considerably more conservative since I have 3 children, ages 9 to 13, and am on the BoD of their private school. Were I 25 and unmarried, I would most likely tell them, with all due respect, to go to hell. But now, I have them (and it) to think about.

bear in mind also that the BATFE has demonstrated throughout its history that it is able and willing to perpetrate mayhem and slaughter if it so chooses, and do so with virtual immunity. How far will BATFE play their bluff of felony charges for possession violations? I personally don't think very far, but neither do I care to risk my time, money and the well-being of me and my family to find out. But that is my personal choice in the matter (and precisely the kind of decision their tactics are designed to elicit)

again, considering the risk of inconvenience, disruption of their lives, or worse, I expect that individuals need to use their judgement in how they would deal with it. I do not regard it as a matter of courage or cowardice, but of one of being responsible for your situation.

(I apologize for the repitition on this 'flow of consciousness' response)

- iz