jerry irvine is a lying coward

The part you snipped explained it: "I mean, "you got yours" is usually something people say when they're jealous of something someone else has that they want."

You keep saying "you got yours" to Fred, so it's natural to assume that what Fred has is something you desire, or at least is something you believe others should have.

Maybe so. All I know is that some folks have been able to get them, and others have not.

So you need incentive to show that you're legal to ship? How much incentive did you need to ship illegally?

Irrelevant. If you had proof you could legally ship motors, you'd be rubbing everyone's face in it regardless of whether the motors were certified. Especially since lack of legal shipping was one of the main factors in not being able to get your motors certified.

You show off everything else, including documents that were never legally transferred to you and/or are outdated. Why the sudden shyness when you (allegedly) have legal shipping?

For someone who likes to do things "under the table" you sure don't grasp the concept very well. Don't go around insisting that you're legal if you don't want to be asked to prove it. Market only to those who don't care.

Simply false.

One wouldn't.

I explained it.

You ignored it.

Not my problem.

... not much.

But you didn't answer the original question.

Thanks, that's the point...

Fred

Another point I hadn't considered.. Hmmm....

Fred

Jerry, I'm sorry, but brother Dave has a point. Go back and re-read his post...

Fred

Show us your current LEMP, or continue to be a FRAUD.

From RSPA Ref. No. 02-002-SE-HQ:

"Moreover, IT IS CLEAR that Mr. Irvine always considered that the rocket motors and solid propellant were explosives, as initially approved in November 1986, which is consistent with the opinion of RSPA?s Office of Hazardous Materials Technology. There is NO BASIS TO DISMISS Mr. Irvine from this case."

"As the manager and virtually the only employee of Dynamic, HE IS THE COMPANY."

"HE signed the bill of lading and WAS RESPONSIBLE for the shipment of rocket motors and solid propellant DISGUISED as ?Model Airplane Parts.? It is well settled that both a company and its individual agent or employee who acts for the company may be held responsible for violations that the employee commits."

Emphasis (caps) on key words and phrases, for the benefit of the learning disabled (that's you, Jerry).

ROCKET MOTORS are NOT "model airplane parts" or "model aircraft parts", which is why you were fined $40,000 - which is an EXTREME fine (even after reduction from $57,500) for an EGREGIOUS violation.

You lied. You got caught. You were fined $40,000. THAT is reality.

"QED."

Only above 3.3x36" solid cylinder. Not at issue here.

Does DOT have a dog that selectively "eats their homework" once they've decided to cobble up a basis for an "enforcement action"?

-dave w

It seems like it.

Look at all the correspondence they claim to have lost:

Letter from Carter Letter from me confirming letter from carter Fax re exemptions

2nd copy of fax re exemptions Fax re paperwork update 2nd copy of paperwork for update Certified letter of same 2nd copy certified letter of same

The copy tendered by Wallace of same they actually admitted receiving, but took NO action, which was the PURPOSE for wallace to be submitting it in the first place, no matter how much he "peppered" the correspondence with "speculation and doubt".

Jerry

And this is the same stuff that they then turned around and claimed was never "updated", "transferred", "applied for reassignment", etc...???

Hmmm...

-dave w

Administrative actions are a monologue.

No judge.

Jerry

It is instructive to note this list is what Fred himself was skeptical of DOT "losing".

Looks like he was wrong about that one!