NAR BoD declines Wickman leadership in legislative action

If he didn't have acrimony, he would have nothing at all :)

Jerry

I am entertained.

What is interesting about this discussion is that NAR members think the way NAR does things is the only good way to do it. TRA members think the way TRA does things is the only good way to do it. ARSA "associates and followers" think the way NAR and TRA does things is the NOT only good way to do it. And simply put forward a positive course of action that is so effective NAR responds by spending several tens of thousands of dolars to "mitigate and deal with it" and TRA publishes many "statements" to "mitigate and deal with it".

Meantime ARSA alone is a source for media content, legislative updates from the source itself, positions on rocketry regulation that takes into account all rocketry forms, not just toy paper rockets, and only those with silly little club approval. By an arcane and arbitrary set of procedures no less.

The cultural difference is stark.

Jerry

FUD

I agree, Mark. However, if you'd have left out the Republican and Democrat labels on the two branches I'd agree 100 percent! I think those labels are irrelevant to this discussion. Simply stated, the elected officials of this country are very hesitant to jump on the "make explosives easier to obtain" bandwagon and are more inclined to want to be seen as "making it a safer nation".

Regardless of party, gender, sexual preference, political leaning, race, background, right handed, left handed, or ambidextrous.

Steve

In this session of Congress, the only 'meaningful outcome' we're going to get is something based on HK.724 in the Senate and a similar, hopefully better, effort in the House. No member of the House or Senate will expend any political capital to do anything else, at least not now. If we push for more, we'll probably get 'nothing.'

I don't like it either. I'm hoping we can find sponsors for a House bill that will fix the most glaring problems and get us something that can go to conference, eventually.

Consider this: If Herb Kohl really wanted to block us completely, S.724 would have been buried so deeply in the Judiciary Committee that it would NEVER have seen the light of day, not in this lifetime. Instead, we at least got

*something* - and in fact, we got it relatively quickly, compared to the usual glacial pace of government.

It's p-o-l-i-t-i-c-s. Get used to it.

Have you read NFPA 1122/25/27? Have you read 27 CFR 55.141-1-8? Direct conflict between the law and the NAR/TRA actions. As to the future of HPR, go back and read the new proposal from BATFE. Any reload will require an LEUP if it goes into effect. There is no 62.5 limit for reloads only SUs. John W. took real action to preserve rocketry and it's future. As it stands now, there is a real danger that the BATFE will succeed in shutting down APCP as a propellant for the hobbiest. Black powder motors can be shutdown at anytime they choose, simply by enforcing the "antique firearms" clause. Igniters and ejection charges without an LEUP are illegal now.

Go back and do your homework and then decide what hobby you plan on picking up if we lose in Congress.

Rocky Firth

Ever hear of the RRS, PRS or the MTA?

Rocky Firth

MTA is a place purchased by PRA and RRS and operated at different times by each. RRS to my knowledge is totally independent and not affiliated with IEAS or TRA or anybody.

PRS has not taken a position re ieas officially however members of nboth RRS and PRS have formed IEAS groups which should probably be viewed as independent entities who simply "support" IEAS.

To date there are a couple of IEAS "suppported" clubs but the only tangible evidence of that is a magazine ad in ER suggesting contacting those clubs directly which enough people have done that group launches have begun to form.

Considering how long it took for IEAS.org to "get started", once it actually did something, the time to real activities is record short time.

Jerry

Explain something to me from a NAR perspective.

Why is something bad batter than nothing?

Why is anything other than substantially the ORIGINAL language acceptable at all under any circumstances?

Why is NAR willing to spend big bucks to forward a bad version of a bill it was opposed to initially on principal or tactics, but once it morphed to something the authors opposed, it all of a sudden is the point man on it to the strong disagreement with the founders of the movement?

I believe these questions deserve real answers.

Nothing is FAR BETTER than HK724!

HOPING? WE?

Are you a moron?

He gave the government what IT wanted and the OPPOSITE of what the CITIZENS wanted.

Do you even get that?

Jerry

John DeMar wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@removethis.syr.edu:

Anything less than 3.3 lbs LOW and 160 nt-sec is tiny, apparently.

len.

What do you call intend? It has not intended yet. Show me.

Jerry

First off, I don't agree that it was illegal before. But to answer the question, if it were illegal, that fact was irrelevant because there was no mechanism in place to prevent people from buying "regulated" motors.

Do we have to wait until it's dead and buried before making a fuss?

I'll explain from a NAR member's perspective. I hold no position in NAR nor in my local NAR chapter. I am "only" L2 certified.

Right now I am faced with very real constraints on the pursuit of my hobby. While you quote chapter and verse with your interpretation of the law, the ATF is trying very hard to impose LEUPs on anything over 62.5g. You may be right about rocket motors being PADs, and intellectually I agree with your interpretation, but the ATF if singing another hymn. In the absence of judicial or legislative relieve I am faced with three alternatives:

1. Assume (hope) You are right and risk arrest and prosecution on Federal Explosives violations. Not an attractive thought. I might be able to win in court but I'm sure what's left of my life savings would be gone. And what's left of my life would be ruined also. I don't look good in stripes and I hate soap on a rope.
2. Get a LEUP. A viable alternative even if, as you claim, it is not required. I estimate it would cost me at least 0 for a magazine + shed + application. 0 is a lot less than my life savings so this is cheap insurance. But 0 would buy a lot of other toys I'd rather have.
3. Fly Hybrids. This is my current approach. It is fun, and legal, but I miss those PRO38s and Redline motors.

So what benefit, to me, is less than perfect legislative relief? It lets me fly, without fear of prosecution, up to J motors. That covers the high 90 percentile of my activity. I could always go hybrid for anything larger. Judging by all of the flight reports I've seen in the past 8 years, I think it would cover the vast majority of L1 and L2 certified fliers. Vast.

Already answered. The original language is, of course, prefered.

Perhaps because the NAR (and its members) can read the political tea leaves. The lawsuit lasted far longer than we expected. It could drag out much longer. We could probably wait out this round of legislative BS and hope for something better next year. Or the year after. In the mean time, the hobby is hemorrhaging from FUD. And perhaps because they know that a bill passed in the Senate is not the last step. Bunny has already commented that he follows Stine's philosophy: "live to fight another day". Take what you can today to keep the hobby alive. Come back next year and improve that.

You will not agree with my opinion. But they are real.

Perhaps for you it is. For me, it is better than two of the three choices I face today. If it fails in this Congress I will end up with a LEUP. And that will be the end of it for me. Once I cross that line I no longer need relieve. As I said, $500 is cheap insurance.

That would be correct. ;-)

Well, no it doesn't. As long as the dealer is unwilling to assume the liability for the interpretation of the law (by requiring a LEUP), you cannot buy a motor without one. Unless you can list the dealers willing to sell APCP motors to persons without a LEUP, your point is MOOT.

Joel. phx

I believe your entire proposition hinges on this statement. This statement assumes facts not in evidence. Unless there have been either arrests or threats of arrests I am not aware of.

I have seen agents ask SOME existing LEUP holders (ATF has surprisingly wide authority over permit holders unlike non-permit holders) to magazine propellant, bit not right after having 55.141-a-8 stuck in front of their face.

I have seen no (ZERO) non permit holders be asked (by ATF) to get permits for propellant and motors at all anywhere in the entire country.

The solution it seems is to expire the permit and never get one.

Correct me if I am wrong please.

Jerry

You are going to find a lot of people, especially in Congress that will say this change is a good thing.

How had you planned on legally purchasing and storing restricted access motors before?

But, my po> >

Never said that. It's just a shame that people think the hobby is dead because of the past 9 months of misinformation. As enthusiasts for the hobby (myself at all levels) I think we should all get it straight and spread the word.

-John DeMar