NAR Prez on Wall Street Journal Story

Many of you have undoubtedly seen Friday's Wall Street Journal front page story entitled: "Explosive Debate: Should U.S. Check Up On Model
Rockets?"
The publication of this story ends six months of work by NAR and TRA members to provide reporter Bobby Block with a complete and clear picture of the illegal and unnecessary regulation of our hobby by BATFE.
From the beginning, the NAR and TRA leadership coordinated Bobby's efforts with both our legislative and legal teams. Having been a Journal reader for the past 30 years, I now have a newfound respect for the integrity and diligence with which the Journal's reporters pursue their stories, having seen it firsthand.
The story's publication is important to the hobby for several reasons.
First, the Wall Street Journal is the country's most widely circulated newspaper. The paper is read and paid attention to by leaders in both industry and government. We could not have purchased at any price the breadth of penetration or credibility this article provides our hobby.
Secondly, the story itself paints the hobby in a positive light, and leaves the reader asking the question "why is the government wasting its time chasing these guys?" When I took a survey in my office today, where people do know about my rocketry life, but are not at all rocketry experts, they almost universally had the reaction "it's silly for the government to be bothering with you". Such reaction helps us build both public support for and credibility around the argument we've held all along that BATFE regulation is over and above anything reasonably required to protect national security or public safety.
Finally, having this article in the public record will help our efforts on Capitol Hill. Members read and respect this paper, and again the credibility we have gained from this exposure will ultimately help us achieve relief.
My thanks to the many NAR and TRA members who responded to my request to talk with and provide information to Bobby Block. I wish to particularly acknowledge the efforts of DC area NAR and TRA members, particularly those in the NOVAAR section, who spent considerable time at their launches to make sure Bobby got a good look at our hobby. They undertook this job on top of their already considerable work assisting the Team America flyoff and NARAM.
Recent suggestions in various electronic forums that we've lost this battle with BATFE are dead flat out wrong.
The tide is slowly but surely turning, folks. More and more people in more and more places are finding out about our troubles and the unjust treatment we're getting. If we can sustain our efforts to get the message out about our hobby, we can secure its unregulated future.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Mark B. Bundick mbundick - at - earthlink - dot - net NAR President www - dot - nar - dot - org
"A dark night in a city that knows how to keep its secrets, but high above the quiet streets on the twelfth floor of the Acme Building, one man is still trying to find the answers to life's persistent questions. Guy Noir, Private Eye."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Point.
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Now that is one positive rmr post!
Stones

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark, Good job, giving a perspective on the piece..
Fred
"Mark B. Bundick" wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ok, I'm going to step into the role of "opposer" on this forum(and not ROL).
Great work, good job in supporting this reporter and getting the hobby's side told in the prestigious WSJ. But...
I do have to disagree about "the tide turning." This struggle against ATF is going to be far more like WWI than, say, a strategically winnable war like WWII. For now the hobby is having some successes. Later this year ATF will have some successes. The best we can hope for is to keep the worst attacks on the hobby deflected in an ongoing conflict, IMO. The front line will keep moving back and forth year after year.
In the very next breath you say that we should be on the lookout for ATF enforcement action. I dunno if that's FUD or real. Wouldn't surprise me if ATF's sore loser leadership sent out orders for more nitpicking field action. But it just sounds too much like Wickman's dire warning last year. And if the tide is really turning, why the worry?
The last few weeks have been good for the hobby. Let's all enjoy it while it lasts.
But beware of irrational exuberance. ATF is like a classic hollywood monster: it never really dies or quits or goes away.
+McG+

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (Kenneth C. McGoffin) wrote:

This is where my "live the lifestyle" advise is an actual prophylactic. If you have had the conversation in advance with your agent (permit or not) and read the law to him and he AGREED you are exempt, any future enforcement action will be abated by his "police consent".
Just Technorocker! Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Advice Advise Please use the correct one.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I apologize. I used to get corrected by Chris Tavares on other words all the time too. I admit to being loose with my rmr posts.
I beg forgiveness if I am slow to change.
Jerry
I believe.
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Don't usually post corrections. I have just seen that one used a bunch. Not picking on you.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8 May 2004 15:27:48 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (Kenneth C. McGoffin) wrote:

Perhaps no one here knows better than I the WWI analogy, Ken. I've been at this for 5 years now (our first meeting with Joe Egan was in May 1999 at the Culpepper launch).
I also confess that I have better information about tide turning than most others due to my position. Making the political and PR efforts work in our favor takes a lot of phone calls, letters, and personal visits, and much of what we do there is done with folks who don't necessarily want a lot of public exposure; we also have cases where public exposure would make clear our efforts to the ATF and derail them before we can get them started. The WSJ is only one example of such work I've done and am doing.
The sensitivity of the work and the stealth required to make it work mean I don't comment publically on these things. However don't mistake my silence for inaction on the NAR's part. The NAR Board has made it clear to me and I to them that success in this venue is the #1 thing on my to do list, and I've cleared my NAR administrative desk to make sure I can devote as much time as needed to this work.
So I agree that it's trench warfare, but I disagree that the tide's not turning. There's too much science and public policy rationale behind our side to lose in the long run. More and more people are beginning to understand that public policy is better served by ATF resources being deployed away from hobbyists and their materials and towards other efforts.

My apologies for not making the issue clearer. We need clearly identified cases of threatened or actual enforcement action in order to strengthen our position with the court, not the legislative / NPRM efforts. In warfare terms, it's a different theater of operations.
And no, it's not FUD. Joe Egan's letter of May 6 that I distibuted to NAR Section leaders documents clearly a case of threatened enforcement in the field. It's a real incident that actually happened.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Mark B. Bundick mbundick - at - earthlink - dot - net NAR President www - dot - nar - dot - org
"A dark night in a city that knows how to keep its secrets, but high above the quiet streets on the twelfth floor of the Acme Building, one man is still trying to find the answers to life's persistent questions. Guy Noir, Private Eye."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then you DO understand how your efforts derailed the legislation which would have been nothing but positive for NAR had it not been destealthified by your OVERPAID legislative expert.

Good.
Or it could simply be a divide and attack strategy by picking specific local individuals on the theory individuals will not be supported by national. I hope they are wrong, and I hope the public posting we are vigilant for it will kill it before it starts.
We see that with DOT issues already.

I offer that right now on DOT. I FINALLY have POST-ADMINISTRATIVE jurisdiction AND written governmentally issued evidence and test reports APCP is objectively safe and deserving of a VERY LOW hazard class.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
and jerry why don't you just resign from the NAR? Your recent stunt with the DOT shows that you do more harm than good. The NAR doesn't need people who willfully violate local,state and federal laws right now or for that matter,ever. The NAR should expel you for conduct prejudicial to the objectives of the NAR.
shockie B)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Absolutely! Couldn't agree with ya more shockie. With the legal issues that JI has brought upon himself (no Jerry, you're not a victim) you'd think he'd refrain from commenting on ANYTHING remotely political, as far as rocketry goes. Of course, that isn't and will never be the case. He can't help himself.
Stones

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
stones wrote:

That's nonsene. Who better to complain about excessive regulation than one whom it's been applied against?
-dave w
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

that
he'd
rocketry
JI is being fined for the "illegality" of his actions. If you consider that "excessive regulation" .... 'Nuff said.
Stones
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
stones wrote:

Yes, I do. I think a regulation that requires propellant, in the forms and formulas found in sport rocketry products, to be classified for shipment as "Class 1 Explosives", is in fact excessive. I believe that classification overstates the actual hazard characteristics of the material, and creates unnecessary logistical and regulatory obstacles to its commerce and movement.

What's that supposed to mean?
-dave w
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What is interesting about his comment is:
1. It is true.
2. I have the paperwork to prove it.
3. The DOT of course is going to defend its improper position even if it has to lie and cheat to achieve it, EXACTLY LIKE THE ATF DID.
4. I am in a position to do something about it for the first time in decades.
5. The very people "piling on" me and ALSO stating or implying that the material NEEDS the excessive regulation, are the very ones who will be benefited if I succeed.
The fine is the fine. My goal is the proper treatment of the material. I have jurisdiction.
Tech Post Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry wrote: << 2. I have the paperwork to prove it.>>
That's not what the DOT said. They said your paperwork is invalid.
<<3. The DOT of course is going to defend its improper position even if it has to lie and cheat to achieve it, EXACTLY LIKE THE ATF DID. 4. I am in a position to do something about it for the first time in decades.>>
How does getting stuck with a $40k fine do anything to change the DOT's position?
<<My goal is the proper treatment of the material. I have jurisdiction. >>
YOU have jurisdiction? The authorities have jurisdiction, not you. All you have a big fine and a bunch of invalid papers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

Nothing I have ever explained to you has stuck. I am not going to waste my time.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.