Ok Jerry - a simple yes/no is all that's required

Then why do you claim to have a LEMP, for purposes other than rocketry?

No certification, but still shipping.

Reply to
Dave Grayvis
Loading thread data ...

That should be in the FAQ :-)

Reply to
Greg Cisko

Tell you what. It can be anything you want it to be :-)

Reply to
Greg Cisko

It is sad that this is all you seem to believe.

Reply to
Greg Cisko

Its very simple Woody and its why poor sad jerry has such a hard time getting to grips with this.

Under the SEA the following is stated quite clearly and on TWO counts porr jerry is unable to hold ANY explosives, explosive device or pre-cursors to make the same.

I quote from the SEA - "persons under indictment for, or convicted of a felony, fugitives from justice, unlawful users of or persons addicted to controlled substances, and persons adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution were prohibited from receiving or possessing explosive materials. The Act added aliens (other than permanent resident aliens and other excepted aliens), persons dishonorably discharged from the military, and persons who have renounced their U.S. citizenship to the list of prohibited person"

Now if you are generous you could probably consider jerry an alien (might explain some of the behaviour) but most likely its count #1 "A convicted Felon", and count #2 "mentaly defective"

So poor jerry cannot handle anything listed on the explosives list.

But we all know jerry clings to those much doctored documents, claiming he is legal, is this not akin to poor adolf in his bunker, I will prevail.. Not in this lifetime :-)

Remeber Jerry, lithium is your friend.

Reply to
David Wilkins

Even if what you claimed were true, propellant actuated devices are excluded from the "explosives list" since both the list itself and the exemptions from that list are BOTH contained in 27 CFR Part 555.

Being Australian and an anti-Jerry zealot I can see why you might be cloudy on this.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

jerry, exemptions don't apply to prohibited persons, such as yourself... and any of those less than two employees.

Reply to
Dave Grayvis

Legally, no. For a hypothetical question, you most certainly can. So, ignoring the storage requirements, could you today get a LEUP, Jerry? It's a very simple question, why are you trying so hard to avoid answering it?

That's irrelevant to the question. The question had nothing to do with PADs.

No one's asking you to test it, nor does it matter whether or not you want "explosives". Just answer the question.

No you haven't. Surrender means that you stop fighting, and that is something you haven't yet done. It's also irrelevant to the question of whether or not you could currently get a LEUP.

Again, irrelevant, both to the original question and to whether or not you have "surrendered", since you are still bitching about your inability to get your motors certified.

See? You haven't surrendered at all.

No, but this thread is. The whole thread could have been reduced to two posts if you had just answered the question.

Reply to
raydunakin

How can that be? Was it a motor?

Fair enough.

Yet you refuse to let anyone see it, so why should we think you're telling the truth?

So what was it, and why do you think that we are "all potential criminals"?

Most of your answers only raise more questions. For instance, you could just tell us what the "destructive device" actually was instead of telling us what it wasn't, then we could stop playing 20 Questions trying to find out.

o
Reply to
raydunakin

Oh, good catch Dave! Don't know how I missed that obvious contradiction.

%
Reply to
raydunakin

Was your "destructive device" a PAD, Jerry?

Reply to
raydunakin

Simply false. I posted a link to it on rmr for YEARS over and over.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Of course. They were dertified in a way no rule allowed.

That will be true FOREVER.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Then how come nobody has seen it?

Why won't you let Us see it now?

Reply to
Dave Grayvis

Only in your sick, twisted, coke'd out mind.

Reply to
Dave Grayvis

You aren't letting anyone see it NOW.

So why the sudden need to hide it? Is it the one that isn't in your name?

=CF

Reply to
raydunakin

Bull. The rules are clear -- motors meet the cert requirements to be certified. That includes motors being recertified.

Reply to
raydunakin

Yep. I know if I'd ever seen a LEMP with Jerry's name on it, I'd remember it. Besides, even if he had posted one years ago, that's not proof that he currently has a valid LEMP.

Jerry, you said your LEMP wasn't for rocket motors, and you said you didn't need or want "explosives". So why did you have an LEMP?

Reply to
raydunakin

But even if true (not), which it was not, does NOT apply to CURRENT motors simply because classifications by ATF and DOT and CSFM, and CPSC do not expire!!

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

It was and is true that motors and motor manufacturers must meet the current cert requirements to be certified.

The cert requirements state that you must have DOT EX numbers for shipping, and an LEMP for manufacturing. Since you are in CA, you also need a CSFM permit for manufacture/sales/export. You have not submitted any of these things in your name.

That $40,000 fine from DOT proves that DOT does not accept your so-called "classifications". Your felony conviction makes it questionable whether you ever had an LEMP. It also makes it highly unlikely you could currently get either an LEMP or a CSFM permit.

=C4

Reply to
raydunakin

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.