Re: BATF Stuff...PAGING MR BUNDICK

You could always do what I did. Go to the court web site and download the documents.

formatting link
It doesn't have quite the popularity of the Gitmo rulings so it isn't in an area where you can get it for free. But they are public records and all you have to do is register for a PACER account and you can get them.

Here is a quote from the ruling:

ORDERED, that the plaintiffs? requests for the Court to (1) order the ATF to recognize sport rocket motors as propellant actuated devices and to (2) order that the Question and Answer sheet currently posted on the ATF website either be removed or revised are DENIED. It is further ORDERED, that the parties shall proceed with the litigation of this case as previously scheduled by the Court.

If that isn't enough for you, here is an argument from the BATFE's filing which should give you an idea of how they feel about it.

"The 1994 letters provide that rocket motors containing no more than 62.5 grams of propellant, and producing less than 80 newton-seconds (17.92 pound seconds) of total impulse with thrust duration not less than 0.050 seconds are exempt. See id. at 15-16. This, of course, means that rocket motors not meeting those criteria are not exempt."

tater schuld wrote: > Bunny, please confirm or deny this. >

no need to explain, just validify if this is true >
Reply to
David Schultz
Loading thread data ...

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

david: what search terms do u use? shockie B)

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

Reply to
David Schultz

I think you are missing the pernt...

Reply to
Greg Cisko

Alas, the Earthlink news server is being stupid and refuses to allow me to post attachments this evening.

Customer support was as dissapo> If you have the doc, just post it to ABMR, please........

Reply to
David Schultz

e-mail it to me make sure its a zip file (damned filters) and I will post it to my site

Chris Taylor

formatting link

Reply to
Chris Taylor Jr

We already know how the ATF feels about it -- the same as they always have.

That's ATF's position, but the judge already ruled that the 62.5g limit is invalid.

Reply to
RayDunakin

No it represents a major change shortly after the release of "easy access"-tm motors.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

You mean the point that we are screwed and Jerry was wrong? Or are you trying to deflect it to a childish but irrelevant discussion about why you weren't told immediately?

Reply to
David

Reply to
LeRoycom

Reply to
Phil Stein

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.