Re: Pennsylvania explosives regulation changes in the works

Dec 28, 2004 7 Replies

Rate this thread:

Scott Schuckert 21 years ago

And those laws that we DO have, should include a simple PURPOSE statement,

> and a simple way to measure their success. if the law doesn';t accomplish
> the desired goal after a specified period (something relatively short, like
> 2-4 years, then the law is automatically invalidated.

Bob, I like the way you think! We could do the same think with spending bills - a single, simple purpose, that has to meet performance goals. Last I heard, there were still two federal employees assigned to teach proper farming techniques - in Las Vegas. And the number of times something useless and unrelated is tacked onto essential bills, because it wouldn't pass any other way...!

(Sorry, gentle readers - we're pretty far from rocketry but hopefully of interest anyway)

Vote

David Weinshenker 21 years ago

While we're at it: repeal any law where the violation simply boils down to "disobeying the cops"... i.e., "obstruction of justice" for refusing to answer 'investigation' questions, "resisting arrest", etc.

-dave w

Vote

John Stein 21 years ago

Funny, the doctor tells me the same thing during a flight physical just after I'm told to bend over and spread my cheeks........

John

Vote

The Rocket Scientist 21 years ago

In my case, the doctor would be in for one HELL of a surprise. Bill Sullivan

Vote

Gary Crowell / VCP 21 years ago

2/3 majority to pass a law; 1/3 majority to revoke.

Vote

Bob Kaplow 21 years ago

In a way, we already have (or would have if our legal system didn't try to block it all the time) better than this. It's called Jury Nullification and it's what really ended prohibition. It turns out that you only have to have

6% of the general population to think that a law is bad to have a better than 50% chance of one such person ending up on a randomly chosen jury. And it only takes that one person to refuse to convict. When conviction rates drop, prosecutors stop wasting their time on the cases.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Vote

Scott Schuckert 21 years ago

True, but as we all know, there's a big difference between "not illegal" and "not usually prosecuted" - and getting a law off the books because they can't get convictions is darned rare. I'd still prefer a more formal approach.

Vote

Jerry Irvine 21 years ago

ATF agrees. 27 CFR 555.141-a-8. Explicitly.

Vote

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required