Egan, the attorney for NAR et, al is the one who needs to know if anyone does. He didn't care.
I decline to answer.
ONLY if what you are doing is NOT exempt. It is exempt. Therefore there is no risk despite noise, even noise by your silly little clubs and agents in touch with the morons engaging in self destructive behavior (like getting explosives permits for exempt materials).
Actually it does not say that. It says that it is a Class B explosive in cast form larger than a minimum size; but says NOTHING about what properties it has, or how it should be classed, below that size.
Bull. If the ATF says it's not exempt, you ARE at risk of becoming the "test case". Yeah, you'll probably win in the end but after how many years and how much money wasted? It took ten years to get the lawsuit through the legal system.
Unlike a criminal defendant, the plaintiff in a civil case does not have a "right to a speedy trial".
Besides, the lawsuit was filed in early
2000 IIRC, not "ten years" ago.-dave w
No evidence.
So far, your track record with federal agencies is, Feds 2, jerry 0. Are you gonna strike out?
I never said or implied JI got a judge. NAR/TRA did that. I only said he was right that rocket motors are legally PADS.
OK. And you seem to be hung up on defending NAR/TRA at every turn. But there is right and wrong at both ends of the spectrum. When something is right, it's right, no matter if it comes from JI, TRA, John Doe, etc. I know it's hindsight but do you honestly believe that back in 94 NAR/TRA did all they could to help insure that HPR got a minimum of goverment regulation?
But there was no legal challenge until what, 2001? And from what I read, it was obvious a long time ago that there would be no successful negotiating for relief from ATFE.
Please read more carefully. He did not say agents published anything. The subject of the sentence is "I" and the compound verb is "got" and "PUBLISHED." Thus JI says he is the one who published. Bigotry is blind to reality. Larry Lobdell Jr.
I believe they did what they thought was the best course of action towards achieving that goal, to the best of their abilities.
Skippy quit now while you still have your freedom! We like you Skippy, you make us laugh and sometimes cry ... but don't get yourself locked up in some roo prison with a Mr. Ben Dover ... don't do it Skippy ... on second thought ... you deserve a good ass screwing for all the crap you have dished out over the last 20 years ... go for it Skippy ... we are BEHIND you! Yep, a line of us right behind you waiting our turn at you!
"Very astute observation. Even after being led by the nose to facts supporting JI's claim, he still says that none exist. He's a troll...pure and simple."
- Mark Simpson NAR 71503 Level II
We being: TRA NAR TRA dealers NAR dealers TRA testing lab NAR testing lab TRA leaders NAR leaders TRA NFPA committee members NAR NFPA committee members
They REFUSED to live the lifestyle despite the law in black and white.
Nada.
Been invited to more rocket launches?
As it was, they know we were exempt and that they asked TRA/NAR to get permits anyway, and their attendence at launches would have given them wierd and conflicting duties, which is why they almost never come.
As an ATF agent following the law, how would you answer the question, "I am preparing to put my PAD in my magazine, how do I log it?"
The correct answer is "You don't".
By not being there at launches to be asked, people were free to do the wrong thing under orders of TRA/NAR and also not fear any enforcement for doing it. ATF was back at the office laughing their asses off.
This should be in the FAQ.
BS.
ATF has no jurisdiction over NFPA model building codes!
Lie.
For not breaking the law?
Ever hear of false arrest?
Why did you label a package, containing over 200 lb.s of rocket motors, "model aircraft parts", is that "living the lifestyle"?
Did the BATFE say that was ok?
jerry, How could Ray's opinion about what might happen, be a lie?
Did Ray get "Busted" shipping over 200 lbs of rocket motors, labeled, "model aircraft parts"? I thought that was you.
NAR/TRA's "authority" to certify motors does not come from the BATF in the first place - it's not something that BATF would have any power to "pull".
-dave w
Yeah Dave, what did they say when -you- called?
Joel. phx
If you mean the public safety branch of BATFE and are referring to whether a LEMP(technically LEML) is needed for commercial manufacture of APCP....
The answer I received from the 2 individuals is yes, a license is required to manufacture for commercial use/sale. They referred to it as a 'type 21' form(type 34 is LEUP).
Ted Novak TRA#5512
Well I would expect one manufacturing explosives be required to have a LEMP. So that didn't really help.
Joel. phx
Well I 'expected' that too but as *we* all know, actual facts are what matters.
Hey, was I the only one who bothered to call???
Ted Novak TRA#5512
Joel Corwith wrote:
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.