ROL NEWS--Joint Statement on BATF Litigation, November 2, 2004

I don't see any blank or missing pages.

The first two pages are the actual motion. Twenty pages of the ammended complaint. One page of a draft order to accept the motion. One page certificate of service.

Looks like it is all there to me.

shockwaveriderz wrote: > kevin: yes after I posted that I went to the TRA website and found the > .pdf......Did you notice that there are numerous blank pages and actual > missing pages in that document? somebody needs to redo and repost it.. >

So what's membership cost going to go up to for '05? $85.00/year? More? Sorry, you guys screwed the pooch here. Membership in the NAR went up bigtime last year and all we got for our money was an almost worthless PAD exemption that does or does not exist depending on which motor dealer you are talking to. When is enough enough?

Point.

The lawsuit is on the OBVIOUS.

The plaintiff refuses to live the lifestyle of the very claims they make.

I said REFUSE.

Jerry

When we win. :)

Define win.

I claim you cannot recognize you already won.

Jerry

He's waiting for the BATF to publicly "say uncle".

(I'm not sure that that would be within either their repertoire of bureaucratic behavior, or the scope of available injunctive relief, though... they probably wouldn't know how to do _that_, even if the judge did think he could order them to...)

-dave w

And waiting, and waiting, and waiting . . .

I have proof they would be insane to do so:

Dave W. wrote:

They are "conforming with Tripoli and Aerotech".

Get it?

They are listening and complying with the citizenry.

Make the citizenry less retarded!!

Please?

Jerry

Hello?

Knock, knock, anybody home?

Here we go again (still).

If they actually are hassling dealers at this point, that's information that needs to get brought to the awareness of the lawyers and the judge.

Are you aware of specific, recent, instances?

-dave w

The lawsuit will do nothing - we got Bush for 4 more years, and the administration's goal seems to be to restrict rights as much as possible.

Seems to me that NAR/TRA shouldn't spend another dime on this debacle, but use the money instead to help clubs buy type-4 mags and assist members in getting LEUPs. Enough is enough... This has been going on for how long? Pre 911 by a couple years, IIRC.....

Speaking of which, I was surprised to find nothing on the sssrocketry website about LEUPs and storage permits in AZ.

AZ Woody wrote:

One minor problem. In for a penny, in for a pound. Remember they gave ATF jurisdiction over --US-- at the same time they sued.

Jerry

Maybe they simply follow the law? Last I checked they did.

Aero Tech (consumer aerospace) TOLD THEM!! TRA/HPR verified and codified it too. Then enforced it! Kosdon was decertified for lack of LEMP. He was complying.

You are how I define moron.

You newbies don't remember the last time the NAR (alone, with no help from any other organization) took on government regulation. It took NINE YEARS to get the FAA to act, and that got us FAR 101.22. And there was no mass panic and hysteria in the way over that simple issue.

We'll be damn lucky to have this issue resolved by the end of the decade.

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

Actually the best idea I've heard yet is a club that made arrangements with the local police to the police magazine for the clubs rocket motors. Pretty hard for the JBGTs to complain about that!

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

Yep.