Timing of request for comment

Show them the law and simply insist they do their duty and follow it. To the letter.

God save the constitution of the United States of America.

Jerry

What is the story behind this?

There is a good reason you do see details posted. But the fact they occured is on the record and a HUGE, MASSIVE feather in our cap.

Jerry

Sadly Jerry. I wish I was wrong. but the constitution is only as good as the people fighting for it and failing that the people enforcing it.

No one in fighting for it (and by no one I mean no one in meaningful quantities and that means 10's of millions NO LESS)

since no one of fighting it falls to the people enforcing it. that means our government. NOT US.

as for showing them the law. They make it. They interprit it. They enforce it.

Then tell YOU what the law says. They tell you HOW it will be interprited. THEY tell YOU how and if and when it will be enforced.

that is so long as they hold the bigger stick. and right now YOUR interpritation of the law (right or wrong) is a smaller stick than THEIR interpritation.

The courts have a larger stick. we are not doing so well their but their is some level of hope.

Congress has a bigger stick but we apparently have already lost the battle their so far as I can see.

the only other entity with more power is the people as a whole. we are 10 thousand at most.

Make that 10 million and you MIGHT MAYBE have a chance.

Please explain to me how I am wrong.

Chris Taylor

Good. Your wish is my command.

Tripoli and NAR are proving that every day with a result of people leaving the hobby in droves.

Ironis isn't it that an organization with launches called "Large and dangerous Rocket Ships" and "Balls" would be hosted by and participated in, by people with no balls at all?

It is US (TRA/NAR) that are setting aside a HARD EXEMPTION out of irrational fear and causing uncontrollable giggling in ATF offices.

Which "they" is that?

Screw your goddamn interpretations. Interpretations never resulted in an arrest or convictrion (either) in rocketry and never will.

Jerry

• quadruple plonk *

but you fail to recognize that the fear of trouble is now SHARED by the attacker, and not only the attacked... thereby preventing and inhibiting 99% of the "potential" attackers.

You willingly and profusely show that the fear works on this side, but miss the "equal and opposite reaction".

~Duane Phillips.

The ATF can _not_ sentence you to jail. Only a court can do that. The ATF is not a court. It can only make accusations.

You are arguing as if you believe that an accusation of a possible technical violation of explosives regulations is the moral equivalent of being "found guilty of being an accused terrorist".

It's scary that people in America are learning to think this way. As citizens, we have not only the right to the _duty_ to stand up to such an accusation (if it comes to be made) with a response such as "oh yeah? let's go talk to the judge!".

Failure to do so (if you genuinely believe the accusation to be unjust) is as damaging to the "legal fiber" of the Republic as any actual crime or act of terrorism.

"My country is like a conquered province with foreign rulers - but they are _not_ foreigners, and _we_ are responsible for what they do." -Paul Goodman, "Like a Conquered Province: The Moral Ambiguity of America" (emphasis added).

What you are saying is that it is too much trouble any more to be a responsible American, so you would rather be a sheeple.

-dave w

you still loose to an uzi. hence why no one moves.

point is if the risk is high enough people will tend not to voluntarily place themselves in harms way.

that is the only point I am making.

so your telling if the ATF comes to my door ans says for these violations you are under arrest.

are you telling me I am not going to jail right then and their ? could have fooled me.

also in today's envoroment I am uneasy as to how SAFE my position would be if they decided to USE terrorism in any way in their case against me. I NEVER said I would be deemed a terrorists (although they might try)

Po> > so until someone higher on the chain tells the ATF that YES it does apply I

America" (emphasis added).

In the eyes of the media and the public, that's pretty much the way it plays these days.

Not judge. Jury of your peers...

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

negative. Judge decides of you get TRIED

Jury then decides if you are guilty. and I can not imagine it being hard for them to come to that conclusion. EVEN if you win what will this COST you as for your reputation hassle and financially to protect yourself.

how much will they "seize" and "ransack" in the process and destroy while doing it.

I never said you were assured losing but sometimes it matters not either way as far as damage done.

My fear is they would try and "make an example" of someone to disuade others.

_yes_they_will. I gave case in point. You are so blinded by fear, you don't see the truth. Risk has a threshold... it only works up to a certain breaking point. When people feel they are inevitably going to lose anyway, it suddenly frees them to make actions they normally might not take.

There is only in-action when the that course *appears* to have a greater potential for continued or regained life control.

I contrast the first 3 plane-loads of people to the 4th plane on 9/11. And I am telling you, an UZI would not have made a difference. These people _knew_ they were probably going to die anyway. The first 3 did not know this. At that moment, they lost most of their fear, and there is a very certain freedom in knowing that... and raised dramatically the chance of life.

The issue is more akin to boiling a frog. Turn the heat slowly, and he never knows he is dying, or slowly faints trying to take on the small increments of additional heat... But throw him into sudden change where he knows he is bound to lose, and he jumps!

~Duane Phillips.

As Janice Joplin used to sing, "Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose..."

How far is the present insanity going to go before we feel like we've got nothin' left to lose?

-dave w

About the distance from Ashcroft's mouth to his asshole...

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

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 12:47:12 -0400, "Chris Taylor Jr" is alleged to have written:

And that should change. I would love to fly on an airline that had an explicit policy of encouraging passengers to come aboard armed to the teeth. An armed society is a polite society.

- Rick "Whee!" Dickinson

The ATF may not want to try to make an example of someone because they know they have a weak case and will lose - for now. If they press the issue and lose it would just open the door for everyone to ignore them. They won't lose after the new regulations go into effect. Judging from the briefs from the TRA/NAR lawsuit it looks like a no-brainer decision - but we don't have one. It wouldn't surprise me if the judge in the TRA/NAR lawsuit has had a converstion with the ATF and he is holding off on issuing a judgement until the ATF has their reg's squared away. Until then the ATF is banking on intimidation to obtain what they don't yet have through legitimate regulatory authority.

Brad Hitch

Isn't that illegal?

-dave w

I believe that falls under "politics".