[Trolls} Received the holy grail and are silent

Had it for YEARS and didn't know it.
IRONICALLY if TRA simply renews USR motors per its own rules, they will
be 100% legal (really).
Let me SHOW you.
:)
Or not :-(
Can you even imagine ???????????
I Can.
Jerry
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Loading thread data ...
Jeeeeeees....who put the quarter in you?!?!?!?!?
Wait, it's saturday night....
I'll take my twin 40's of maddog over your rum-n-cokes any day :)
Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75
Reply to
the notorious t-e-d
Had what??
Jerry, you're delusional. Even if TRA ever became deranged enough to cert your motors, it would not make them legal. You still don't have ATF permits to manufacture them, so in the eyes of the ATF they would be illegal to sell. Nor do you have the DOT permits to ship them, so they'd still be illegal to ship. Club certification would not change these facts.
Furthermore, certification of motors wouldn't erase your felony conviction for possession of a destructive device, which makes you a "prohibited person" according to ATF.
So far you haven't even shown us this alleged "holy grail" referred to in the title of your post, whatever that may be.
Reply to
raydunakin
Yes it would.
The MANUFACTURER does (for other purposes entirely), but the ATF has CLEARLY said to them the sport motors are not subject to that permit at any point in time.
I have posted the cites over and over. A judge even concurred and you STILL defame it. You are untrainable.
The good news is the folks that matter, the manufacturer, and the ATF all agree sport motors are all exempt.
ONLY the TRA is out of synch.
Therefore it is a FACT that if TRA simply followed its own rules (I have cited them over and over as well) on motor renewals and required ONLY motors and money in the case of USR just as it does with all its other "manufacturers", then the motors would be available again immediately.
You do not have the authority or expertise to say the exact and precise opposite of the ATF's own statements to the manufacturer. To the extent TRA goes along with this, they are in "restraint of trade".
Jerry
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
points to ponder:
A: the BATFE changes its rules and regs to suit itself at its own whim.
B: BATFE did not go through proper procedures during recent rule making.
C: BATFE has done this several times in the past.
D: TRA certification is beating a dead horse. Have you tried NAR or the Canadians? if so did they say the same. NYET!
E. Per all the fecal material that has been posted here by yourself Mr. Irvine and all the other fecal matter that has flown in responses. I politely ask for you to simply give it up. Unless Moses should return with the next five commandments saying that Irvine is good, Irvine is right. It is not going to happen in my lifetime or yours. All the continued bantering of this matter is doing is embarressing yourself and allowing us to see what a huge waste of basic component chemicals you are.
Reply to
nitram578
Prove it.
Prove it.
You've posted no cites from the ATF. Where is the ATF's statement saying that your manufacturer doesn't need a LEMP?
Prove it. I've posted a statement from the ATF which says manufacturers DO need a LEMP. If they have since changed that policy, please post their statement saying so.
First off, they do not require "motors and money only" from other manufacturers. All manufacturers must show proof that they are in compliance with ATF, DOT, and state laws. Secondly, even if your problems with ATF went away, you still don't have DOT approvals, nor do you have CSFM permits.
No, I just have the ATF's own statements which I have posted before and will now post again. You have nothing but a record of lying.
formatting link
In particular, check out question #3... "3. I would like to manufacture and distribute single use rocket motors and/or propellant reload kits. What ATF license is required? Only a manufacturer's license is required. Licensed manufacturers may engage in the business of manufacturing explosive materials for purposes of sale or distribution or for their own use. It is not necessary for a licensed manufacturer to also obtain a dealer's license to engage in business on his or her licensed premises as a dealer in explosive materials. See 27 CFR =A7 555.41(b)(3)."
That's the ATF's official, published statement saying that they require LEMPs for rocket motor manufacturers. If you have another official statement from them that contradicts that, post it. Also, if it predates their current published position, then it's not their current policy -- it would only be useful for overturning their current policy, through the court.
Reply to
raydunakin
Oh, I forgot one other thing. Even IF your manufacturer was 100% legal, YOU still couldn't get their motors certified. Only the manufacturer can submit motors for certification. Your mystery manufacturer will have to come out from under that cloak of secrecy and submit the motors if they ever want to have them certified.
s
Reply to
raydunakin
a écrit dans le message de news: snipped-for-privacy@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
He can maybe submit one motor manufactured by him, then sell those manufactured by his "manufacturer". Like someone certifying a J350 and then make them manufactured by another one.
Reply to
michel
To do that, Jerry would have to be a manufacturer. He says he isn't.
Both he and the other manufacturer would have to have LEMPs and state permits, and of course the motors would have to be legal to ship.=20
i
Reply to
raydunakin
While other issues are real, this is a silly TRA-only rule. Under the TRA rule, Quest motors would not be certifiable. Nor would the motors sold under the PML or former Rocketvision labels. And for that matter, neither would the Aerotech by Ellis motors, including the infamous spongy J350.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
As far as I can tell it is not a rule. Of course if you were not certified, it would be necessary to reveal the manufacturer and the manufacturer would have to be certified. Of course, there probably is no manufacturer other than Jerry which is why he doesn't want to reveal the name. Life is tough when you are the manager, consultant and employee of a company the employees less than two employees.
Reply to
Phil Stein
Nope, just have AeroTech submit the PML motors and you're fine. That's exactly what was stated was the proper way to go about it.
For example, SkyRipper uses AT slugs as preheaters, and as such provides documentation to that effect, to show the proper DOT paperwork is in place.
-Kevin
Reply to
Kevin Trojanowski
If you're referring to the case that was posted about last week, it looks to me like he's not a felon anymore:
http://170.164.50.60/openaccess/CRIMINAL/minute.asp?courtcode=X&casenumber=FWV018813&defnbr=75199&defseq=1&otnmseq=0&dsn=&actioncode=HRS&actiondate=20010619&actiontime=8.3 According to what I'm seeing, it looks like his plea was changed to Not Guilty, and the charges were dismissed, upon completion of his probation.
Here's the relevant quote:
TERMINATION OF PROBATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1203.3 PC GRANTED. DEFENDANT DISCHARGED. CONVICTION(S) HERETOFORE ENTERED IS SET ASIDE; A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY IS ORDERED ENTERED AND THE CASE IS DISMISSED PURSUANT TO SECTION 1203.4 PC.
So, he may not be a "convicted felon" after all. At least, not for this case, any more.
- Rick "Interesting reading" Dickinson
Reply to
Rick Dickinson
There are two counts; go to the summary page and look at the plea information -- count 1 has no plea, and is the one I would guess was expunged. Count 2 still has a guilty plea.
I'd bet that if both counts were expunged, jerry would've stated as much.
-Kevin
Reply to
Kevin Trojanowski
I think the problem there is I think the S&T guy is that same one who's kid opend one of Jerry shipments that came via US Mail in an unmarked box. The kid opened it and it contained model aircraft parts - er I mean rocket motors. He was not amused.
One thing I'll say for Jerry - he makes a lasting impression on people.
Reply to
Phil Stein
I'm gonna let You guys in on a little secret I've been keeping to myself. It makes Me chuckle every time I think about it.
Antonio J. Bestard, jerry's criminal defense attorney, happens to be a member of the Western Pyrotechnic Association, as am I. But that's not how I know Him. Antonio Bestard has a brother who happens to be married to My sister. Which makes Antonio Bestard a member of My extended family. :)
Poor jerry.
Reply to
Dave Grayvis

Site Timeline

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.