|
ATF, DOT, other EXEMPTIONS
To avoid "interaction" with alphabet regulators we no longer resell contracted
motors. The contractors even provided all the papers for permits they asked for, and they
said "no" rather rudely, WITHOUT processing them.
"No soup for you." It sure would be
handy if citizens had rights. Hmmm.
It is interesting the way rockets are legally exempt from ATF. And how regulators are
operating well beyond their charter TODAY. ATF "knowingly and falsely" claimed PADs are not
exempt despite 27 CFR 555.141-a-8. CPSC is going after mail order chemical
sellers because one
of the MANY uses for those chemicals is to make firecrackers which
they have TOTALLY banned.
Hmmmm. The rules do not allow banning any possible repurposeable "precursor chemical". Oh,
wait, what gave them the right to ban firecrackers to begin with? Another regulator, ATF
specifically ALLOWS firecrackers for cultural and recreational purposes! Resend the
memo!
Put our product in every school interested in improving science and math. Fight the
government regulator's fight against its own citizens!
HARD NEWS
"In addition, the Court finds that the ATF's pronouncement
that sport rocket motors are not PADs is invalid
because it was made without compliance with the
notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures
of the OCCA and the APA."
Just WINNER Jerry
Court order FEDERAL COURT 19 March 2004 Part
1
Court order FEDERAL COURT 19 March 2004 Part
2
"The problem in this case is that
ATFE's explanation for its
determination that APCP deflagrates
lacks any coherence. We therefore
owe no deference to ATFE's
purported expertise because we
cannot discern it. ATFE has neither
laid out a concrete standard for
classifying materials along the
burn-deflagrate-detonate continuum,
nor offered data specific to the burn
speed of APCP when used for its
common or primary purpose. On this
record, the agency's decision cannot
withstand judicial review."
Just WINNER Jerry
FEDERAL APPEALS COURT order 10
February 2005
|
