BATFE

[Keeb]

We are in the home stretch for the judges decision. Hopefully we all will see some regulatory relief at the end of the month.

Fly em big, Fly em high

[Handeman]

I'm glad I clicked here. I was wondering when the court date was, or is it just going to be a ruling issued?

Will it be before Aug 1 or could it take longer?
_________________
Handeman TRA #09903  L1

[kgholloway]

Handeman,

It could be either. My understanding is that the judge in the case must take some sort of action by the end of the month. He can either:

1) Make a ruling based on the evidence presented to him up until now.

Or

2) He will decide that he needs to hear oral arguments in the case.

If it's #2 he will have to schedule the court hearing for some date in the future.

Ken Holloway
NAR #78336, L-II

[Handeman]

And the wheels of [strike through]justice[/strike through] technicalities and case law grind on.....
_________________
Handeman TRA #09903  L1

[Keeb]

has anyone out there with better contacts than I heard of any possible progress or update on the situation as the 27th is this Friday. I would assume the legal staffs probably know if they will need to present oral arguments or be doing something orally.......

Keeb

[kgholloway]

Just saw a posting on another rocketry site. It seems that the judge in the case has asked the NAR/TRA and the BATFE for an extension to the July 27th status hearing. No word as to what this means except for another delay.
_________________
Kenneth G. Holloway
NAR #78336, L-II

[troj]

Purely speculation on my part, but I suspect he wants to further investigate something about the case.

Perhaps case law, to allow him to make a ruling?

-Kevin

[RDBones]

Maybe he was still laughing at the way the BATFE had the testing conducted !
_________________
<div>"No-Chute" Roy Polmanteer<br>L3 = TRA #11283 <br>www.arizonarocketryteam.net<br>Southern Arizona Rocketry Association<br>NAR Section #545 / TRA Prefecture #93</div><br>

[Handeman]

The testing methods the ATF used were fine, it was their analysis of the data and ridiculous conclusions that made them look like idiots.

Unfortunately, it's not illegal to be an idiot, even for the government. I just think the judge is going to rule in favor of the ATF.

I think that APCP is going to remain on the explosives list. If by some twist of fate, the judge does remove it from the list, I expect it will be back on the list as soon as the ATF can get it there. Either by regulation or screaming "terrorist threat" and getting congress to put it back on through legislation.

Personally I don't think most of the regulations concerning APCP, black powder, ematches, LEUPs, etc. fit the purpose of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, Title XI as stated in the law.

The Congress hereby declares that the purpose of this title is to protect interstate and foreign commerce against interference and interruption by reducing the hazard to persons and property arising from misuse and unsafe or insecure storage of explosive materials. It is not the purpose of this title to place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, storage, or use of explosive materials for industrial, mining, agricultural, or other lawful purposes, or to provide for the imposition by Federal regulations of any procedures or requirements other than those reasonably necessary to implement and effectuate the provisions of this title.
_________________
Handeman TRA #09903  L1

[tbrogan]

"It is not the purpose of this title to place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, storage, or use of explosive materials for industrial, mining, agricultural, or other lawful purposes,"

but we are going to anyway!!
then, they get to define "undue" "unnecessary" "other lawful purposes" are these guys great or what?

I believe he asked for the extension so he could go hunting with Dick Cheney

Tom

[falingtrea]

So did anyone else see this report on ABC News today. Seems a guy had a grudge against the Army and had a bunch of pipe bombs and stuff. When I saw the pics it looked to me like he was making the pipe bombs from smokeless powder, as you can see here.

Here is the url for the story itself.

If there is any truth to this, I wonder if we can use this in our court battle??

[mrmonteith]

As with all the regulations they don't mean anything if they're not enforced. You can make bombs out of stuff that doesn't explode or even burn but make expanding gases enough to rupture like those pipes. They regulate Sudefed but all it dd was make it harder for the law-abiding citizen only.

The thing with this is a matter of terms. Low explosives vs high explosives, which black powder and APCP fall in the same category, yet black powder is allowed pretty freely. Like shown someone used something that's readily available.

It's better if that just stick to what is safe and legal use instead of making all the red tape. Anyone not using it safe or legal is punished, clearly. But adding more steps and red tape doesn't stop anyone that's going to do it illegal anyway. They're not going to go through the red tape to begin with. So all you do is make it harder for the person that is going to use it properly. Yet now they make it just harder for them. Same thing with guns, sudafed, or a ton of other things. They just don't get it!

It's not the laws that's the problem.

Michael

[Balsa Bob]

I've heard nothing on the subject of the judge's ruling for quite a while now and, like everyone else, am forced to accept this waiting period.
I encourage everyone to remain vigilant regarding safety.
Bad press is not welcome anytime, but especially while the judge is pondering his ruling.
Any accident - no matter how innocent - would hurt our cause.