 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Rockets / October 2006regarding E-matches
As some of you know... I got in a bit of trouble with the ATF like 4 years ago. There were some debates about how E-matches are regulated therefore requires a LEUP. Well when the ATF got me I had some oxrals and daveyfires (I made ejection charges out of them and they thought they were squibs) and I didn't get nailed on any of them... I even had a can of 4f blackpowder and again, no criminal charges on that either. I don't know if this means that ATF is just being a prick and trying to scare people into things or if they could really charge you with a crime if you had oxrals or 4f blackpowder for rocketry use. But in my test case, they either couldn't or didn't. No I didn't have any antique firearms, only "modern" firearms (that uses smokeless powders) and I am sure if its illegal to have blackpowder without using them for shooting they probably would have given me that. That's not to say that the ATF wont give you administative trouble though, it just means they possibly cannot give you a criminal charge for having E matches/bp around. I dont know what changes the Safe Explosives Act did however so dont flame me for it.  SignatureTAI FU Much as I kick ATF HQ for its stupid counterproductive policies, ATF has not been anything remotely like hardline in its enforcement actions wrt rocketry. The only fines I've heard of that rocketeers have been hit with are less than minor traffic tickets. ATF wants compliance, not a public relations black eye. However, they are over time becoming more insistent on compliance and I see no reason to expect this trend to ease. They certainly can charge you with criminal violations but until the HQ bigwigs have decided to start making examples of people they go for voluntary compliance. But, as is the case with fireworks, repeat flagrant violations will quickly use up their patience. ATF won't waste their time prosecuting 2-cent violators where a verbal warning is clearly enough. FWIW, pre-loaded ejection charge cannisters *are* squibs by standard industry definitions of the construction of such things. Sometimes rocketeers bring it on themselves by not doing their homework first. Just because you're using dynamite to kill gophers doesn't mean it's covered by the agricultural pest control exemption. ;-) +McG+ > As some of you know... I got in a bit of trouble with the ATF like 4 years > ago. There were some debates about how E-matches are regulated therefore [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I dont know what changes the Safe Explosives Act did however so dont flame > me for it. Quite true - the definition of a squib typically defines a device with an initiator (e-match) and a secondary composition. It is rather hard to argue that an e-match buried in a spoonful of BP is NOT a squib by that criteria. An e-match without a secondary composition is by that same definition not a squib. Mike D. > Much as I kick ATF HQ for its stupid counterproductive policies, ATF > has not [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > I dont know what changes the Safe Explosives Act did however so dont flame > > me for it. Yea, but they didnt charge me with having an E match or a squib... they took whatever that can burn however like all the estes engine, fireworks, "squibs", and took a picture of my PML Small Endeavor, I guess they were probably looking into it but didn't. All I got hit with was having a firearm... SignatureTAI FU > Quite true - the definition of a squib typically defines a device with an > initiator (e-match) and a secondary composition. It is rather hard to [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > flame >> > me for it. > Yea, but they didnt charge me with having an E match or a squib... they took > whatever that can burn however like all the estes engine, fireworks, > "squibs", and took a picture of my PML Small Endeavor, I guess they were > probably looking into it but didn't. All I got hit with was having a > firearm... And be glad they didn't go through the garage, find pieces of pipe left over from some plumbing repair, and charge you with possessing components of pipe bombs. (This *has* been done to a few fireworks hobbyists over the years by various police agencies. I think the legal term is "overcharging" in order to force a guilty plea on lesser charges.) Most usually they do just what they did to you--seize everything they think they can get away with, making you sweat and then be glad they didn't send you for a meeting with Madame Guillotine. Lesson learned. ;-) Face it: you had squibs, possessed and stored improperly. The fireworks were probably illegal too. The Estes motors, well, what with the fireworks for all they knew you were going to make skyrockets with those motors(more than a few people have!). And the Small Endeavour looked like it could hold quite a bit of flash in the nosecone for a really great huge skyrocket. The presence of illegal items effectively tainted everything else in the eyes of the law. What they did was SOP for cops these days. They seize everything that looks even vaguely suspicious *to them* and then take their time sorting through it and figuring out the best criminal case they can make with it. But they don't want to further overload the court system with petty stuff so the only thing they charged you with was the one 'quality' violation they found: the firearm. +McG+ > > Yea, but they didnt charge me with having an E match or a squib... they took > > whatever that can burn however like all the estes engine, fireworks, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > years by > various police agencies. A suspected terrorist cell was apprehended recently and charged with possession and transportation of bomb-making equipment. When arrested, the suspects were allegedly in possession of various bedsheets that could be used to fashion fuses, several six-packs of metal casings, and nearly half a tankful of highly explosive liquid ethyl. The suspects claimed to be traveling to a sporting event. (Stolen from the National Lampoon, circa 1970. The more things change...) Bill Sullivan > > > Yea, but they didnt charge me with having an E match or a squib... they took > > > whatever that can burn however like all the estes engine, fireworks, [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Bill Sullivan And the scary part is(hey, it *is* Halloween!)that today you'd simply vanish without a trace into the new American gulag system. It has occurred to me that I really shouldn't kick ATF HQ in the shins the way I do on various internet forums and lists. But I figure that if I suddenly quit doing that, it would look suspicious to the computers spying on my posts, and then the JBGT's really might come drag me away...because the gov't computers told them to. Ack! Who needs ghosts and goblins? +McG+ >Yea, but they didnt charge me with having an E match or a squib... they took >whatever that can burn however like all the estes engine, fireworks, >"squibs", and took a picture of my PML Small Endeavor, I guess they were >probably looking into it but didn't. All I got hit with was having a >firearm... Why did you need a firearm? Are you a GANGSTA? Phil > All I got hit with was having a firearm... What was illegal about this? Was the gun illegal? Or your possession of it? Why? Is this why you left the country? Frankly, I like your attitude, Tai, and wish you the best to make it back some day. Doug >> All I got hit with was having a firearm... > > What was illegal about this? Was the gun illegal? Or your possession of it? Why? Is this why > you left the country? If Tai wasn't a U.S. citizen, possession of a firearm would have been illegal. Personally, I think if you're allowed into the country *legally*, you should be afforded the same legal rights to possess a firearm as any citizen. Why? As a litmus test, mostly. If you can't be trusted with a firearm, you shouldn't BE here in the first place. That might make the bureaucrats use a little common sense when deciding who they let into the country. But hey, I suppose expecting bureaucrats to HAVE any common sense is a bit of a stretch... >> All I got hit with was having a firearm... > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Doug There are a lot of places where you can't just walk around with one and there are more places where if it is concealed, you have problems with the law. In Philly, they're trying to end the year with an average of at least one homocide a day. I'm confident that they'll make it. Phil Well apprantly I was in the USA illegally because my parents got me in with a I-95 back in 1989 when I was too young to understand all this. Well I assumed I entered legally because we took a plane and was let through the customs and all, and the fact my parents didnt take me back made me think we must be here legally. Of course they also somehow enrolled me in elementry through college, so I mean, what reason do I have to believe I was in the country illegally. Personally I would not overstay a visa intentionally but in this case it wasn't like I had a choice. I don't think I can ever come back to the USA again because the government seems somewhat tough about this. It doesn't mean I can't go to Canada however. I had those firearms purely for recreational purpose, just like why any of you guys would have firearms. SignatureTAI FU >> All I got hit with was having a firearm... > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Doug > I had those firearms purely for recreational purpose, just like why any of > you guys would have firearms. How did the cops (feds?) come to find them? Were they on your person? In your car? House? Doug They were in my house, I dont carry those things on my person cause I dont have a concealed handgun license... Apprantly someone snitched on me though... SignatureTAI FU > It doesn't mean I can't go to Canada however. What, you get drafted or something? SignatureTweak What is left to deploy a rocket if you do not have a LEUP? If the Rouse CD3 is a squip (it uses black powder next to an ematch), there are not too many options left. This type of control is really counter productive. > Much as I kick ATF HQ for its stupid counterproductive policies, ATF > has not [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > I dont know what changes the Safe Explosives Act did however so dont flame > > me for it. >What is left to deploy a rocket if you do not have a LEUP? If the >Rouse CD3 is a squip (it uses black powder next to an ematch), there >are not too many options left. This type of control is really counter eject-o-matic! Mine is almost done. > What is left to deploy a rocket if you do not have a LEUP? If the > Rouse CD3 is a squip (it uses black powder next to an ematch), there > are not too many options left. This type of control is really counter > productive. Yeah, ATF's policies about ematches and BP are pretty stupid. But geez, load the charges in the field from your carefully hidden can of BP. Don't leave any more contraband lying around than you have to... There's a rocketeer here in the Pacific NW who has been quite successful using a spring system for deployment. It *can* be done. And since I non-renewed my LEUP and don't plan to get another, I'm working on some of my own ideas to circumvent ATF regulated materials. It forces today's rocketeers back to the more intellectually engaging aspects of rocketry from the time before everything could be bought off the shelf. To quote my own description of amateur rocketry: "Innovation, invention, the fine art of jerryrigging together the most improbable combination of materials and devices into a rocket and actually getting the darn thing to work." By forcing so many hobbyists into this mode, ATF is making a big strategic mistake. +McG+ > > Much as I kick ATF HQ for its stupid counterproductive policies, ATF > > has not [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > > I dont know what changes the Safe Explosives Act did however so dont flame > > > me for it. > As some of you know... I got in a bit of trouble with the ATF like 4 years > ago. There were some debates about how E-matches are regulated therefore [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > -- > TAI FU You make a good point.. but lets not try to piss off the ATF and possibly the Judge.. The point is you are not free if your freedom depends on not pissing off a government official. This is business as usual in China and now it is business as usual in the U.S. It is not reasonable or right or wrong it is who you know and not ticking off the power over you at the time. Very, very sad! I would like to blame the terrorists, but the U.S. was well on this path way before they stepped in. They just speed up the process. Could the Rouse CO device be modified to activate via a spring loaded trigger? This would solve the problem completely. > > As some of you know... I got in a bit of trouble with the ATF like 4 years > > ago. There were some debates about how E-matches are regulated therefore [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > You make a good point.. but lets not try to piss off the ATF and > possibly the Judge.. Well, how about a timer fuse that is activated along with the motor when it lights (use a quickmatch to make up the distance from the back of the rocket to the ejection charge, then visco time fuse or those fuses used in a fireworks shell for the rest of the time) Or just use electronic timer that activates a spring loaded flint which in turn lights the powder? Or perhaps compressed air ejection... SignatureTAI FU > The point is you are not free if your freedom depends on not pissing > off a government official. This is business as usual in China and now [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] >> You make a good point.. but lets not try to piss off the ATF and >> possibly the Judge.. > > As some of you know... I got in a bit of trouble with the ATF like 4 years > > ago. There were some debates about how E-matches are regulated therefore [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > You make a good point.. but lets not try to piss off the ATF and > possibly the Judge.. > > As some of you know... I got in a bit of trouble with the ATF like 4 years > > ago. There were some debates about how E-matches are regulated therefore [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > You make a good point.. but lets not try to piss off the ATF and > possibly the Judge.. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.