New Restrictions on Black Powder?

[rocketsaway]

Man, what planet do you live on? These things have ALREADY happened. Don't you remember the ten year lawsuit filed on our behalf by Nar and Tra because a branch of the government arbitrarily decided to regulate our AP motors?

Guess who also was involved w/ this ?
Lautenberg-NJ and Shumer-NY

Both have a clear agenda.

And the people keep voting them in.

 

[JFlagg]

Anybody besides me ever received this https://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=3927 letter? If you don't think Big Brother is watching, think again.

Did you look at the date on that? 2005, Seven years back. Yes they went after a bunch of firecracker makers using invoices from some of the pyro supply companies. Big illegal crackers were, and probably remain, good money in the bigger cities if you are willing to break the law. So are drugs, untaxed cigarettes, and under the table gun dealing.

The CPSC went several rounds with Skylighter, one of the bigger hobby pyro supply guys and a couple other companies in similar business back about the time of that letter. Well, Skylighter is still up and running and still selling pyro materials, they just won't sell combinations of materials that are obviously for firecrackers and flash powder. But yes, they are watching. The best course is to peruse a legal path with the required permits and whatnot if you want to make this stuff. It can be hard, but I know of lots of people who successfully do this even in a tough state like California.

As to people with agendas. Yep, there are probably a group of people on each side of every politically issue in the country. That is how our democracy works. People pitch their agendas and it either passed or fails based on how a majority of representatives vote. If they pass something you don't like, then that doesn't mean government doesn't work, it just means you didn't have enough political capital on your side. My views aren't upheld all that often either. Ranting on some rocketry forum is unlikely to change anything but I guess it make you feel better.

 

[tmacklin]

Did you look at the date on that? 2005, Seven years back. Yes they went after a bunch of firecracker makers using invoices from some of the pyro supply companies. Big illegal crackers were, and probably remain, good money in the bigger cities if you are willing to break the law. So are drugs, untaxed cigarettes, and under the table gun dealing.

The CPSC went several rounds with Skylighter, one of the bigger hobby pyro supply guys and a couple other companies in similar business back about the time of that letter. Well, Skylighter is still up and running and still selling pyro materials, they just won't sell combinations of materials that are obviously for firecrackers and flash powder. But yes, they are watching. The best course is to peruse a legal path with the required permits and whatnot if you want to make this stuff. It can be hard, but I know of lots of people who successfully do this even in a tough state like California.

As to people with agendas. Yep, there are probably a group of people on each side of every politically issue in the country. That is how our democracy works. People pitch their agendas and it either passed or fails based on how a majority of representatives vote. If they pass something you don't like, then that doesn't mean government doesn't work, it just means you didn't have enough political capital on your side. My views aren't upheld all that often either. Ranting on some rocketry forum is unlikely to change anything but I guess it make you feel better.

I have no agenda. I answered an ad which appeared in Popular Science magazine while seeking information on amateur rocketry. I don't like bullies, governmental or otherwise. America is a constitutional republic, not a democracy. I don't make illegal fireworks. No rant, just facts. Be careful where you buy your pizza, it might be a Mafia front.

 

[JFlagg]

I have no agenda. I answered an ad which appeared in Popular Science magazine while seeking information on amateur rocketry. I don't like bullies, governmental or otherwise. America is a constitutional republic, not a democracy. I don't make illegal fireworks. No rant, just facts. Be careful where you buy your pizza, it might be a Mafia front.

Well, I guess you didn't read the rest of the thread. The agenda comment was not directed at you.

 

[tmacklin]

A trip down memory lane: https://www.space-rockets.com/arsanews.html Hobby rocket motors enjoy no specific constitutional protection, unlike the second amendment which protects "arms". This is why black powder is OK for firearm use but not for ejection charges. In either case, it smells like **** once burned. :wink:

 

[JFlagg]

.... In either case, it smells like **** once burned. :wink:

Everyone I know that loves fireworks loves that sulfur smell.

It smells like ... victory.

 

[tmacklin]

It seems to me that the primary danger to the rocket hobby in this current climate of hysteria is the notion amoung politicians that "we must do something". After 9-11, we get the DHS and the Safe Explosives Act. I have no doubt that the BATFE is still fuming about the decision in the NAR/TRA lawsuit and would love any excuse to craft more draconian rules against energetic materials. Such measures will not make "the children" any safer because criminals, including terrorists, don't play by the rules.

 

[JFlagg]

It seems to me that the primary danger to the rocket hobby in this current climate of hysteria is the notion amoung politicians that "we must do something". After 9-11, we get the DHS and the Safe Explosives Act. I have no doubt that the BATFE is still fuming about the decision in the NAR/TRA lawsuit and would love any excuse to craft more draconian rules against energetic materials. Such measures will not make "the children" any safer because criminals, including terrorists, don't play by the rules.

Yeah, I can agree with that except the part about the BATFE fuming. I thnk most of the agency's employees are completely unaware of that part of the regulations and those that were involved have moved on to other issues. I think it is largely a job to them and they don't really have a dog in the fight.

Part of my purpose of posting so much in this thread is to keep steering it away from politics. Such discussion will only get the thread closed. I think the outcome of this legislation will be important to all that use electronic deployment and how we have to operate in the future to keep us in compliance.

 

[cerving]

Notice that they wanted the names/addresses of R/C hobbyists too... think that might come up again? I bet the AMA is already mobilizing their attorneys...

A trip down memory lane: https://www.space-rockets.com/arsanews.html Hobby rocket motors enjoy no specific constitutional protection, unlike the second amendment which protects "arms". This is why black powder is OK for firearm use but not for ejection charges. In either case, it smells like **** once burned. :wink:

 

[cerving]

Somebody needs to come up with an easy and cheap electronic non-pyro deployment...

Yeah, I can agree with that except the part about the BATFE fuming. I thnk most of the agency's employees are completely unaware of that part of the regulations and those that were involved have moved on to other issues. I think it is largely a job to them and they don't really have a dog in the fight.

Part of my purpose of posting so much in this thread is to keep steering it away from politics. Such discussion will only get the thread closed. I think the outcome of this legislation will be important to all that use electronic deployment and how we have to operate in the future to keep us in compliance.

 

[tmacklin]

I should be more specific. I should have said, "elements within the BATFE", meaning the policy makers. In my view there is an institutional mentality at work, largely unseen by us peasants. (That letter I received in '05 provides a rare glimpse into these behind the scenes activities.) Being a police agency, it is a top down organization. And like all good soldiers "theirs is not to reason why, theirs is just to do or die", so to speak.

Anyway, the week is almost over, thank God.

 

[tmacklin]

Somebody needs to come up with an easy and cheap electronic non-pyro deployment...

There was a guy who named John Drayna who sold a make your own sugar rockets package deal (See attachment). He also had an idea for a non-pyro ejection system he named "HANEES" which stood for "heat activated non-explosive ejection system". Apparently, it worked by burning a fusable link of some sort which in turn released a bungee activated plunger which would then push out the laundry. This was a pyrotechnic to mechanical system. His website (gone) said he had applied for a patent.

This system could easily be modified to be an electronically activated system via an altimeter, especially in larger airframe.

View attachment octoberscience.pdf

 

[gldknght]

The best course is to peruse a legal path with the required permits and whatnot if you want to make this stuff. It can be hard, but I know of lots of people who successfully do this even in a tough state like California.

You just don't seem to get it. We don't want to have to get permits to enjoy a hobby. We don't want the government deciding what is "safe" and what isn't. We want the government to stay out of our lives and out of our business. If I want to make a fire cracker, and I blow my thumbs off, it's not the job of the government to tell me I can't. This is the dumbing down of America. Let me blow my thumbs off, I'll learn something and probably never do it again.

What ever the hot button issue is, whether it's gun control, black powder control, or smoking cigarettes in public, when the governement makes it illegal to do, then only the criminals will do it, or have it. People, criminals will always find a way to do their illegal stuff no matter what. Punishing the law abiders is not the answer, whether it's with more regulation, or removal of the items in question.

I think we need tougher penalties on law breakers. I don't mean incarceration, either. Take those bombers from Boston, how about making them pay for the damages they caused to people and property. People died? Then I say we execute those responsible. On the court house lawn, in public. Tell me that's not a deterrent to others thinking about doing the same thing.

 

[JFlagg]

You just don't seem to get it. We don't want to have to get permits to enjoy a hobby. We don't want the government deciding what is "safe" and what isn't. If I want to make a fire cracker, and I blow my thumbs off, it's not the job of the government to tell me I can't. This is the dumbing down of America. Let me blow my thumbs off, I'll learn something and probably never do it again.

What ever the hot button issue is, whether it's gun control, black powder control, or smoking cigarettes in public, when the governement makes it illegal to do, then only the criminals will do it, or have it. People, criminals will always find a way to do their illegal stuff no matter what. Punishing the law abiders is not the answer, whether it's with more regulation, or removal of the items in question.

I think we need tougher penalties on law breakers. I don't mean incarceration, either. Take those bombers from Boston, how about making them pay for the damages they caused to people and property. People died? Then I say we execute those responsible. On the court house lawn, in public. Tell me that's not a detterant to others thinking about doing the same thing.

A fine opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. I don't disagree with some of it. But I don't make the rules and you don't either. We elect people who do. So there are a few choices as I see it: Become politically more active and try to change things, do things that are illegal and risk the consequences, or get on with life and rockets. You get that choice too. But mind you, if you choose to break the law, get arrested, and it makes the news, you screw us all.

 

[gldknght]

Well, I do vote, every time. Unfortunately those that are hassling us are not from my district, or even my state. I wish they were so we could fire them. They seem to have forgotten who they work for.

 

[shockie]

I didn't know that most states consider it illegal to make BP for your own personal use. Does that also mean fireworks for your own personal use?I knew it was acceptable to make your own on the Fed level and you are correct this proposed law would require a Fed permit/license for home manufacture of personal fireworks. They haven't posted the text of the proposed bill yet that I can find.

Terry

 

[Sully]

That number itself (the "100,000") is questionable; I have seen other statistics, it's hard to know which one is accurate.

More important, that total number of 100,000 (or whatever it is) rejected applications includes a high percentage of failures of the system itself. That is, the computer was "jammed" on a particular day during a period of high application activity. The overflow applications are automatically categorized as "rejected" without even looking at them, and almost all of these are from legitimate firearms owners/buyers who had to re-apply (and were properly accepted on subsequent application). It is not clear at all that these 100,000 rejections stopped ANYONE from improperly making their purchase, only that the government database system was overloaded. It is clear that many of these 100,000 simply re-applied and completed their purchases at a later time.

I was one of them.

I think you're probably right, but my point wasn't about the numbers, it was about the logical fallacy of comparing knowns with unknowns. As was previously posted, we know of several cases of mass murder or terrorism where background checks would not have (and did not) prevented the tragedy. That does not mean background checks don't work. I used the 100k number as an example because it was related to background checks. My point was tha we have NO idea if or how many crimes were prevented by the current background check system. Even if only 5 or 10% of the prevented sales were actually justified and upheld, that's still 5000 potentially dangerous people who will have a harder time buying a gun. If it really only is 5-10%, it also means the bureaucracy's a mess, but that's another issue altogether.

I could have used another example where we do have data: whenever there is a health campaign that calls for increasing cigarette taxes, there are always people who claim "that doesn't work, an extra 75 cents won't make me quit." And sure enough, there are still plenty of smokers even at $7 a pack. But, the taxes do work: consistently, smoking rates decrease after cigarette prices or taxes rise. So pointing to the remaining smokers as evidence to the contrary would be wrong.

I don't have a strong opinion about background checks. I think there should be some scrutiny and regulation to keep guns and explosives away from certain people as best we can. I don't think that any regulation can prevent all mass murders, and wouldn't expect a background check rule to do that. I also doubt that the federal government can come up with a sensible, efficient, cost- and time-effective way to do this sort of thing. Wouldn't it be nice if instead of "gun control" vs "pro-gun" we could just do something for "gun safety?" I think that the current regulations could probably be changed to improve safeguards and ALSO to streamline the bureaucracy to make appropriate sales easier on the buyers and sellers. Kind of a pipe dream, I guess.

 

[o1d_dude]

The best course is to peruse a legal path with the required permits and whatnot if you want to make this stuff. It can be hard, but I know of lots of people who successfully do this even in a tough state like California.

The first rule of rocketry in California is we don't talk about rocketry in California. Seriously.

 

[JFlagg]

I didn't know that most states consider it illegal to make BP for your own personal use. Does that also mean fireworks for your own personal use?I knew it was acceptable to make your own on the Fed level and you are correct this proposed law would require a Fed permit/license for home manufacture of personal fireworks. They haven't posted the text of the proposed bill yet that I can find.

Terry

You can start here: https://www.americanpyro.com/State Laws (main)/statelaws.html

Layered over that is both county and city regulations and you will have to do a fair amount of research. You can also visit: https://www.pyrouniverse.com/forum/forum.php and ask in the appropriate subforums once you gain posting privileges.

 

[DJDeadParrot]

I think the outcome of this legislation will be important to all that use electronic deployment and how we have to operate in the future to keep us in compliance.

...which is exactly why I'm keeping half an eye on this thread.

 

[Right Wing Wacko]

I don't believe there is any specific information because the bills have not been put forward as actual legislation yet, and likely never will. The Senate majority knows they don't have the votes after the gun background check bill failed and are unlikely to even bother.

The bill was formally introduced in the Senate last week by Harry Reid. For some reason the actual text of the bill "is not available".

The bill requires a background check to purchase black powder, black powder substitute, or smokeless powder, in any quantity. It provides the Attorney General with the authority to stop the sale of explosives when a background check reveals that the applicant is a known or suspected terrorist and the Attorney General reasonably believes that the person may use the explosives in connection with terrorism.

The legislation makes it illegal to manufacture homemade explosives without a permit; and directs ATF to conduct a study on the tagging of explosives, particularly black powder, black powder substitute, and smokeless powder, which could enable law enforcement to detect, identify, and trace explosives used in crimes.

Potentially this could require background checks for EVERYTHING we do from little 1/4A engines, to AP, not just ejection charges

 

[shrox]

...If I want to make a fire cracker, and I blow my thumbs off, it's not the job of the government to tell me I can't. This is the dumbing down of America. Let me blow my thumbs off, I'll learn something and probably never do it again...

I concur.

 

[tmacklin]

Ok James, here is my "take".

Part of the issue is combining "common sense" and "government regulation" in the same sentence.

Who determines "mental health"? Someone could look at certain children diagnosed with ADD/ADHD and see them as "mentally unfit" and add them to a government database "watch list". What do we do when those children grow up? Do they keep the scarlet MU? Do we REALLY want to go there? The problem for most government programs is once they start, they are like the Terminator and execute orders without feeling, without remorse, and are very hard to bring down.

My Exhibit A on why government regulation doesn't work is the shooting at Fort Hood. Up until the shooting, he could have passed all screening. He was, after all, a major in the US Army. The government repeatedly chose to ignore the warning signs that Major Hasan was becoming radicalized. Why? Political Correctness? Perhaps. Regardless of the reason, our countrymen were gunned down as he shouted "Allahu Ahkbar!"

I'd rather live in a risky world where I am free to make my own choices and adapt, then to have choices forced on me by the government in the name of being "safe".

Perhaps our government should stop looking at materials such as BP and pressure cookers, and start looking at radicalized Muslims. Just a thought.

Greg

Who determines mental health? Current news headlines tend to indicate that former agents of the Internal Revenue Service will make such determinations. :wink: