Joint Statement from Ken Good & Trip Barber

[troj]

So they can still go back and follow the rules and have it classified again or ask congress to put it on the list. This just means the rule making they had was faulty.

Hate to say it but knowing the BATFE it will be hard to keep them from trying something else to keep us from flying. Why you ask, Because they need to justify their existance to continue to get funding and grow the agency. The more they regulate the more money they get. Call your members of congress today!

Keep in mind that while that's easy in theory, the practice will be more difficult.

One of the things the appellate court said was that they had failed to justify why it's an explosive, provide data to corroborate that. This meant the ATF had to identify a specific burn rate, and say "anything above this is an explosive." So, they picked a burn rate, then used faulty science to say APCP burned faster than that (motor length rather than web thickness).

To overcome this, they would have to demonstrate, scientifically, that APCP when used for "its primary and intended purpose" burns faster than that burn rate. Not gonna happen; the stuff we use just doesn't meet that requirement, based on the number they picked.

So, what if they try and change the number? Not only will that risk putting other materials on the explosives list, which generates all sorts of additional nightmares, this would also require them saying in court, "Ooops. We screwed up. We were wrong on the burn rate."

The obvious question to ask in court? "So, you got it wrong the first time? You expect us to accept your number this time? You lost a case, so you now expect us to accept your new number?"

They've got a problem.

-Kevin

 

[Adam Selene]

What a great way to celebrate the anniversary of the launch of the first liquid fueled rocket!