POCATELLO, Idaho USA — On April 30th, 2007, United States District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill signed the death warrant for Firefox Enterprises, Inc. in a case brought by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commissions (CPSC) and on which Judge Winmill had previously issued a ruling calling for the parties to reach a working agreement.

Most death warrants are for the immediate termination of life, in a manner as humane as possible, under the circumstances, that is. This explains the rise of chemically-induced death sentences in the U.S. over the more archaic forms of electrocution or hanging. But Judge Winmill's sentence for Firefox did not call for the immediate termination of life — it called for a deliberate and torturous continuation of business based on the judge's order of what Firefox will be and will not be allowed to do. For all practical purposes, Firefox is dead.

For amateur rocketry enthusiasts nationwide, the interest in this case has been high, since Firefox Enterprises and similar companies have been the source for chemicals known as "oxidizers" and "fuels" that are combined to produce experimental research rocket motors. This case, immediately for Firefox and certainly to follow for other similar suppliers, may spell the end of availability of those products, creating a serious effect for amateur and experimental rocketeers nationwide.

On December 6, 2006, Judge Winmill issued a ruling that directed Firefox and CPSC to negotiate a mutually acceptable plan for the enforcement of regulations and applicable law which CPSC has the authority to enforce. Whereas hobby rocketry enthusiasts are more commonly affected by the governmental oversight of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) due to the use of commercially manufactured propellant, CPSC's case against Firefox is unique in that none of the chemicals it sells is considered an explosive.

Firefox is not regulated by the ATF. ATF regulations and the federal Explosives Control Act only apply to the commerce and storage of explosives, of which the ATF publishes a list annually. Nothing that Firefox sells is found on the ATF List of Explosives. And, nothing Firefox sells meets the definition of an explosive. The company merely sells individual chemicals that can be combined to make a chemical composition that can meet the definition of an explosive.

On the other hand, the CPSC was created by Congress to reduce or eliminate injuries to consumers caused by dangerous and/or hazardous products. The regulations that CPSC is applying in the Firefox case are defined in three sources: 1) Federal Hazardous Substance Act (FHSA) at 15 U.S.C. 1261 et seq., 2) the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPS Act) at 15 U.S.C. 2051 et seq., and 3) the regulations of the CPSC at 16 C.F.R. 1500 and 1507.

The judge initially set a deadline of January 15, 2007 for CPSC and Firefox to reach an agreement on which chemicals and supplies are to be limited in sales to individuals who do not possess an ATF Explosives Manufacturer's Permit. This didn't happen, the two sides agreeing to disagree, so on April 30th, Judge Winmill issued his ruling based on recommendations submitted to him by U.S. attorney's representing the CPSC and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) as well as counsel for the defendants, Firefox.

Firefox's recommendations were almost unilaterally ignored, with the exception that the government must bear the costs of copying and shipping should CPSC or DOT request records for review. The judge granted the government's recommendations in their entirety with the exception of the government's request to strike the expert reports submitted by the defendant Firefox. Since the government got all of their requests in the order, the judge saw no reason to deny the record from standing as submitted.

Three of the four points of paragraph 5 in the judge's order that may have the greatest effect on amateur rocket scientists are that Firefox is permanently restrained from "participating in any transaction that involves selling, giving away, holding for sale, or otherwise distributing:"

• To any delivery address or to any individual, more than one pound of any oxidizer per twelve-month period;
• To any delivery address or to any individual, any fuel for which the particle size is finer than 100 mesh (or particles less than 150 microns in size); and
• To any delivery address or to any individual, any tube 10 inches or shorter in length.

As defined in the order, "Oxidizer" means ammonium nitrate, potassium chlorate, potassium perchlorate, potassium nitrate, sodium chlorate, sodium perchlorate, sodium nitrate, barium nitrate, strontium nitrate, or potassium permanganate. "Fuel" means aluminum and aluminum alloys, magnesium, magnesium/aluminum alloys (magnalium), antimony sulfide, antimony trisulfide, potassium benzoate, sodium benzoate, sodium salicylate, sulfur, titanium, zinc, zirconium, or zirconium hydride.

Even if you just wanted to buy a box of 3/8" by 2" long paper tubes to make ejection charges with, Firefox can't sell them to you. You would need to buy tubes longer than 10 inches and cut them up yourself. With a caveat. A gotcha, if you will. If you have an ATF manufacturing permit, you can buy as many tubes less than 10" in length that you wish. Quoting from the judge's order, these restrictions "shall not apply to the distribution of any oxidizer, fuel, fuse, or tube to any individual or entity that submits a valid, current, certified license to manufacture explosives issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ('ATF'), provided, in the case of an entity, that the distribution is made to a 'responsible person' for the entity as defined at 18 U.S.C. § 841(s) and 27 C.F.R. § 555.11."

Further damage to Firefox's business is that they are permanently restrained from "offering metallic powders for transportation within the same outer packaging as any oxidizer ('oxidizer' being defined for purposes of this paragraph according to the Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 C.F.R. Pts. 171-180, and not limited to the specific oxidizers set out in paragraph 3(c) above)," and "failing to declare all metallic powders as hazardous materials to the carrier prior to transportation," which requires that all metallic powders must now be shipped as HAZMAT. That's one pound a year, plus HAZMAT fees. But no fuel and oxidizer in the same box, so that's two shipments.

Rocketeers wishing to purchase the materials to produce their own "black powder" must purchase their materials separately, as Firefox is permanently restrained from "offering for shipment, within the same outer packaging, all the chemicals or materials used to manufacture 'flash powder,' 'black powder,' or any explosive or pyrotechnic article or device, irrespective of whether the chemicals or materials are listed in the hazmat table found under section 101, Part 172 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations."

Apparently the ability for individuals to produce their own pyrotechnic-style compounds also struck a nerve, as Firefox now finds themselves permanently restrained from "offering for transportation or selling any 'thermatic' mixture unless the material is subjected to the testing required by the Hazardous Materials Regulations, including, but not limited to, self-reactivity testing under the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria, as incorporated into the Hazardous Materials Regulations by 49 C.F.R. § 107.7, to determine the material's type; and, if required by the Hazardous Materials Regulations, submission of the mixture to the Associate Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, for approval."

Even things which just seemed unusual made it into the ruling, such as Firefox being permanently restrained from "offering any metallic powder for shipment, unless the metallic powder is classified, described and documented on a shipping paper and on the packaging containing it, based on the smallest particle size found in the material (e.g., magnesium powder containing 50% or more ribbons or turnings must be classified as 'Magnesium Powder,' and not as 'Magnesium with more than 50 percent magnesium in pellets, turnings or ribbons')," meaning that if they were to sell 99.9% magnesium turnings, with .1% percentage magnesium powder, it had to be labeled "Magnesium powder."

In addition, the order called for extensive record keeping (photocopies of drivers licenses and, if applicable, ATF licenses for all recipients, as well as detailed invoices maintained for at least seven years and Firefox’s agreement to provide those records to CPSC at any time on demand.

No doubt, the impact of this decision will weigh heavily in the fireworks community, where the majority of participants do not hold federal ATF explosives manufacturing permits. Firefox and similar competitors are suppliers of hobby-oriented quantities to hobby-oriented users. The stifling restrictions being forced upon the fireworks community will mean that companies like Firefox will simply go out of business. And if Firefox does, the court order requires them to notify CPSC and DOT, adding insult to injury.

It is currently legal for you to mix and cast your own motors as long as they are for your own use and not for resale without a federal explosives permit. It is also currently legal for you to fire the same motor on your property without an explosives permit. It is not, however, legal for you to transport your motor to an approved launch site without an explosives permit. But how can you mix and cast your own motors if you can't get the materials? Gotcha!

Now that legal precedent has been set that requires one company to demand that you have an ATF manufacturing permit in order to purchase more than 1 pound per year of non-legally-restricted powders, these "fuels" and "oxidizers" used in the manufacturer of amateur rocket motors, how long will it be before it is required of all companies? How long before said precedent becomes law?

Documents:

• Judgment: The United States of America v. Gary Purrington (64K Adobe PDF)
• U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission Press Release (HTML Document)

05-05-2007 06:02 PM  #1
Steve_Shannon Growing more clueless...   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 2220	How can we help? This is the end result of a populace which expects its government to "protect" it. I don't make amateur fireworks, but if we don't support Firefox and amateur firework makers, then our hobby may be next.

05-05-2007 06:55 PM  #2
jimmyc-rocket Certified Level Two   Joined: Mar 2007 Posts: 68	Well here we are in the land of the free!!!! How much longer until we will not have any freedom unless it is approved by our government? I was always under the impression that the government was supposed to be for the people but I am now feeling like it is for the people in government. This is called Communisms. I believe it was Russian Leader Mikhail Gorbachev who said, “As we (Russia) move to Democracy the US moves to Communism.” This may not be a correct quote but it is the meaning and I am beginning to believe he was correct.

05-05-2007 07:36 PM  #3
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 4030	Quote: Well here we are in the land of the free!!!! That is correct! You are FREE to do what you are TOLD!

05-05-2007 07:39 PM  #4
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	How many k's are there in Amerika? The Fox is dead! Long live the Fox!

05-06-2007 10:34 AM  #5
mrbusdriver Certified Level One   Joined: Mar 2007 Posts: 28	Meanwhile, while having all this success in harassing the legitimate users... The driver of the tanker truck that burned down the Cali overpass had a rap sheet as long as my arm...weapons, drugs, prison time. But all's well, he passed his TSA background check... It would be funny if it wasn't so sickening.

05-06-2007 12:15 PM  #6
ken487 New Member   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 3	Ammonium Nitrate is the first thing mentioned. Does this mean that as a farmer I would need to get an Explosives Manufacturing Permit to fertilize my fields? Or that I can only purchase 1 lb. per year? That would really limit the amount or product grown per acre, raising the per unit cost and that would really destroy the ethanol industry. There would not be enough corn to feed everyone and make useless ethanol, which takes more energy to produce then it gives back. Don't get me started onthis useless stuff now too. Ken

05-06-2007 01:17 PM  #7
Steve_Shannon Growing more clueless...   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 2220	Quote: Ammonium Nitrate is the first thing mentioned. Does this mean that as a farmer I would need to get an Explosives Manufacturing Permit to fertilize my fields? Or that I can only purchase 1 lb. per year? That would really limit the amount or product grown per acre, raising the per unit cost and that would really destroy the ethanol industry. There would not be enough corn to feed everyone and make useless ethanol, which takes more energy to produce then it gives back. Don't get me started onthis useless stuff now too. Ken No, as I read it this court order only places conditions on the seller, Firefox Enterprises. The end user is free to go elsewhere and buy from others without the same conditions. That's why this is such a bizarre and unworkable judgement. I guess the assumption the court made is that Firefox is the only place where people can go to buy oxidizers, metals, or paper tubes, and that people cannot figure out how to cut a paper tube shorter than ten inches. When paper tubes are banned only outlaws will have paper tubes...

05-06-2007 01:27 PM  #8
PeterEkstrom New Member   Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 8	When does this take effect?

05-06-2007 03:28 PM  #9
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 4030	Quote: When does this take effect? Why, April 30th, 2007! Oh that was last Monday, wasn't it? This is the judge's way of punishing Firefox individually, and the Purrington's collectively, so that they as a company or they individually may never be involved with selling anything that can made into an M80. But that is the judge's primary desire. The CPSC, on the other hand, has a much larger agenda and if you read the second link above to their trumpeting press release, they embrace the precedent-setting concept that the judge and the U.S. District Court has now stated in the public record that CPSC has the regulatory authority to oversee the sales of those products: "A federal court affirmed that the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has the authority to stop the sale of chemicals and components used to make illegal, dangerous fireworks. This is a major victory in CPSC’s continuing effort to protect consumers from injury and death caused by illegal explosives." (Emphasis added) Those key words should be a clue that CPSC has every intention to pursue the continuing erosion of your constitutionally guaranteed personal rights. What is scary to see in writing is where the judge stated: "As suggested by the Government, the only way to foreclose Defendants’ customers from building illegal fireworks would be an outright ban on fuel sales of all mesh sizes. Although the Court believes that it would be legally justified in ordering such an outright ban, the Court agrees with the Government that enjoining Defendants from selling, giving away, holding for sale, or otherwise distributing to any fuel for which the particle size is finer than 100 mesh will stop most of Defendants’ sales related to banned firework manufacture. Thus, the Court will adopt the Government’s proposal with respect to fuel sales." (Emphasis added) The judge believe that he would be legally justified in ordering an outright ban. Arrogance just doesn't get much more blatant than that.

05-06-2007 03:35 PM  #10
aerostadt Certified Level Two   Joined: Feb 2007 Posts: 56	Quote: When paper tubes are banned only outlaws will have paper tubes... I love Steve's satire here. All you Outlaws out there don't try to erase the serial number on your paper tubes longer than 10 inches. Just take them to the nearest police station. There is bound to be an amnesty program! Bob

05-06-2007 03:43 PM  #11
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	Quote: "There are far too many injuries and deaths from the manufacture and use of illegal fireworks." I imagine there have been injuries from fireworks, legal and illegal. Does anyone know just how many deaths there have been? I decided to answer my own question and do a little research. I found a document on the web: 2005 Fireworks Annual Report, Fireworks-Related Deaths, Emergency Department -Treated Injuries, and Enforcement Activities During 2005 URL: http://www.cpsc.gov/library/2005fwreport.pdf "CPSC has reports of 4 deaths associated with fireworks during 2005. Two victims were killed in incidents involving aerial devices. In one incident an aerial shell type device exploded while the victim was holding it in a launching tube. In the second incident, a man was struck in the face by a shell which launched while he was leaning over the tube. The other two incidents involved motor vehicle fires that were started by fireworks, in both cases killing the vehicle passenger." 4? God save America when CPSC gets started on the evil automobile.

05-06-2007 03:58 PM  #12
UhClem Certified Level Three   Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 192	http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/2005fwreport.pdf Number one cause of death was stupidity. Fireworks were just the chosen instrument.

05-06-2007 05:16 PM  #13
Steve_Shannon Growing more clueless...   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 2220	Quote: http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/2005fwreport.pdf Number one cause of death was stupidity. Fireworks were just the chosen instrument. Ain't that a fact. The end result is, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, "Government of the stupid, by the stupid, for the stupid." Or, as Forrest Gump said, "Stupid is as stupid does." Maybe we should start the National Paper Tube Association and lobby our representatives...

05-06-2007 06:12 PM  #14
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 4030	Quote: Ain't that a fact. The end result is, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, "Government of the stupid, by the stupid, for the stupid." Agreed! But 4 deaths? 4 deaths? I didn't see any indication that those 4 deaths were related to the actions of Firefox. Why is the CPSC trying so desperately to save us from this? Far more people are killed by lightning strikes, eating Big Macs and smoking in bed. I'll bet we can find more than 4 people who died from staph infection that started with ingrown toenails. One death is a tragedy, but you can't stop everyone from killing themselves by doing stupid things.

05-06-2007 08:03 PM  #15
Steve_Shannon Growing more clueless...   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 2220	I agree completely. Somehow this colossal waste of our money needs to be publicized. I have tried submitting these things to "News of the Wierd" but they never make it, so I don't know how to get publicity.

05-06-2007 08:05 PM  #16
gregm The BCS is total BS!!!!!!   Joined: May 2007 Posts: 158	Appeal??? Seems to me that the ridiculous nature of the judges decisions opens the door for a slam dunk appeal. While I am not suprised by this, I can't imagine it would hold up upon appeal. Look at the situation the ATFE is in right now. They also made ridiculous and baseless assertions and the judge in that case called them on it. It took the appeal though, initially the judge didn't think so rationally. Big problem is when will Gary just get fed up and quit?!?!? Greg

05-06-2007 09:15 PM  #17
Aphyle Hot HCl and rubber @ AM   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 116	Quote: The CPSC, on the other hand, has a much larger agenda and if you read the second link above to their trumpeting press release, they embrace the precedent-setting concept that the judge and the U.S. District Court has now stated in the public record that CPSC has the regulatory authority to oversee the sales of those products: "A federal court affirmed that the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has the authority to stop the sale of chemicals and components used to make illegal, dangerous fireworks. This is a major victory in CPSC’s continuing effort to protect consumers from injury and death caused by illegal explosives." (Emphasis added) What should be another area of concern are the thousands of chemistry departments (and other sciences) that might be adversely affected by this. Is there a waiver for academic institutions? Or will they have to get explosives manufacturer's permits to conduct research in areas that have nothing to do with explosives?

05-06-2007 11:04 PM  #18
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 4030	Quote: Big problem is when will Gary just get fed up and quit?!?!? This has to be a concern for the entire Purrington family. Were it not for donations from customers and concerned citizens, they wouldn't have made it this far. They need continued donations just to consider an appeal.

05-07-2007 12:51 AM  #19
jimmyc-rocket Certified Level Two   Joined: Mar 2007 Posts: 68	this adds the amateur fire works clubs to the list of people effected by this over regulating government. let them keep this up and if all these groups join forces to fight this in court, they (CPSC ) will find they are in a battle similar as the ATF and the NRA .

05-07-2007 02:16 PM  #20
Steve_Shannon Growing more clueless...   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 2220	Quote: this adds the amateur fire works clubs to the list of people effected by this over regulating government. let them keep this up and if all these groups join forces to fight this in court, they (CPSC ) will find they are in a battle similar as the ATF and the NRA . I wish that were true, but the NRA has a few million members and there are many more gun owners who vote with the NRA. With all the members of rocket clubs and all the fireworks clubs we are only a tiny percentage of that. That does not mean we should roll over, but we need to be realistic. So, what do we do? First, we need to go on a participation drive. When I joined NRA there were less than a million members. As gun rights became threatened they started really pushing for new members. NRA members were rewarded for getting new members with prizes such as caps. Soon they were at 2 million. Now they are up around 4 million I believe and fairly whipped into a frenzy. We need to do the same to introduce more people to rocketry. TARC has been a good start but it is very limited. Lately NAR has been having a drive to get more rocketry participants. They call it the "Fly 50,000 for our 50th" celebration, but it has not been well promoted. In order to find a link to it on the NAR site you have to scroll way down to the news area and click on the link to the 50th birthday celebration. It's a great idea but very poorly promoted. As always it is really up to us in the sections and prefectures to push from below. That is how it should be, but my feeling is that the lawsuit has been such a distraction that we have not been doing (I'm not pointing fingers because I am guilty too) as much as we should to attract new rocketeers and to publicize our sport. Some clubs do a great job, but probably for every one that does there are a few that just go out and launch quietly. With more members a lot of other things fall into place, including eventually legislative relief. I'll step down off the soap box now, but I hope that we can all work together to get more members. If each member brought one guest, that would be a big start. Just think what could happen if every club gave "scholarships" to needy families to get kids involved in rocketry, which could help them in school with math and science as well. That would be something we could proudly publicize and which would paint us in a very positive light. What government agency could criticize a group that sets out to help kids stay in school.

05-07-2007 03:25 PM  #21
Raider Rocketry Low Power Enthusiast   Joined: Mar 2007 Posts: 128	Try contacting WHO radio out of Des Moines. Not only are they a 50,000 watt station, but they broadcast over the internet world wide. The program I have in mind does a wonderful mix of local and national news and loves the obscure items that have a profound impact. Jan Mickelson can be reached at This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it While I would write him, there are many who are more knowledgable about this and would be better at public speaking. DD, I hope this helps you.

05-09-2007 12:06 AM  #22
SpartaChris Certified Certifiable   Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 137	Quote: Agreed! But 4 deaths? 4 deaths? I didn't see any indication that those 4 deaths were related to the actions of Firefox. Why is the CPSC trying so desperately to save us from this? Far more people are killed by lightning strikes, eating Big Macs and smoking in bed. I'll bet we can find more than 4 people who died from staph infection that started with ingrown toenails. One death is a tragedy, but you can't stop everyone from killing themselves by doing stupid things. Nor should we stop people from killing themselves by doing stupid things. I'm a huge fan of thinning the herd. I think common sense agencies are a total waste of time, energy and oxygen. I wonder how those guys at the CPSC can sleep at night knowing that they just killed a portion of amateur science and discovery, chemistry and physics. And for what? To save 4 people who were stupid to begin with?

05-09-2007 11:11 AM  #23
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 4030	Quote: I wonder how those guys at the CPSC can sleep at night knowing that they just killed a portion of amateur science and discovery, chemistry and physics. And for what? To save 4 people who were stupid to begin with? No, to save their jobs. I decided I wanted to place an order with Firefox just to show a little support. I don't make my own motors, so chemicals were not of any interest to me, but I did want to purchase some tubes to make ejection charges with, and since they had a minimum order, I also ordered some special soldering flux for use with nichrome wire. Based on my experience, I don't see how the company is still in business as it is, since there are so many "taxes" and surcharges on each order it's near ridiculous. Between shipping, packaging, fuel surcharges, a legal fund "tax" and a credit card surcharge, these added 82% to the price of my order. Had I ordered something considered hazardous, I could have faced an additional HAZMAT fee and possibly a DOT-E-8249 fee. And, if I lived in Idaho, I could have chipped in another 5% to the state.

05-09-2007 03:42 PM  #24
Raider Rocketry Low Power Enthusiast   Joined: Mar 2007 Posts: 128	That's it! I am beyond fed up with bureaucratic agencies run amok. I'm writing my Representatives and Senators both at the state and federal level, along with the governor and the president and I encourage everyone to do the same. I can no longer peacefully rest while judges legislate our self-regulated and safe hobby from the bench. Enough is enough. I don't know how much good it will do. I cannot at this time contribute to any legal funds but I can, and will, do this. It's time, for me at least, to do something. -Damon Raider Rocketry I'm mad as ____ and I'm not going to take it anymore!

05-22-2007 01:54 PM  #25
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 4030	I saw an interesting quote today: “We are not just a recall agency,” explains CPSC spokesperson Scott Wolfson. “We have turned our attention to the chemical components used in the manufacture of illegal fireworks, which can cause amputations and death.” A 2004 study by the agency found that 2 percent of fireworks-related injuries that year were caused by homemade or altered fireworks; the majority involved the mishandling of commercial firecrackers, bottle rockets, and sparklers. Nonetheless, Wolfson says, “we’ve fostered a very close relationship with the Justice Department and we’re out there on the Internet looking to see who is promoting these core chemicals. Fireworks is one area where we’re putting people in prison.” (Emphasis added) http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/chemistry.html

05-22-2007 02:02 PM  #26
mrbusdriver Certified Level One   Joined: Mar 2007 Posts: 28	Boy, they're so big and tough going against the legitimate businesses...wonder how they do with the real bad guys. Jeesh! It's like the national police crackdown on beltless drivers...don't they have someting more important to do?

05-22-2007 02:41 PM  #27
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 4030	Quote: wonder how they do with the real bad guys. Ever heard the term "the path of the least resistance?" That is why they go after legitimate businesses. Why have to earn your money when you can just pick up a check doing something easy? Quote: It's like the national police crackdown on beltless drivers...don't they have someting more important to do? Hey, the elections are over and the new budgets indicate a need to "tighten the belt." (Pun intended) Everyone knows the quickest "ticket" (whoops, sorry!) to fill the local municipality coffers is to hit the easiest targets with the largest number of citations. Nationwide seat belt ticketing campaigns bring in lots of money!

05-22-2007 07:55 PM  #28
Aphyle Hot HCl and rubber @ AM   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 116	Quote: “we’ve fostered a very close relationship with the Justice Department and we’re out there on the Internet looking to see who is promoting these core chemicals. Fireworks is one area where we’re putting people in prison.” They say that the most common last words of a redneck are, "Hey! Watch this!" So we now have the time and resources to pursue and prosecute criminal stupidity.

06-20-2008 02:58 PM  #29
tmacklin Certifiable   Joined: Apr 2008 Posts: 124	Re: Firefox today, industry tomorrow. Amateur rocketry next year? Quote: I saw an interesting quote today: “We are not just a recall agency,” explains CPSC spokesperson Scott Wolfson. “We have turned our attention to the chemical components used in the manufacture of illegal fireworks, which can cause amputations and death.” A 2004 study by the agency found that 2 percent of fireworks-related injuries that year were caused by homemade or altered fireworks; the majority involved the mishandling of commercial firecrackers, bottle rockets, and sparklers. Nonetheless, Wolfson says, “we’ve fostered a very close relationship with the Justice Department and we’re out there on the Internet looking to see who is promoting these core chemicals. Fireworks is one area where we’re putting people in prison.” (Emphasis added) http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/chemistry.html Being in a rather foul mood today, I thought now would be a good time to revisit this topic. I like rockets. Estes rockets, Quest rockets, Aerotech rockets, LOC rockets, Dave Sleeter's homemade black powder rockets, Richard Nakka's sugar rockets and even John Wickman's ammonium nitrate/magnesium rockets. Did I leave anybody out? Anyhow, my obsession led me to a classified ad in the back of an issue of Popular Science magazine. I sent in the three bucks for the catalog and ultimately received a paper catalog from Pyrotek, Inc. of Halsted, PA. Subsequently, I ordered a few books, "how to" manuals, chemicals and accessories. Nothing I ordered or received was illegal for me to order or receive, and none of the chemicals or components were of the type that could be used to make illegal fireworks. This was in the timeframe of 2001 through 2004. Then one day in May of 2005, I get this rather nasty letter from the United States Department of Justice, Office of Consumer Litigation. Since I don't have a scanner, the curious may find the text of this letter here: Quote: Dear Mr. ________ The U.S. Department of Justice is involved with other goverment agencies in investigating the illegal manufacture, distribution and sale of highly dangerous fireworks and flash powder devices that constitute "explosive materials" under 18 U.S.C. SS 841 and 842 as well as "banned hazardous substances" under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act ("FHSA"), 15 U.S.C. S 1261. The manufacture and use of illegal fireworks can result in blinding, severe burns, amputations, and death. As part of our investigation, the Justice Department has obtained numerous invoices and shipping records from various entities and individuals selling illegal fireworks, or kits and components to produce illegal fireworks. Your name appeared in those records as a consumer of at least one of those entites and individuals. We thus want to formally notify you that it is a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. S 842 (punishable by imprisonment of up to ten years and a fine of $250,000 or both) to engage in the buisness of manufacturing or dealing in explosive materials without a license issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. It is also a crime under the FHSA to cause the introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of banned hazardous substances. This includes chemicals as well as kits and components intended to produce fireworks that are banned hazardous substances. Fireworks banned under 18 U.S.C. S 842 and the FHSA include large, reloadable tube devices, aerial bombs, devices falsely designed as pest control devices or bird bombs, cherry bombs, M-80's and other large flash powder devices (commonly known as quarter-sticks, half-sticks) - all of which are very dangerous. Thus far, numerous individuals who have violated the above-described bans have been prosecuted and have been sentenced to terms of imprisonment. Our investigation is ongoing, and we intend to bring prosecutions against individuals who continue to violate either the FHSA or the provisions of 18 U.S.C. S 842. In doing so, we hope to reduce significantly the number of people who are injured each year from the manufacture and use of illegal fireworks. We further hope that individuals who have in the past purchased illegal fireworks or the kits and components to make illegal fireworks will no longer do so. Sincerely, Henry I. LaHaie Assistant Director Office of Consumer Litigation Source: http://www.sciencemadness..../viewthread.php?tid=3927 I wrote my congressman, the Honorable Ralph Hall, R-Texas immediately after I received this menacing letter and asked him to look into the matter. That was more than three years ago and I have yet to hear from old Ralph. I wonder if anybody who reads this forum also received this letter? I wonder if anyone who received this letter had a heart attack? That was the idea, wasn't it? Oh, BTW, Pyrotek is out of business after it's owner, John Rasmus got sent to the slammer for violation of the "consent decree" imposed on him by the court. Apparently, the judge took his actions as a sign of disrespect. As I understand it, a consent decree is sorta like when a rapist says, "give it up and I won't cut your throat". Sorry, your honor. I told you I was in a bad mood.

06-20-2008 04:01 PM  #30
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 4030	Re: Firefox today, industry tomorrow. Amateur rocketry next year? I have edited your message to include the text you were linking to, so other wouldn't have to click away to read it. In today's Amerika, it is against the law to do anything. If they so desire, they will find a way to lock you up for a long time, often using laws you have never even heard of. "Ignorance of the law is no defense." Their intent was hidden in the last sentence of their letter: "We further hope that individuals who have in the past purchased illegal fireworks or the kits and components to make illegal fireworks will no longer do so." You haven't violated ANY law in your purchases, since you weren't manufacturing or selling anything, but your name was on Rasmus' lists, so you got a plea to stop buying stuff from those "criminals." Personally, I wouldn't have stopped writing Hall until I got a response. I would have written him every 90 days until he answered me, or I would have gone to Austin and paid him a visit. I am sick to death of the federal intervention into our lives, when we are merely trying to enjoy our God-given rights as free men to do so. The federal government is out of control, but there is very little to nothing that we can do to change it.

06-20-2008 05:02 PM  #31
tmacklin Certifiable   Joined: Apr 2008 Posts: 124	Re: Firefox today, industry tomorrow. Amateur rocketry next year? Thanks for editing and posting my rant. I'm feeling much better (but I'm still pissed!) As for the good congressman, he always responds when I send him one of those NRA blitz postcards on the Second amendment, but is a bit slow on any issue that actually requires thought. Unfortunately, I got the same response when I copied Ron Paul and Senator Mike Enzi: nothing. Maybe I should try stuffing the envelopes with cash? I beleive the reason our government is able to get away with outrages like this is because we, i.e. the rocket hobby community, are largely invisible. As long as we remain so they will do it to us without end.

06-20-2008 05:17 PM  #32
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 4030	Re: Firefox today, industry tomorrow. Amateur rocketry next year? Our government is able to get away with what they do because they keep us divided and fragmented. Remember, divided we fall? Combined with generic apathy, Americans can't unite for anything important. It easier to stomp on a bunch of small "splinter cells" than it is to fight a united populace. In order for the broad populace to get up in arms, they would have to do something really awful, like criminalizing text messaging.

06-20-2008 05:29 PM  #33
tmacklin Certifiable   Joined: Apr 2008 Posts: 124	Re: Firefox today, industry tomorrow. Amateur rocketry next year? Yes. It's depressing. Tomorrow if it's not too hot, windy or raining, I think I'll join the other anarchists at the DARS launch in Frisco and do something dangerous. Federal agents are welcome, but try not to be too obvious.