cat
2004-12-10 00:21:40 UTC
I'm sorry if I seam stuck on this topic, but I'm trying to understand.
Probably most everyone has read USA vs Firefox by now but if you haven't you
really should, it's located here:
http://www.firefox-fx.com/images/Firefox%20CPSC%20Complaint.pdf
I don't make fireworks, but I have a lot of interest in propulsion, and EX
rocketry. When I have a free moment it's usually spent reading or testing
new motor concepts.
I don't understand much about law and precedent, but to me it seams the CPSC
is trying to establish that certain chemicals should raise suspicions that
an individual is constructing illegal fireworks/explosives. Again, I don't
know much, but it seams to me that they are saying anyone possessing any
combination or partial combination of chemicals or accessories that could be
used to create any explosive compound would be in violation.
It's really quite mind-boggling. On the forth page there is a list of
violations, the violations to me hardly straight forward and that's what
worries me. Using the verbiage "defendants knew or had reason to know that
it was a component intended to produce banned fireworks".
Some examples of combinations include:
"250 feet of fuse"
"5lbs of sulfur, 10ft of fuse, and 1000 paper tubes"
"5lbs of chlorate and 500 paper tubes"
By this logic wouldn't any oxidizer and fuel fall into that category?
KNO3+Sugar+Paper tubes?
-Cat
Probably most everyone has read USA vs Firefox by now but if you haven't you
really should, it's located here:
http://www.firefox-fx.com/images/Firefox%20CPSC%20Complaint.pdf
I don't make fireworks, but I have a lot of interest in propulsion, and EX
rocketry. When I have a free moment it's usually spent reading or testing
new motor concepts.
I don't understand much about law and precedent, but to me it seams the CPSC
is trying to establish that certain chemicals should raise suspicions that
an individual is constructing illegal fireworks/explosives. Again, I don't
know much, but it seams to me that they are saying anyone possessing any
combination or partial combination of chemicals or accessories that could be
used to create any explosive compound would be in violation.
It's really quite mind-boggling. On the forth page there is a list of
violations, the violations to me hardly straight forward and that's what
worries me. Using the verbiage "defendants knew or had reason to know that
it was a component intended to produce banned fireworks".
Some examples of combinations include:
"250 feet of fuse"
"5lbs of sulfur, 10ft of fuse, and 1000 paper tubes"
"5lbs of chlorate and 500 paper tubes"
By this logic wouldn't any oxidizer and fuel fall into that category?
KNO3+Sugar+Paper tubes?
-Cat