17 replies to this topic

[Steve]

Here's the link to the thread, plus I'll copy it to the bottom of here.
Rec.pyro thread

I guess this is going to be fairly significant for the Americans. I wonder how this will affect us in England?

I, and I guess a fair number of forum readers, use Sklylighter as a source of the more difficult to obtain stuff.

I'll try not to go on too much of a political rant, but seriously, this will mean such a blow to the American's 'free' country, a place, where you can own a gun, but now it seem, if your aluminium is finer than 100 mesh, you could be breaking the law? It will remain to be seen if the companies will continue to supply the likes of parlon, sodium salicitate etc once they are restricted from other sales. Also what will happen for the amateur pyros in America, if nothing else, they will understand how hard we have it over here. This will suck to the greatest degree.

This will be a very sad day if Firefox, Skylighter and the others are forced to shut because of this.

Steve

There has been a fund set up, to help legal fees in fighting the case, which I will be donating to, and I would encourage anyone who benifits from their services to also make a donation, of whatever size they feel suitable.





Dear Pyro Hobbyists:


This is Danny Clark, past President of the Crackerjacks. On behalf of the
Fireworks Foundation and the pyro community, I desperately need to ask for
your help on a serious situation that directly affects the pyro hobby.


Firefox was served a summons to sign a decent decree that effectively says
that they must stop selling most oxidizers and fine mesh metals to non-ATF
permit holders. If they fail to sign, they have been ordered to appear in
court. ATF rules do not forbid hobbyist manufacture in states where it is
not prohibited. ATF rules do not forbid sales of these chemicals.


If the CPSC is successful, Firefox, Skylighter and the other chemical
suppliers will be out of business. Hobbyist manufacture of fireworks will
be gone. This is a VERY serious situation.


The Fireworks Foundation has formed a legal team to analyze and defend the
situation. This defense team needs funding. They may also need support in
the form of letters.


I am asking each pyro hobbyist to make a donation of whatever amount you
can afford. If you can give even a $1, it is appreciated.


In a few days there will be a website for news regarding this situation.
It will also list all of those companies, clubs, and people that have made
pledges/donations above $1000. Therefore, please send me an email when you
make a pledge. Send actual payments
to:


Mike Swisher
Treasurer-Fireworks Foundation
14511 Olinda Blvd. N
Stillwater, Minnesota 55082


Make checks payable to THE FIREWORKS FOUNDATION


Note on each check whether the contribution is designated for the "Chemical
Defense Fund" or "General Foundation Use"


Below are the unedited details as they have been presented by Gary and Diane
of FireFox.


Danny Clark



-------------------------------------
Begin message to John Steinberg from Firefox:


John,


The time has come to start the fund raisers, and we appreciate your
willingness to help us.
We were hoping that we would not have to write this letter, but
unfortunately all of our attempts to negotiate with the CPSC have failed. On
Monday last we were served with a Summons to either sign the Consent Decree
that was attached or appear in court. After reading through the new proposed
Consent Decree, we have come to the conclusion that to sign it we would in
fact be putting an end to our business, as we could not survive with such a
devastating blow in sales by eliminating these items from sales as stated in
this Decree.
This is a brief summary of their decree; No sales whatsoever on the
following items unless the customer has an ATFE manufacturing permit; any
Chlorate compound, Magnesium Metal (all), Permanganate compound, Peroxide
compound, Zirconium Metal, or any listed in 16 C.F.R. 1507.2.
No
sales on the following to anyone that does not posses a ATFE Manufacturing
Permit, the following partial size in less than 100 mesh, Aluminum and
Aluminum Alloys (all of them), Magnesium Aluminum Alloys, Titanium Alloys or
Zinc Metal. No sales on the following items to anyone that does not posses a
ATFE Manufacturing Permit in quantities greater than 1 LB per year,
Antimony and Antimony Compounds, Benzoate Compounds, Nitrate Compounds,
Perchlorate Compounds, Salicylate Compounds or Sulfur. No sales on any Fuse
greater than 25' per year per customer who does not posses a ATFE
Manufacturing License.
As you can see this covers virtually ALL OXIDIZERS and most of the
commonly used fuels. This will effectively put us and all other suppliers
out of business and with us, the clubs.
The ATF tells us that hobby fireworks for your own use and not for resale
is legal without permits in most cases (you still need an ATFE to purchase
time fuse if you are making shells and black powder).
However, you
do have to store the completed devices properly according to their specs
(magazine) but if you do not have an ATFE you do not need to register the
magazine with ATF. You just need one constructed according to their specs
should they have reason to visit you and you do need to keep magazine
records. The CPSC does not care about this. It looks to us like they are
trying to get these chemicals listed on the FHSA (fed hazardous substance
act). If they do, these items are GONE!
As you know we have been willing to do our part in controlling those that
wish to make illegal devises, as they are the ones that make it hard for all
of us that strive to follow the regulations and keep this hobby alive.
We do
not sell "combination orders" for flash without an ATFE but the CPSC has
broadened their language as to what is a combination order. They now state
that anyone who orders the materials that can be used to make salutes, even
separately and/or over any period of time and even if not all of the
materials it takes to make them was ordered, again even over any period of
time would be in violation of the FHSA. One example is an order for
potassium chlorate or perchlorate and paper tubes! Another would be an order
for 250 ft of fuse, etc. etc..
We both wish that we could fight this alone without asking for any help, but
unfortunately we do not have enough finances to do that, so we are turning
to you and humbly asking you to help us with this. It does not matter who
you purchase your materials from. If we loose this battle all the other
suppliers will fall as well and they know it. It is time to rally all the
support we can to get through this. Please help us and your hobby by
addressing as many supporters as you can to come to our aid.
We have been in contact with our attorney (Doug Mawhorr) and he is very
positive that we will have a good chance of this going our way with some
restrictions of course.
Gary and I both would be devastated to see this hobby come to a halt, so no
matter how much it takes mentally and physically we will do this so that
hopefully years from now we are able to enjoy this hobby with our
grandchildren as we do today.
So, it is time to start the fund raisers, rally the troops and even some
letters can help. We need to educate the court on what these materials are
used for legally and that they are not just used or intended for illegal
production and/or sale. Any comments or letters we can present the court
would help. I believe the key to this is education.
We appreciate all your continued support,


Gary and Diane

[Richard H]

The Americans are not going to sit back, they are going to fight this. I for one will be sending a donation shortly.

[BigG]

This is the end. Anything that happens in America usually follows a pattern. The UK tends to be fairly close behind (usually six months). Stock up could be the keyword here.

I disagree. There is fundamental difference between the UK and the USA on this subject. It will not "follow to here" as we already have those limitations in place. You can say that the USA is following the UK in this case.

I do agree that for the Americans this can be a real disaster. And I hope that will manage to fight it through.

[BigG]

We are looking at this case. Save your money - we might consider an organized donation through the BPS - and one sum will save a significant amount in conversion.

We already contacted the lawyers and firefox and we have more of the information first hand. We will post an explanation later. One must point that this is not a clean shoot as it first look and both sides need to be understood at this content. Before you contribute money, make sure you understand what you are contributing for.

Please do not submit personal mail that was sent to you unless you got the original writer permission to do so.

[Patrick]

Here is what the CPSC has to say about the matter:

The United States Department of Justice has filed suit against a company and three individuals as a result of conduct that the government believes violates federal law. The Complaint includes a request for injunctive relief that the government believes is necessary and warranted. A copy of the complaint is attached. If you have any further questions about this matter, please contact Henry LaHaie, Assistant Director, Office of Consumer Litigation, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530.

Here is the Complaint:

Try this one:

http://www.teamfha.c.....E STAMPED.pdf

Edited by Patrick, 09 December 2004 - 08:42 PM.

[adamw]

Can you please post the link with the correct document source.. the one you posted is missing some information.

[italteen3]

Here is what the CPSC has to say about the matter:

The United States Department of Justice has filed suit against a company and three individuals as a result of conduct that the government believes violates federal law.  The Complaint includes a request for injunctive relief that the government believes is necessary and warranted.  A copy of the complaint is attached.  If you have any further questions about this matter, please contact Henry LaHaie, Assistant Director, Office of Consumer Litigation, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530.

Here is the Complaint:  http://www.teamfha.c.....E STAMPED.pdf

I get an error when I visit the link Patrick that I do not have permission to access the webpage. Anyway you can copy/paste it?

BigG I have contacted Harry about putting up the emails. If he says no I will remove them shortly after. Grucci has gotten back to me but I have sent them another email and have many more to go.

[italteen3]

That is odd. My same post was posted twice. And it took about 10 minutes to post it....

Edited by italteen3, 09 December 2004 - 07:26 PM.

[Patrick]

I would just copy and paste it if I could. It's the actual xerox copy of the complaint in an Adobe Acrobat file. If that link doesn't work, I'll host it somewhere else. It works for me now though.

[The_Djinn]

http://www.firefox-f...20Complaint.pdf

[BigG]

http://www.firefox-f...20Complaint.pdf

Good man. It makes an interesting reading.

If you didn't know, we are collecting money for the defence.
follow the link:
http://www.ukrocketr...t=0

[The_Djinn]

couple of things of interest in the document. prior issues and court proceedings and a judgement. once judgement expiered they went back to doing things the same way that they were taken to court for before. to me this case is not about selling the chems, it is the manor in which it is done and the checks that are in place... the law is not going after all the other chem suppliers from what I can see on the web.
I think this needs a little more looking at, and if anyone has any other documents, pm me the url's or put the links in here.
I for one am not about to contribute towards 3 individuals that have prior judgements against them and have resorted to going back to doing things the same way again... I need more info before I cough up any money.

Mark

[Patrick]

Here is a link to the Office of Consumer Litigation , They post updates to certain cases.

http://www.usdoj.gov...cases/index.htm

See "US v. Gary Purrington, Diane Purrington, Skyler Purrington, and Firefox Enterprises"

[Richard H]

Interesting, I'll have a read tomorrow. If it is clear that firefox are not selling precursors in a responsible manner then the case may not be so compelling.