[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Dangerous Devices



Original poster: "D.C. Cox" <resonance@xxxxxxxxxx>



I have a good friend (former ham buddy from the 60's) that is fairly high up in the FCC ranks. He said they consider TC's a "gray area" and only consider any enforcement work if there is a very serious complaint. In short --- keep your neighbors happy like we do with our Teslathon party every year and they won't complain --- all runs along smoothly.

He said the FCC considers (unofficially of course) the TC a training technical tool for high schools, trade schools, and universities. They don't interfere unless they have a very good reason too.

Guys on the TC list should all take it upon themselves to do free demos at local schools whenever possible --- I do over a dozen in Tucson, AZ, every winter.


Dr. Resonance

In a message dated 9/15/05 8:08:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tesla@xxxxxxxxxx writes:


> There are several levels of firearm ownership, each with an >associated yearly tax.

>Regular firearms, no tax.
>Dealer in regular firearms (FFL): About $20
>Machine guns, silencers, and sawed off shotguns: $500 per year
>Destructive Devices (we means bombs and exposives here) $1000 per year

You might be thinking more along the lines of yearly licensing for dealers - the Special Occupational Tax (SOT). Taxes are a little higher and more complex than you've listed here.
Ownership is not yearly taxed.
>Transfer of a machine gun (etc) to someone else (e.g., a sale): $200


This is true. But in reality, the transferee (buyer) pays for the transfer tax.

>The thing is,. the BATF, which is never known for its sanity,
>controls these.

Although BATF(E), and several other agencies are widely despised for several spectacular fiascoes, they are desperately trying to enforce insane *laws*. They have political pressure to "do something" about gun crime, but the laws passed to cure the problem are usually ineffective and illogical. This often results in schizophrenic rulings about how they decide to interpret and enforce these laws. Make the laws coherent and consistent, and that's the kind of enforcement you can expect. This goes for any law, of course...
Also true WRT any agency - when the FCC confiscates your noisy TC or the EPA fines you for a little PCB cap.


>    You give up your 4th Amendment right for a
>warrant-search if you become a dealer. They can bust in any old time
>and check your stuff. Your paperwork must always be in order.

You don't give up all your rights as a dealer - there are limitations to what they can do, of course. And many inspectors are well aware that BATFE's internal paperwork and records are so screwed up that they are glad to use the dealer's records to get things straight.


>Incidentally, machine guns and stuff are legal (except in California >and Wash. State) to own.

    State laws vary greatly.

> The problem is selling the things! Here in
>Colorado, the police won't sign off on a "Form 4", which allows you
>to sell one. That's against the law, but when the police agree to do
>something like this, there is nothing you can do. (Well, I could sue
>them, but who wants to sue the local police who may be needed?)
Local police chief is just one acceptable signer. There are many ways around this. I agree, though that their fears are usually unfounded.
What if you powered up a pig-sized coil in front of a your neighborhood cop, and asked them if they thought it was legal to do so in a suburban setting? They would likely err on the side of caution. Police are not lawyers, but the chief holds a political position and must act accordingly.


>I clearly remember when Federico Pena, in the Clinton Administration,
>"decreed" that the Striker-12 Shotgun should be moved from "Regular
>Firearms" to a "Destructive Device".

    Another arbitrary decision...

>I would have had to pay $1000
>yearly just to own a frapping shotgun!

Not true. In fact, I believe BATF waived the one-time $200 registration fee on the Form 1. Since they were stuck with enforcing an irrational change in policy, they really just wanted to make sure they got all of them registered. There was a lengthy and well-known amnesty period to comply with the new ruling.

>Needless to say, I (legally)
>disposed of it from my inventory. Later, I got tired of the whole
>BATF business and gave up my dealer's license -- I mostly had it to
>buy ammo at better prices, because I enjoy target shooting.

Then in the end they won - they buried you in paperwork and got rid of another pesky dealer.

>And the Striker-12 wasn't that good a shotgun to begin with. If you
>fired it, it spattered you with shotgun pieces...
I have never fired one (here in Virginia Striker-12's are specifically illegal). Never heard that about them, though. Those South Africans have some innovative crowd control solutions... I fired the latest versions of the AA-12 full-auto shotgun at a demo a few months ago - 20 rounds of 12 gauge in 4 seconds suddenly puts "lightning guns" in perspective. :)


>I am wondering if Tesla Coils might be moved to a Destructive Device
>by some policy wonk "because they interfere with ambulance radios" or
>some dumb thing like that. The FCC "Class B" regulations were passed
>partly because of hype about computers interfering with "life saving
>communications".

I would think that the FCC would have the jurisdiction WRT TC. Although, I have heard that BATF considers railguns to be under their purvey. The United States Code does not cover TC's or railguns et al. in any way, AFAIK, so this might have been somebody's unofficial interpretation. Besides, there are exemptions for research devices.
For those interested in the legalities of "Dangerous Devices", here's the best FAQ:


<http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/nfa_faq.txt>http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/nfa_faq.txt


-Phil LaBudde (owner/manufacturer of several legally BATFE-registered "dangerous devices")

> Hmmm...  Be sure to keep this on the topic of Tesla coils.... - Terry <