On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 00:31:37 -0500, Richard
wrote:

On 4/20/2013 12:14 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 11:46:00 -0500, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

Ed fired this volley in
:

Somehow I'm not troubled by amateur pyros having some of their
freedoms restricted.

If you feel that way, you don't know much about the art.

I know nothing about the art. I do know that I'm not bothered by
people having to live with some restrictions on pyrotechnical
experiments.


"Amateur pyrotechnicians" are not "backyard bombers". They are, in fact,
the source of MOST of the new effects and techniques used in the
professional trade.

That's nice.


They pursue the ART of fireworking, preserving hundreds-of-years-old
traditional methods of Europe, the US, and the Mediterranean, and at the
same time advancing the science, the art, and the technique of fireworks
as you see them in the sky.

Great. Just as long as they don't mix their brews next door to me.


Fireworks is a small industry compared to many, but it's important, and
entertains millions safely, economically, and beautifully.

'Amateur' does not mean 'unskilled', nor does it mean unlicensed in many
cases. A large number of amateurs hold ATF licenses to do their work.
But at the same time, ATF has OFFICIALLY recognized (and promulgated
regulations) that their record is so good, and also their intentions,
that it is legal under federal law to manufacture fireworks for one's own
use. They cannot be _transported_ over the public roads by anyone but a
licensee, but they can be made without a permit or license. (local
ordinances may mitigate that permission).

You should not express negative opinions about people of whom you know
nothing. (I do it too, then always regret it)

Look, Lloyd, I'm not expressing negative opinions about amateur pyros.
I am expressing a combination of some experience with what propellants
and explosives can do, and about the uneven distribution of good sense
and responsibility among any large population.

When you talk in generalized abstractions, like the "freedoms" of
amateur pyrotechnicians, it's just not a field -- given the two points
in my last paragraph -- in which I'd get upset about some
restrictions.

On Jan. 1st of this year, San Francisco police reported 188 fireworks
injuries. Some of the stories were about "amateur pyrotechnicians."

What do you do when one of these guys blows the ears off of his
neighbors? Do you disown him? Take away his Amateur Pyrotechnician
club card? Claim he was never an amateur pyrotechnician in the place,
but only a poseur?

It's clearly a field that demands some intelligence, good judgment, a
strong sense of safety for oneself and others. Those are
characteristics that tend to be, as I said, unevenly distributed.

I don't disparage the activity or the practitioners. I'll just watch
from a long distance away, and hope they don't get all loose and
goosey about their "freedoms" at others' expense.

Ok?



Sounds vaguely familiar, Ed...

It should. It's the way most people think about topics that involve
demonstrably dangerous activities and that depend upon good judgment
on the part of people they don't know.

If they have any sense, they know that depending on someone else's
good judgment is not a wise thing to do.

--
Ed Huntress