Why the metal cans / There aught to be a law

[Del Rykert]

And do they even follow the warning labels anyway?.  Only tries to help reduce the burden on the manufacturer of said product. How many modelers have to be warned that props on engines can be dangerous when running.
 
        Del

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Anthony Abdullah 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 9:32 AM
  Subject: Re: Why the metal cans / There aught to be a law


  My statement carried with it an assumed destinction between sensible legislation backed by research and statistical fact, and frivilous legislation that can't be enforced. I am all for seat belts, food quality standards, and smoke detectors and things of that sort, but laws requiring warning lables stating that you shouldn't use acid as a salad dressing or stop an industrial fan with your tongue are just silly to me. They cost companies money, cost consumers money, and only help a very small percent of the population, that probably shouldn't be handling acid anyway.

  John Ferrell <johnferrell at earthlink.net> wrote:
    I would like to agree with you, but I remember the same cry about seat belts. Without legislation I would still be one of the quirky few to have them in my vehicles.
    In the 1960's I was actively competing in Sports car rallies with Corvairs. I wanted to install a roll bar but the wording on the insurance policy would not allow it!

    Without mandated inspections, our food supply and our water supplies would not be safe.

    In fact, only careful security prevents some idiot from putting that gel cell and a can of fuel in the overhead storage on an airliner. Not only are people getting smarter, some are getting dumber!

    If there is no specific law against it, some damned fool will do it!

    John Ferrell 
    6241 Phillippi Rd
    Julian NC 27283
    Phone: (336)685-9606  
    johnferrell at earthlink.net
    Dixie Competition Products
    NSRCA 479 AMA 4190  W8CCW
    "My Competition is Not My Enemy"

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Anthony Abdullah 
      To: discussion at nsrca.org 
      Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 9:55 AM
      Subject: Why the metal cans / There aught to be a law


      Del, I'm with you 100%. I get concerned anytime legislators try to protect otherwise intelligent people with stupid, cumbersome, and often unenforceable laws. It helps me cope with it to realize that it is partly our (the masses) fault that they make these laws. People are just too litigious! Anytime you need a warning on drain cleaner that says do not use as a party mixer, things are out of hand. But the first alcoholic that mixes it with rubbing alcahol to get a buzz will be filing a lawsuit saying there should have been a warning on the label.

      Del Rykert <drykert at rochester.rr.com> wrote: I inferred similar after reading the group of posts with reference to have to change to metal cans by one distributor due to a fire. Instead of addressing who and why the fire was allowed to start in first place they also go after what helped contribute to a bigger fire. Next the will legislate no fire allowed when the wind is blowing as that causes bigger fires. Just Kidding about legislating wind but the officials looking out for the masses also get my dander up.

        Course having been down a NASTY road with them might have something to do with my opinion.

             Del K. Rykert
             AMA - 8928 
             NSRCA - 473
             Kb2joi - General 


          ----- Original Message ----- 
          From: Keith Black 
          To: discussion at nsrca.org 
          Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 1:10 PM
          Subject: Re: Fuel Question... Why the metal cans?


          Personally I really appreciate Earl's pointing this out. It's something that I hadn't considered and I do carry a loose gel cell battery that I use with my starter. The terminals on top could easily touch a fuel can. If I ever use metal fuel cans I'll keep this in mind.

          I'm also against too much governmental interference, but I didn't read that into Earl's message at all.

          Keith Black
            ----- Original Message ----- 
            From: Ron Van Putte 
            To: discussion at nsrca.org 
            Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 10:51 AM
            Subject: Re: Fuel Question... Why the metal cans?




            EHaury at aol.com wrote:

              A consideration for modelers using metal fuel cans is their conductivity. Shorting a gel cell, or large starter NiCads, with a metal fuel can has been disastrous for a few, a lesson we should not repeat.



            You can't legislate against ignorance/stupidity/et al, but state and federal officials keep trying to protect us from ourselves.  Just wait until they decide that model airplane fuel is even more dangerous than gasoline (it isn't).  Then we will they will ban it for our own good.  Sorry for the tirade, but Earl's response triggered my %$#@ button regarding government control of our lives. 

            Ron Van Putte 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20030711/140678a3/attachment.html