canopy breaking tool?

[Russell Duffy]

Greetings,

I've been looking for a canopy breaking tool, that would work on a 1/4"
thick canopy. I know the military has had a few of these over the years,
but I haven't been able to locate a used, or surplus tool. I'm betting that
someone makes a tool for this, but I sure can't find one in any internet
search.

For the record, I've seen the life hammers, and such that are made for
tempered auto glass, but I don't think those would work. If anyone can
point me to a tool that's made for aircraft canopies, I'd certainly
appreciate it.

Cheers,
Rusty

[Robert Little]

Actually it is no big deal.. The one mounted in the old AH-1 Cobra that I
flew was nothing but a short bladed K-Bar kniife and our curved canopy was
about 1/4" thick. It was installed for when the det cord didn't blow out
the canopy or the copter was laying over on the canopy (which is usually the
way things ended up in bad times).n I'm sure the ones found in the auto
magazines would do as well as the high dollar K-Bar. Just a thought. RTL
"Russell Duffy" > wrote in message
...
> Greetings,
>
> I've been looking for a canopy breaking tool, that would work on a 1/4"
> thick canopy. I know the military has had a few of these over the years,
> but I haven't been able to locate a used, or surplus tool. I'm betting
that
> someone makes a tool for this, but I sure can't find one in any internet
> search.
>
> For the record, I've seen the life hammers, and such that are made for
> tempered auto glass, but I don't think those would work. If anyone can
> point me to a tool that's made for aircraft canopies, I'd certainly
> appreciate it.
>
> Cheers,
> Rusty
>
>

[Del Rawlins]

>> I've been looking for a canopy breaking tool, that would work on a 1/
>> 4" thick canopy. I know the military has had a few of these over the
>> years, but I haven't been able to locate a used, or surplus tool.
>> I'm betting that someone makes a tool for this, but I sure can't find
>> one in >> any internet search.

<cheap shot>I believe we have an RV-4 builder present who can advise on
one method of how to break a canopy....</cheap shot>

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

[Dave Hyde]

Del Rawlins wrote:

> <cheap shot>I believe we have an RV-4 builder present who can advise on
> one method of how to break a canopy....</cheap shot>

OOOOOoooooohhhhh.

Dave 'crack kills' Hyde

[Frederick Wilson]

Robert,

I was going to mention the det cord in the Cobra. I could see the Darwin
Award now. "Homebuilt airplane blown in two while pilot attempts to use the
privately installed detonation cord to eject canopy glass."

Where and when do you fly the snake?

I was an aeroscout pilot.

Fred


"Robert Little" > wrote in message
...
> Actually it is no big deal.. The one mounted in the old AH-1 Cobra that I
> flew was nothing but a short bladed K-Bar kniife and our curved canopy was
> about 1/4" thick. It was installed for when the det cord didn't blow out
> the canopy or the copter was laying over on the canopy (which is usually
the
> way things ended up in bad times).n I'm sure the ones found in the auto
> magazines would do as well as the high dollar K-Bar. Just a thought. RTL
> "Russell Duffy" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I've been looking for a canopy breaking tool, that would work on a 1/4"
> > thick canopy. I know the military has had a few of these over the
years,
> > but I haven't been able to locate a used, or surplus tool. I'm betting
> that
> > someone makes a tool for this, but I sure can't find one in any internet
> > search.
> >
> > For the record, I've seen the life hammers, and such that are made for
> > tempered auto glass, but I don't think those would work. If anyone can
> > point me to a tool that's made for aircraft canopies, I'd certainly
> > appreciate it.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Rusty
> >
> >
>
>

[Flightdeck]

Hi,

A full 1/4" thick! Cool.

This brings up a question that some one in the group might be able to
answer. The question arises from some experiments I conducted while trying
to design an extraction tool for a true Lexan canopy.

A few years ago I did the initial test flights and then flew off the "first
40" hours on a friend's homebuilt for him. He spent the extra bucks for a
thick, true Lexan canopy with the gold UV barrier. The Lexan was chosen
over the less expensive Acrylics because we fly in an area where the
probability of bird strikes is higher and Lexan won't break easily. Because
of the geometry of the cowl-canopy-vertical stabilizer line, I was concerned
that it would be very difficult to open the canopy and get out of the thing
if it ever flipped over on its back.

I bought some 1' x 1" Lexan squares of the same thickness as the canopy and
fabricated a rigid frame that I could use as a test jig. I then tried a
number of different extraction "tools" to see which edge design would work
the best to break the Lexan. That stuff is tough! The blunt instruments
would not break it, but a very sharp axe edge could be used to eventually
"chew" through at a spot so that a thin pry-bar could be inserted. This
worked, but the initial creation of the hole for the pry-bar took so long
that a person could be a "crispy critter" before the process was complete.
I needed something with more energy concentrated.

Without going into the whole train of development, I ended up with a device
mounted on a 2' long by 1" diameter tube of 4130 steel. The "business end"
of the device used two of the 32 caliber "nail driver" blank shells to very
rapidly extend, from the end of the device, a captive sharp spike of case
hardened steel coated with carbide granules. The rear, full diameter,
section of the spike and "barrel" were machined like a course "jack screw"
so that the spike rotated as it extended. When the safety was removed and
the "trigger" was pulled with the end of the device held against the Lexan,
the spike would penetrate the Lexan. To me, the interesting part was that a
"smooth spike" coming out without rotation didn't work all of the time
because of recoil. The course, rotating spike actually friction melted its
way through the Lexan and then stuck in place. Once the spike had
penetrated through the Lexan, the 2' "level" portion of the could be used to
pry on the sheet to crack the sheet.

I can think of a modification that would also drive an impact head that
would shatter Acrylic canopys without the need for the spike. It would also
be possible to have a "T" device that provided multiple impact points along
a line.

Here is the question. I used the 32 cal blank shells because that was the
most direct way to get the gas pressure I needed in the chamber. I made one
version that used a modified 410 shot gun shell - but it required more bulk
than the 32 cal shell firing mechinism. And, I considered using the
internal volume of the "pry tube" as a pressure chamber for high pressure
Nitrogen, but the complexity of the filling fittings and the explosive
decompression valve was too much work. Also, it would mean flying with a
pipe bomb in the cockpit. I happened to be describing the device to a
friend over a $100 cup of coffee one day and a fellow in the next booth
overheard the conversation. He volunteered that the device violated FARs
because it could be considered as carrying an "explosive device" in a civil
aircraft.

At the time, I didn't want to "open Pandora's box" by contacting the FAA
about the issue. However, with the proliferation of low-wing homebuilt
aircraft designs that use bubble canopies, I wonder if it is a good time to
pursue further development as a safety device. I didn't apply for patents
because this sort of safety device should be in the public domain.

What think all?

J


"Russell Duffy" > wrote in message
...
> Greetings,
>
> I've been looking for a canopy breaking tool, that would work on a 1/4"
> thick canopy. I know the military has had a few of these over the years,
> but I haven't been able to locate a used, or surplus tool. I'm betting
that
> someone makes a tool for this, but I sure can't find one in any internet
> search.
>
> For the record, I've seen the life hammers, and such that are made for
> tempered auto glass, but I don't think those would work. If anyone can
> point me to a tool that's made for aircraft canopies, I'd certainly
> appreciate it.
>
> Cheers,
> Rusty
>
>

[Snowbird]

Del Rawlins > wrote in message >...
> >> I've been looking for a canopy breaking tool, that would work on a 1/
> >> 4" thick canopy. I know the military has had a few of these over the
> >> years, but I haven't been able to locate a used, or surplus tool.
> >> I'm betting that someone makes a tool for this, but I sure can't find
> >> one in >> any internet search.

> <cheap shot>I believe we have an RV-4 builder present who can advise on
> one method of how to break a canopy....</cheap shot>

ooooh...you're mean (translation: you posted it before I could)

Sydney

[Russell Duffy]

> OOOOOoooooohhhhh.
>
> Dave 'crack kills' Hyde


I've heard the joke about carrying a drill with a standard bit, since we all
know that canopies will crack if you get a drill near them :-) Fortunately,
my RV-8 canopy never cracked in two years I flew it, and the current RV-3
canopy hasn't, and probably won't crack, because it was supplied by Todd's
Canopies.

Thanks to all who commented. Ron, the sight you point me to is down at the
moment, but I'll keep trying. Dan, I've sent an email about the surplus
military tools you mentioned. As for using det cord, pistols, or any sort
of explosive device, I would worry about starting a fire. I imagine being
on my back in the RV-3, with fuel dribbling around the canopy area on the
ground. Just doesn't seem like a good idea to use explosives.

Thanks again,
Rusty (building 3 planes for every one that Dave finishes <g>)

[swedeflyer]

Save yourself some money, WalMart sells a camping axe -- with the
protective leather ~$7. That's what I keep in my plane. Although my
axe was my son's when he was in the scouts.

[Dave Hyde]

Russell Duffy wrote:

> Rusty (building 3 planes for every one that Dave finishes <g>)

OW! Who stuck the 'kick me' sign on my back?

Dave 'Only 3? I'm not done yet' Hyde

[Corrie]

> > Also, it would mean flying with a pipe bomb in the cockpit.

Pipe bomb with a steel spike in the end. FARs or no FARs, that is the
operative statement. It also has to be built to survive the crash and
turnover, safetied to not go off until triggered despite the G-loads
of a hard landing and turnover (not to mention normal flight)...

Build in a kick-out panel between the seat and rudder pedals, maybe?

[Ron Wanttaja]

On 18 Sep 2003 18:02:45 -0700, (Corrie) wrote:

>> > Also, it would mean flying with a pipe bomb in the cockpit.
>
>Pipe bomb with a steel spike in the end. FARs or no FARs, that is the
>operative statement. It also has to be built to survive the crash and
>turnover, safetied to not go off until triggered despite the G-loads
>of a hard landing and turnover (not to mention normal flight)...

....and be usable if one has only a single arm or hand available, and that
hand deadened by cold or shock. Makes a safety a lot harder to work,
especially if the tool comes out of the rack first.

Ron Wanttaja

[Snowbird]

Dave Hyde > wrote in message >...
> Russell Duffy wrote:
>
> > Rusty (building 3 planes for every one that Dave finishes <g>)
>
> OW! Who stuck the 'kick me' sign on my back?
>
> Dave 'Only 3? I'm not done yet' Hyde

Far side cartoon: "Bummer of a Birthmark, Hal"
http://store1.yimg.com/I/coolrags_1753_1742593

It's only because you're so CLOSE, and the Natives are
restless for the First Flight report.

Sydney

PS Mike said "sure" and would be happy to talk specifics.

[Corrie]

Ron Wanttaja > wrote in message >...
> On 18 Sep 2003 18:02:45 -0700, (Corrie) wrote:
>
> >> > Also, it would mean flying with a pipe bomb in the cockpit.
> >
> >Pipe bomb with a steel spike in the end. FARs or no FARs, that is the
> >operative statement. It also has to be built to survive the crash and
> >turnover, safetied to not go off until triggered despite the G-loads
> >of a hard landing and turnover (not to mention normal flight)...
>
> ...and be usable if one has only a single arm or hand available, and that
> hand deadened by cold or shock. Makes a safety a lot harder to work,
> especially if the tool comes out of the rack first.
>
> Ron Wanttaja

All good reasons to fly open cockpit, eh, Ron? ;-)

[Bruce A. Frank]

Corrie wrote:

> All good reasons to fly open cockpit, eh, Ron? ;-)

But with a roll bar!

--
Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL
Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter"
| Publishing interesting material|
| on all aspects of alternative |
| engines and homebuilt aircraft.|

While trying to find the time to finish mine.

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:18:00 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> wrote:
>
>> All good reasons to fly open cockpit, eh, Ron? ;-)
>
>But with a roll bar!

I'd be happy enough with the key to the roll mini-bar. :-)

Ron Wanttaja

[Bruce A. Frank]

There is certainly no law against carrying personal firearms in a
privately owned plane.

Bryan Martin wrote:
>
> in article .net,
> Flightdeck at wrote on 9/17/03 8:50 AM:
>
> > Here is the question. I used the 32 cal blank shells because that was the
> > most direct way to get the gas pressure I needed in the chamber. I made one
> > version that used a modified 410 shot gun shell - but it required more bulk
> > than the 32 cal shell firing mechinism. And, I considered using the
> > internal volume of the "pry tube" as a pressure chamber for high pressure
> > Nitrogen, but the complexity of the filling fittings and the explosive
> > decompression valve was too much work. Also, it would mean flying with a
> > pipe bomb in the cockpit. I happened to be describing the device to a
> > friend over a $100 cup of coffee one day and a fellow in the next booth
> > overheard the conversation. He volunteered that the device violated FARs
> > because it could be considered as carrying an "explosive device" in a civil
> > aircraft.
> >
>
> If a .32 blank is considered an explosive device illegal to carry in a civil
> aircraft, then every bush pilot in the country is in violation of the law by
> carrying firearms in the cockpit for survival in case of forced landing. As
> I understand it, in some areas a firearm is required by law to be carried in
> the airplane. And of course, gasoline must be far too dangerous to carry in
> an airplane.

--
Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL
Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter"
| Publishing interesting material|
| on all aspects of alternative |
| engines and homebuilt aircraft.|

[richard]

On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 04:37:04 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> wrote:

:There is certainly no law against carrying personal firearms in a
:privately owned plane.

Depends on what state you're in. Don't try it in Massachusetts.

[B2431]

>
>:There is certainly no law against carrying personal firearms in a
>:privately owned plane.
>
>Depends on what state you're in. Don't try it in Massachusetts.
>

Airports are federally controlled despite the state cops (in Logan's case)
patrolling. If you secure your fire arm in the aircraft when you leave it there
should be no problem.

My 2000 Federal Firearms Regulation Reference Guide says nothing about it. Now
I am curious and will call ATF.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[richard]

On 22 Sep 2003 05:29:50 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

:>
:>:There is certainly no law against carrying personal firearms in a
:>:privately owned plane.
:>
:>Depends on what state you're in. Don't try it in Massachusetts.
:>
:
:Airports are federally controlled despite the state cops (in Logan's case)
:patrolling. If you secure your fire arm in the aircraft when you leave it there
:should be no problem.
:
:My 2000 Federal Firearms Regulation Reference Guide says nothing about it. Now
:I am curious and will call ATF.
:
:Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

I've heard anecdotal stories of people being arrested at Logan when
they change planes with disassembled, unloaded firearms in their
checked bags. May be urban legend.

At LAX the cops on patrol are a branch of the LAPD. I think if you
violate a state law - like rape, robbery, murder or theft - on the
airport grounds they're going to have something to say about it.
Heck, if you violate a city ordinance, like providing unlicenced
park-and-ride shuttle service - they'll stop you quicker than you'd
think.

[Richard]

On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:19:03 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> wrote:

:So going to your plane with your personal firearm unloaded and locked in
:a case is against the local law?

On your way to the airport, it depends on where you are. In
California and most states, no. In a few, like MA, yes, unless you
and that firearm are licensed in that particular state.

The question is on the airport grounds themselves. Is it Federally
controlled, or under the state law? I *think* it's under the state
law, but I'm not sure. I know that if you take your (state) licensed
concealed pistol into a post office you're in a world of hurt, because
the federal law *does* apply there.

Now - after you take off, and you're flying over a state that requires
you and the gun to be licensed but you're no longer on airport
grounds, which law applies? I have no idea.

Just to get us back on topic - would a .22 kitgun with snakeshot be
effective in breaking a canopy? Or would it create a nice round hole
with no tendency to form a crack?

[Del Rawlins]

On 22 Sep 2003 07:02 AM, Richard posted the following:

> law, but I'm not sure. I know that if you take your (state) licensed
> concealed pistol into a post office you're in a world of hurt, because
> the federal law *does* apply there.

http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rtc-usps.html

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

[richard]

On 23 Sep 2003 03:28:28 GMT, Del Rawlins
> wrote:

:On 22 Sep 2003 07:02 AM, Richard posted the following:
:
:> law, but I'm not sure. I know that if you take your (state) licensed
:> concealed pistol into a post office you're in a world of hurt, because
:> the federal law *does* apply there.
:
:http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rtc-usps.html

Interesting. The instructor at the CCW course I took a couple of
years ago was retired FBI and was adamant about taking your gun off
before you went inside a post office.

Anyway, for the moment I'll stand by the second part of the sentence -
the federal law applies inside a post office (whether or not it deals
with firearms). The question is still - which law applies at an
airport? And, if the state law prohibits it, does the federal law -
if it applies at the airport - give you any cover? This essay appears
to say no. So don't fly into MA with a pistol in your flightbag.

[Del Rawlins]

On 22 Sep 2003 09:34 PM, richard posted the following:
> On 23 Sep 2003 03:28:28 GMT, Del Rawlins
> > wrote:
>
>:On 22 Sep 2003 07:02 AM, Richard posted the following:
>:
>:> law, but I'm not sure. I know that if you take your (state)
>:> licensed concealed pistol into a post office you're in a world of
>:> hurt, because the federal law *does* apply there.
>:
>:http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rtc-usps.html
>
> Interesting. The instructor at the CCW course I took a couple of
> years ago was retired FBI and was adamant about taking your gun off
> before you went inside a post office.

As one of "them" that is what I would have expected him to say. Besides,
as an aquaintence of mine once pointed out, "you will be within your
rights, but you will also be within a jail cell." Those signs you see
at the post office always cite the law they are using to justify their
assertion that it is illegal, but they don't put the whole law on the
sign. I've thought about printing out the rest of the law and posting
it next to one of the signs, but that would most likely result in my
getting charged with defacing postal property or some other such thing.

> Anyway, for the moment I'll stand by the second part of the sentence -
> the federal law applies inside a post office (whether or not it deals
> with firearms). The question is still - which law applies at an
> airport? And, if the state law prohibits it, does the federal law -
> if it applies at the airport - give you any cover? This essay appears
> to say no. So don't fly into MA with a pistol in your flightbag.

There is very little chance I will ever go to MA for anything!

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

[B2431]

>I've heard anecdotal stories of people being arrested at Logan when
>they change planes with disassembled, unloaded firearms in their
>checked bags. May be urban legend.

I have transported firearms via airlines many times including through Logan.
The trick is to transport them in airline approved carrying cases and declare
them when you check in. If in doubt call ahead. Ammunition must be in its
original box and the firearm must be unloaded.

Next time you go through luggage pick up look for luggage with bright orange
tags.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Bruce A. Frank]

Does this mean that if I travel in to Boston with checked guns in my
luggage I will be arrested as I pull them off the turnstile?

I travel with my gun(s) in a locked case, whether on airlines or in
private planes. I have not traveled with them in 5 or 6 years. At that
time I was never accosted by anyone except to verify that my claim check
matched the case. I have been in and out of Philly, Atlanta, New York
City, Orlando, Tampa, Baltimore, Anchorage, SFO, San Jose, Phoenix, and
Washington DC and never have I run in to even the slightest problem...at
least in the past.

Just recently I contacted Delta and American asking about checked guns
and inspections. I was told that gun cases would be inspected at the
ticket check-in, identified with a sticker saying they had been
inspected, then re-locked and I would retain the key.

Just a point of information, there are now IIRC 26 states that have
reciprocity for concealed weapons...meaning that if you are qualified to
carry in your state of residence than you are qualified in those 25
other states.

richard wrote:
>
> On 23 Sep 2003 03:28:28 GMT, Del Rawlins
> > wrote:
>
> :On 22 Sep 2003 07:02 AM, Richard posted the following:
> :
> :> law, but I'm not sure. I know that if you take your (state) licensed
> :> concealed pistol into a post office you're in a world of hurt, because
> :> the federal law *does* apply there.
> :
> :http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rtc-usps.html
>
> Interesting. The instructor at the CCW course I took a couple of
> years ago was retired FBI and was adamant about taking your gun off
> before you went inside a post office.
>
> Anyway, for the moment I'll stand by the second part of the sentence -
> the federal law applies inside a post office (whether or not it deals
> with firearms). The question is still - which law applies at an
> airport? And, if the state law prohibits it, does the federal law -
> if it applies at the airport - give you any cover? This essay appears
> to say no. So don't fly into MA with a pistol in your flightbag.

--
Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL
Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter"
| Publishing interesting material|
| on all aspects of alternative |
| engines and homebuilt aircraft.|

[Richard]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 05:21:42 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> wrote:

:Does this mean that if I travel in to Boston with checked guns in my
:luggage I will be arrested as I pull them off the turnstile?

That's what I've heard. Supposedly, when they had the Olympics in
Atlanta the warned the international shooters not to travel through
Boston on their way.
:
:I travel with my gun(s) in a locked case, whether on airlines or in
:private planes. I have not traveled with them in 5 or 6 years. At that
:time I was never accosted by anyone except to verify that my claim check
:matched the case. I have been in and out of Philly, Atlanta, New York
:City, Orlando, Tampa, Baltimore, Anchorage, SFO, San Jose, Phoenix, and
:Washington DC and never have I run in to even the slightest problem...at
:least in the past.
:
:Just recently I contacted Delta and American asking about checked guns
:and inspections. I was told that gun cases would be inspected at the
:ticket check-in, identified with a sticker saying they had been
:inspected, then re-locked and I would retain the key.

A sticker on the gun, or on the outside of the case - saying "There's
a gun in this one, steal it now!!"

:
:Just a point of information, there are now IIRC 26 states that have
:reciprocity for concealed weapons...meaning that if you are qualified to
:carry in your state of residence than you are qualified in those 25
:other states.

Yes, but I'm licensed in California - no reciprocity at all. IIRC a
CA resident can get a license in Arizona and get reciprocity in
something like 5 states, but the one you want is Kentucky.

[Mike Patterson]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:35:09 GMT, Richard > wrote:

>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 05:21:42 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> wrote:
>
<SNIP>:
>:Just recently I contacted Delta and American asking about checked guns
>:and inspections. I was told that gun cases would be inspected at the
>:ticket check-in, identified with a sticker saying they had been
>:inspected, then re-locked and I would retain the key.
>
>A sticker on the gun, or on the outside of the case - saying "There's
>a gun in this one, steal it now!!"
>
<SNIP>

I seem to remember reading that once the gun is cased, locked, and
stickered, you can place it insde another, unmarked case and send it
on it's way without the "Steal Me" sticker showing to casual
observers.

Mike

Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

[Bruce A. Frank]

The problem may be that even though the locked gunnies is in the
suitcase locked, the suitcase is not locked.

Mike Patterson wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:35:09 GMT, Richard > wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 05:21:42 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> > wrote:
> >
> <SNIP>:
> >:Just recently I contacted Delta and American asking about checked guns
> >:and inspections. I was told that gun cases would be inspected at the
> >:ticket check-in, identified with a sticker saying they had been
> >:inspected, then re-locked and I would retain the key.
> >
> >A sticker on the gun, or on the outside of the case - saying "There's
> >a gun in this one, steal it now!!"
> >
> <SNIP>
>
> I seem to remember reading that once the gun is cased, locked, and
> stickered, you can place it insde another, unmarked case and send it
> on it's way without the "Steal Me" sticker showing to casual
> observers.
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Patterson
> Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

--
Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL
Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter"
| Publishing interesting material|
| on all aspects of alternative |
| engines and homebuilt aircraft.|
*------------------------------**----*
\(-o-)/ AIRCRAFT PROJECTS CO.
\___/ Manufacturing parts & pieces
/ \ for homebuilt aircraft,
0 0 TIG welding

While trying to find the time to finish mine.

[Rich S.]

"Bruce A. Frank" > wrote in message
...
>
> BTW, the word I have is that a permit in UT appears be accepted in all
> other states that allow concealed carry.

Bruce..........

Do you have a reference list URL of reciprocity carry states?

Rich "Those things sticking outa the leading edge? Those'r ah... er... Pitot
tubes - Yeah, that's it" S.

[Ron Natalie]

"Rich S." > wrote in message ...

>
> Do you have a reference list URL of reciprocity carry states?
>
www.packing.org

[Rich S.]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Rich S." > wrote in message
...
>
> >
> > Do you have a reference list URL of reciprocity carry states?
> >
> www.packing.org

Thanks!
Rich

[Bushy]

> Of course frisking yourself for too long and in public is a whole 'nother
> crime =D
>

Look hear, it's my soap and my slug and I'll wash it as fast as I like!
;<)
Peter

[Fred the Red Shirt]

Richard > wrote in message >...
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:19:03 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> > wrote:
>
> :So going to your plane with your personal firearm unloaded and locked in
> :a case is against the local law?
>
> On your way to the airport, it depends on where you are. In
> California and most states, no. In a few, like MA, yes, unless you
> and that firearm are licensed in that particular state.
>
> The question is on the airport grounds themselves. Is it Federally
> controlled, or under the state law? I *think* it's under the state
> law, but I'm not sure.

I expect the answer is both. The Feds and the State can both
have jurisdiction in the same criminal case and try the defendant
seperately. Google for dual (or is it separate?) sovreigns.

For example, Timothy McVeigh was convicted in federal court of
various federal offenses including the murder of federal officials,
and sentenced to death. His was the first execution scheduled under
those Federal Statutes since some reform or other. If the Federal
Death Penalty had been overturned, the State of Oklahoma stood
ready to try him under state law and the OK death penalty had
been tested in the courts.

--

FF