Maybe it is time that someone deliberately break an anti-metric law and site
the 1866 law as their defense. Maybe if the case can go to the supreme court,
then the court can rule in favor of metric, thus by-passing the Congress and
the FMI.
Jerry
________________________________
From: John M. Steele <jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net>
To: U.S.. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:35:16 PM
Subject: [USMA:43749] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices!
It might make an interesting defense if anyone were charged with metric-only
labeling. I'm not sure either the charge or the defense has ever occurred.
On the fill, I believe milk falls under FPLA and no one has located a law that
says it doesn't. FPLA clearly states it trumps state law. All the milk I see
in my supermarket is dual labeled; either unit may be foirst and may be the
round unit.
--- On Fri, 3/13/09, Jeremiah MacGregor <jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com>
wrote:
> From: Jeremiah MacGregor <jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com>
> Subject: [USMA:43748] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices!
> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <usma@colostate.edu>
> Date: Friday, March 13, 2009, 8:26 PM
> I believe the metric law of 1866 would give them the right
> to despite local laws that may require gallon fills only.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: John M. Steele <jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net>
> To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu>
> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2009 6:57:27 PM
> Subject: [USMA:43612] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and
> no-one notices!
>
>
> I still believe they could fill to 4 L if they wanted too.
