News
Elon Musk’s flamethrower gets reprieve in CA after lawmaker’s bill falls through
California lawmakers recently blocked proposed restrictions for the sale and use of The Boring Company’s Not-a-Flamethrowers in the state. The suggested restrictions were authored by LA Assemblyman Miguel Santiago (D-Los Angeles), who earlier this year issued a strongly-worded criticism of the device.
The Boring Co. Not-a-Flamethrower was launched by Elon Musk earlier this year. The devices, which Musk dubbed as a “super terrible idea,” were sold for $500 each during a limited run of 20,000 units. All 20,000 Not-a-Flamethrowers were sold out within four days, raising $10 million for the tunneling startup.
While the Boring Co. Not-a-Flamethrower proved incredibly popular, LA Assemblyman Miguel Santiago found nothing amusing about the device. At the end of January, Santiago issued a press release strongly criticizing the firestarter.
If this is real, I’m outraged and you should be too. If this is a joke, then it’s a terribly insensitive one given that we’re coming off of the worst wildfire season in history. Either way: NOT FUNNY. NOT GONNA HAPPEN. pic.twitter.com/82n00um9Bf
— Miguel Santiago (@MSantiagoAD54) January 29, 2018
Santiago would go on to author AB-1949, better known as the Flamethrower Bill. The bill’s first iteration proposed several restrictions on the sale and use of flamethrowers in California. As could be seen in a copy of the Assemblyman’s bill, owners of Tier II flamethrowers (devices that can shoot flames at least 2 feet but not exceeding 10 feet, like the Boring Co. Not-a-Flamethrower) must have a valid pyrotechnic operator license from the State Fire Marshal and the necessary permits before they are allowed to use the device. Without these documents, buyers of the Boring Co. flamethrower would be at risk of fines or even imprisonment. Here is an excerpt from the Assemblyman’s original bill.
“Any person who uses or possesses any Tier I or Tier II flamethrowing device… without a valid flamethrowing device permit issued pursuant to this part is guilty of a public offense and, upon conviction, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a term not to exceed one year, or in the state prison, or by a fine not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by both imprisonment and fine.”
Santiago’s bill was largely supported by the police and fire officials. As the bill advanced, however, it was eventually amended. The amendments in the bill were primarily focused on Santiago’s proposed restrictions on Tier II flamethrowers, which are less powerful and less likely to cause harm. The suggested imprisonment and fines for individuals using Tier II flamethrowers without permits were struck off the bill as well.
Santiago eventually narrowed the scope of his bill, suggesting that the devices like the Boring Co. Not-a-Flamethrower must carry a safety label. Even this, however, was stalled on Friday, when the bill was held at the Assembly Appropriations Committee. As noted in a San Francisco Chronicle article, the Flamethrower Bill ultimately became a victim of the state’s “suspense file” process, where legislative leaders usually kill bills that can pose an embarrassing vote for the party.
It is pertinent to note that the Boring Co. Not-a-Flamethrower is more of an oversized butane torch than a full-fledged flamethrower. The device shoots flames similar to the Weed Dragon, a torch that can be bought at hardware stores. Tier I flamethrowers, such as the XM42-M, are on an entirely different level, as these devices are capable of shooting flames up to 30 feet.
For now, however, reservation holders of the Boring Company Not-a-Flamethrower could look forward to the upcoming pickup party on June 9 at Los Angeles. The event, which would feature the handover of the first 1,000 Not-a-Flamethrowers, will also include fun activities such as photo booths, marshmallow toasting sessions, and zombie simulations. Deliveries of the Not-a-Flamethrowers would follow soon after.
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) is set to hold its Earnings Call for the first quarter of 2026 on Wednesday, and there are a lot of interesting things that are swirling around in terms of speculation from investors.
With the company’s executives, including CEO Elon Musk, answering a handful of questions that investors submit through the Say platform, fans want to know a lot of things about a lot of things.
These five questions come from Retail Investors, who are normal, everyday shareholders:
- When will we have the Optimus v3 reveal? When will Optimus production start, since we ended the Model S and Model X production earlier than mid-year? What’s the expected Optimus production rate exiting this year? What are the initial targeted skills?
- What milestones are you targeting for unsupervised FSD and Robotaxi expansion beyond Austin this year, and how will that drive recurring revenue?
- How will Hardware 3 cars reach Unsupervised Full Self-Driving?
- When do you expect Unsupervised Full Self-Driving to reach customer cars?
- When will Robotaxi expand past its current limited rollout?
Additionally, these are currently the three questions that are slated to be answered by Institutional Firms, which also answer a handful of questions during the call:
- Now that FSD has been approved in the Netherlands and is expected to launch across Europe this summer, can you discuss your Robotaxi strategy for the region?
- What enabled you to finish the AI5 tapeout early and were there any changes to the original vision? Last week, Elon said AI5 will go into Optimus and the Supercomputer, but one month ago said it would go into the Robotaxi. Has AI5 been dropped from the vehicle roadmap?
- Given the recent NHTSA incident filings, can you update us on the Robotaxi safety data? If safety validation remains the primary bottleneck, why not deploy thousands of vehicles to accelerate the removal of the safety driver?
The questions range through every current Tesla project, including FSD expansion and Optimus. However, many of the answers we will get will likely be repetitive answers we’ve heard in the past.
This is especially pertinent when the questions about when Unsupervised FSD will reach customer cars: we know Musk will say that it will happen this year. Is Tesla capable of that? Maybe. But a more transparent answer that is more revealing of a true timeline would be appreciated.
Hardware 3 owners are anxiously awaiting the arrival of FSD v14 Lite, which was promised to them last year for a release sometime this year.
The Earnings Call is set to take place on Wednesday at market close.
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
