• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US agents raid Gibson Guitar over ebony

Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

Nup, sorry Ockham. But I do have a Rickenbacker 4-string stereo bass (white w/ black pick-guard).

I've played the 4 string version - late 70's natural through a Hartke rig - very nice! I've been on the hunt for a 4003 5-string, not the modified 4-string but the actual fiver since Rick stopped making them a while back. They're hard to come by and when I have seen them, quite expensive. If among your travels you see one... I'd sure be interested!
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

In criminal cases, yes. I think this is probable a civil case.

And I don't you're doing yourself any facors by just dismissing murder cases after posting that "innocent until proven guilty" spiel. Either you apply that consistently, or you don't. BTW, the same thing applies to robbery, etc. Should we just let the their go and give themback the gun they used to commit the robbery? We put people who haven't been convicted of anything in jail all the time, and rightfully so. Gibson isn't immune from this simply because they make rockin' guitars


In criminal cases, yes. I think this is probable a civil case.
Constitutional rights applies to everyone as individuals and corporations, this is how understand, Although I am not a lawyer but the constitution was written for any citizen to understand. I am being consistent, if a man is caught with the smoking gun in hand after a murder then you have probable cause to arrest and hold along with immediately being levied. If one is suspected of a murder without a smoking gun in hand then the state has yet to have proof or can not prove ones guilt, then one must be released until the actual charge with evidence can be justified.
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

I've played the 4 string version - late 70's natural through a Hartke rig - very nice! I've been on the hunt for a 4003 5-string, not the modified 4-string but the actual fiver since Rick stopped making them a while back. They're hard to come by and when I have seen them, quite expensive. If among your travels you see one... I'd sure be interested!
I'll keep an eye out O. Probably a rarity and buku $.

I've got a Hartke amp (400 watts w/ equalizer) somewhere in the studio. If you set the compression right, it sounds mighty nice. I usually use Crown pre-amps, David Eden or World amps, and stacked SWR speaker cabinets.
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

I'll keep an eye out O. Probably a rarity and buku $.

I've got a Hartke amp (400 watts w/ equalizer) somewhere in the studio. If you set the compression right, it sounds mighty nice. I usually use Crown pre-amps, David Eden or World amps, and stacked SWR speaker cabinets.

I do like the Eden stuff - I get a very "back line 1979" type sound out of them. I tend to go small these days using just a 4-10 Hartke half and a Hartke head for stage and then split it out on a DI to the PA guy. I don't play bass live much anymore, or guitar for that matter. I've been doing the small studio demo thing. Mostly it's songs I never got a chance to record or always wanted to record. I did get a hunting show looking for a tune during opening/closing credits so I get to work on that. It's nice to do and I've got some good guys who like to play so it's fun for me.
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

As have the conservos. This is a practice which crosses party and philosophical lines, mainly because it's about power and not about politics. The individuals who perpetuate these practices are not elected officials, they're attorneys who are largely outside the political sphere -- until, of course, they decide to use their record as a champion for truth and justice as a platform for a run for office.

Give us some examples of which Libbo politician that ran on a platform of less government regulation. I await with bated breath.



That's a load of crap. It's a problem inherent to the inner workings of the system that Obama alone can't fix.

You wouldn't be saying that if a Republican were president.
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

Give us some examples of which Libbo politician that ran on a platform of less government regulation. I await with bated breath.

There you go, doing exactly what you try to do when you're having difficulty making your point -- you're trying to change the subject.

Both parties
have ceded vast swaths of power to the executive branch, both parties have had a hand in mandatory minimums and ever-expanding draconian penalties in general, and both parties have screwed with sentencing guidelines so as to push as many sentences as possible towards the maximum end of the recommended range on a variety of offenses. Neither party has made a point of trying to reign in ambitious prosecutors, eliminate laws and practices that all but force defendants to plead guilty rather than fight the charges against them or better equip public defenders to so fight.

Both parties bear responsibility for the condition of our justice system.

You wouldn't be saying that if a Republican were president.

Yes, I absolutely would. All of my reading on the subject of overcriminalization has pointed squarely away from political parties, and directly towards ambitious prosecutors, weak-willed legislators trying to satisfy an ignorant electorate by addressing the issue of criminal justice with hysterical fervor, and permissive judges.

Even though some of the stuff I've read comes from the Heritage Foundation, even they don't make it about politics.
 
Last edited:
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

There you go, doing exactly what you try to do when you're having difficulty making your point -- you're trying to change the subject.

Both parties
have ceded vast swaths of power to the executive branch, both parties have had a hand in mandatory minimums and ever-expanding draconian penalties in general, and both parties have screwed with sentencing guidelines so as to push as many sentences as possible towards the maximum end of the recommended range on a variety of offenses. Neither party has made a point of trying to reign in ambitious prosecutors, eliminate laws and practices that all but force defendants to plead guilty rather than fight the charges against them or better equip public defenders to so fight.

Both parties bear responsibility for the condition of our justice system.



Yes, I absolutely would. All of my reading on the subject of overcriminalization has pointed squarely away from political parties, and directly towards ambitious prosecutors, weak-willed legislators trying to satisfy an ignorant electorate by addressing the issue of criminal justice with hysterical fervor, and permissive judges.

Even though some of the stuff I've read comes from the Heritage Foundation, even they don't make it about politics.

And, there you go when the fire gets too hot for the Libbos...you blame everybody.
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

And, there you go when the fire gets too hot for the Libbos...you blame everybody.

And there you go when you find yourself completely unequipped to respond to my argument -- you mischaracterize it. Even though I've stated several times that overcriminalization is an issue that crosses party lines, you try to tell me I'd blame the President if he was a Republican. When I contradict that by again asserting that the problem is bi-partisan and don't even list the Presidency on my indictment of the justice system, you accuse me of blaming everybody.

I haven't blamed everybody.

I'm blaming ambitious prosecutors, permissive judges, and populist legislators on both sides of the isle.

I look forward to your next deceptive tactic, all the others have been such fun to deconstruct.
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

And there you go when you find yourself completely unequipped to respond to my argument -- you mischaracterize it. Even though I've stated several times that overcriminalization is an issue that crosses party lines, you try to tell me I'd blame the President if he was a Republican. When I contradict that by again asserting that the problem is bi-partisan and don't even list the Presidency on my indictment of the justice system, you accuse me of blaming everybody.

I haven't blamed everybody.

I'm blaming ambitious prosecutors, permissive judges, and populist legislators on both sides of the isle.

I look forward to your next deceptive tactic, all the others have been such fun to deconstruct.

When you actually make an argument, I'll respond to it.
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

I have made an argument, a rather complex one, and you continue to dismiss it because you're completely unable to respond to it. It's all you can do to pound out a quippy one-liner every time I reply to you, and they're not even funny.
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

I have made an argument, a rather complex one, and you continue to dismiss it because you're completely unable to respond to it. It's all you can do to pound out a quippy one-liner every time I reply to you, and they're not even funny.

Complex confusion, perhaps. :lamo
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

Complex confusion, perhaps. :lamo

That makes 3 one-line responses that neither address anything I've said nor entertain me in any way. No doubt your response to this post will be the fourth such.
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

That makes 3 one-line responses that neither address anything I've said nor entertain me in any way. No doubt your response to this post will be the fourth such.

Of course it will. :lamo
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

I suggest you read up on the Lacey Act on your own if you don't believe the article. I believe you will find that they reported it correctly. Although the Lacey Act is enforced somewhat selectively, it can be used to confiscate any item with exotic wood or anther banned material in it where the owner cannot document that the materials were collected and imported legally. Have you ever watched Antique Road Show and seen the experts on it mention potential problems with the antiques brought in ??

Where's the beef? There is only a problem with the import of endangered species, or things made from them. Show us the cases of people in this country being busted for their old guitars with ebony and rosewood?
 
Re: Is your guitar DOJ approved?

The illegality you speak of has yet to be proven, or even charged. The feds just busted in - again - took some valuable material, and has yet to return it. The loss of material alone is worth a million dollars to Gibson, not counting the loss in sales of products that could be made from the confiscated material.

Screw that. The gov needs to file charges or return the stuff.


Sure, why wait for the facts?
 
Gibson had all the necessary documentation to prove they were in legal possession of the material. The government confiscated the material, anyway and have yet to return it.

LOL! You conducted the investigated the case personally did you?
 
"The U.S. Justice Department won't comment about the case it's preparing, but a court motion filed in June asserts Gibson's Madagascar ebony was contraband. It quotes emails that seem to show Gibson taking steps to maintain a supply chain that's been connected to illegal timber harvests.

Andrea Johnson, director of forest programs for the Environmental Investigation Agency in Washington, says the Lacey Act requires end users of endangered wood to certify the legality of their supply chain all the way to the trees. EIA's independent investigations have concluded that Gibson knowingly imported tainted wood.

"Gibson clearly understood the risks involved," says Johnson. "Was on the ground in Madagascar getting a tour to understand whether they could possibly source illegally from that country. And made a decision in the end that they were going to source despite knowing that there was a ban on exports of ebony and rosewood."

Why Gibson Guitar Was Raided By The Justice Department : The Record : NPR
 
LOL! You conducted the investigated the case personally did you?

According to the honch as Gibson, he claims to have imported the materials legally and has the docs to prove it.

Can you prove that he's lieing?
 
According to the honch as Gibson, he claims to have imported the materials legally and has the docs to prove it.

Can you prove that he's lieing?

Look, they raided his shop WITH GUNS. You don't raid someone like that if they are innocent.

So, he should ALSO be charged with lying to police, and presenting forged documents because there's no way that Gibson could be innocent if they were raided like that.

It doesn't matter that the wood was documented, it doesn't matter that his competition gets wood from the SAME SOURCE but is being passed by (it doesn't matter that Gibson's main competitor happens to be a big Obama supporter), the fact is that this US company violated INDIAN law and so should be shut down in America and the factory moved to a country with more favorable laws like China or Cambodia.

I think the government should invoke the patriot act and put Gibson and company away in Guantanamo Bay and perhaps given the chance to plead his case to a military tribunal in about 200 years, that should be sufficient.

(BTW, if it was not abundantly clear, this was sarcasm).
 
Look, they raided his shop WITH GUNS. You don't raid someone like that if they are innocent.

So, he should ALSO be charged with lying to police, and presenting forged documents because there's no way that Gibson could be innocent if they were raided like that.

It doesn't matter that the wood was documented, it doesn't matter that his competition gets wood from the SAME SOURCE but is being passed by (it doesn't matter that Gibson's main competitor happens to be a big Obama supporter), the fact is that this US company violated INDIAN law and so should be shut down in America and the factory moved to a country with more favorable laws like China or Cambodia.

I think the government should invoke the patriot act and put Gibson and company away in Guantanamo Bay and perhaps given the chance to plead his case to a military tribunal in about 200 years, that should be sufficient.

(BTW, if it was not abundantly clear, this was sarcasm).

Picked up on that purdy early in the post. ;)
 
According to the honch as Gibson, he claims to have imported the materials legally and has the docs to prove it.

Can you prove that he's lieing?

The great majority of criminals claim they are innocent. The investigation will determine if he is telling the truth, or not. We know the Court felt the evidence was sufficient for the raid. Who are we to second guess the Court's decision, and on what basis?
 
The great majority of criminals claim they are innocent. The investigation will determine if he is telling the truth, or not. We know the Court felt the evidence was sufficient for the raid. Who are we to second guess the Court's decision, and on what basis?

Why, since the 2009 raid--1 year and 9 months prior to this raid--hasn't the government brought any charges? Why a second raid?
 
So what has become of Gibson then?
 
Look, they raided his shop WITH GUNS. You don't raid someone like that if they are innocent.

So, he should ALSO be charged with lying to police, and presenting forged documents because there's no way that Gibson could be innocent if they were raided like that.

It doesn't matter that the wood was documented, it doesn't matter that his competition gets wood from the SAME SOURCE but is being passed by (it doesn't matter that Gibson's main competitor happens to be a big Obama supporter), the fact is that this US company violated INDIAN law and so should be shut down in America and the factory moved to a country with more favorable laws like China or Cambodia.

I think the government should invoke the patriot act and put Gibson and company away in Guantanamo Bay and perhaps given the chance to plead his case to a military tribunal in about 200 years, that should be sufficient.

(BTW, if it was not abundantly clear, this was sarcasm).

I didn't.......jerk

(that was sarcasm too.....or was it?)
 
Why, since the 2009 raid--1 year and 9 months prior to this raid--hasn't the government brought any charges? Why a second raid?

I am not familiar with all the detail of the case against Gibson. Perhaps they gave them a break, perhaps they didn't have enough evidence to place charges. Are you betting they don't place charges this time?
 
Back
Top Bottom