- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,909
- Reaction score
- 11,003
- Location
- New Jersey
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
You don't know what the government requires for action either... therefore you don't know what you're talking about.Ok so you do not know what you are taking about, yet, you wish for the Lacey Act to stay in force because some other guy (Gibson CEO ) wants the law to stay intact.
So are you being purposefully obtuse? Probably... for what purpose? Dunno... but you're starting to bore me.
Yet, you continue to put the burden on Gibson. :think:I do not.
I'm certainly biased against unreasonable actions taken by a government which has yielded no charges and a loss of millions of dollars, with no day in court. Definitely biased against that, you caught me.You stated that, [you] do not know what is required for the government to take action". You are clear in your bias and outrage, but, not your factual analysis.
So you're citing yet more government inadequacies. I quite agree.Enforcement of the Lacey Act itself is not clear either , indeed, "How enforcement resources will be allocated is yet to be determined; in general, enforcement priorities and plans are not discussed in detail. In most enforcement work, if information is developed indicating a high likelihood of violations of a particular type, enforcement resources will likely focus on those types of activities".
I seem to have missed the other guitar companies who have been raided since 2008. And since there were none (I'll just skip the witty reparte of the next few posts if you don't mind), I'm sure you'll admit that Gibson has been singled out.