• 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

Ockham said:
Wrong. I am saying there are NO other guitar companies which have been raided
Click to expand...

Because there is no evidence that other guitar companies violated the Lacey Act. Why is that such a hard concept for you?
 
j-mac said:
I have searched, and can find no other guitar manufacturer in the US, that I assume uses the same woods that Gibson was raided for, having been raided themselves...Therefore, I, unless shown that others have had the same treatment as Gibson, would have to conclude that Gibson is being singled out.
Click to expand...

When you assume, as you have done, you do not have to conclude anything





I don't follow you. the 16th amendment is about laying and collecting taxation, it mentions nothing about arrest.
Click to expand...

If you were able to remember your own posts (something you've been shown unable to do twice today) you'd realize that "16th" was a typo. We were referring to YOUR claim that "6th" had been violated.
 
justabubba said:
no. here is what is different
all other manufacturers - they incurred no raid because the government does not suspect them of violating the lacey act
gibson - incurred two raids because the government does suspect them of violating the lacey act

notice how that describes the DIFFERENCE and NOT the SIMILARITY

pity such basic logic is lost within your posts
Click to expand...

Jeeez. I can fully sympathize in that we don't know for certain that Gibson was targeted for anything other than a possible legitimate violation. The opinion that they have been improperly targeted has merit as well. To at least a few of us, the due-process expectation seems a fairy-tale at this point.

I noted this before, and I will again. You are a bit naive in how this works. As has been discussed at length here is the ability of the government to abuse such as the Lacey Act. I suspect that you would agreee that the government often goes after the biggest fish with regard to a possible violation, and then makes an example of them, so as to influence beyond those parameters. Frankly, that would seem as common sense. But the issue here is four years and no charges. Anywhere.

I have not read all 450 posts. A distinction that I had wanted to illuminate is that while the Lacey Act goes back 100 years, its an entirely different beast now when looking at all the myriad of world-wide species that the US now has a written obligation to protect if it chooses to. The main issue for me being that, as stated in the Lacey Act, if some third-world corruptomatic piss-ant country is making a mockery of its CITES participation, where everyone there is getting payola, our government can now do as it has done with Gibson. Where Gibson has yet to be shown to have knowingly violated any law. Or unknowingly violated any law.

I've got CITES permits for Appendix II listings on my desk as we speak. I import from Madagascar. I export to a dozen countries. I know this business. ;)
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
Because there is no evidence that other guitar companies violated the Lacey Act. Why is that such a hard concept for you?
Click to expand...

So you admit that there was no evidence that anyone BUT Gibson violated the LA?

So Gibson was the only corp that may have violated the LA, but you still insist that they were "singled out"?

No, that's not too partisan :roll:
 
Catawba said:
The judge that issued the search warrant obviously disagrees with you, as he felt there was sufficient grounds, most likely because he was more familiar with the evidence against Gibson than you are.
Click to expand...

Catawba. Grounds for a warrant is not the same as to be charged. Surely you know this ..... or maybe not ?
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Jeeez. I cn fully sympathize in that we don't know for certain that Gibson was targeted for anything other than a possible legitimate violation. The opinion that they have been improperly trgeted has merit as well.
Click to expand...

And *that* is the point. Ockhams argument is so dishonest, he can't admit to this clear and obvious point

I noted this before, and I will again. You are a bit naive in how this works. As has been discussed at length here is the ability of the government to abuse such as the Lacey Act.
Click to expand...

And as YOU have pointed out, there is no evidence that this has happened in this case. Ockhams delusional claims are supported only by partisanship and a dishonest refusal to admit to obvious truths
 
sangha said:
You're the one who's changing your own words. Given their inanity, I can't say that I blame you

You said that Gibson was targeted. We're still waiting for you to prove this delusion of yours
Click to expand...

If it is indeed such a delusion, and you seem to be insinuating that the music industry is replete similar raids and confiscations to that which has happened to Gibson Guitar. If that is the case, then you should have no problem just linking to the others that have been raided, with their product confiscated...


j-mac
 
sangha said:
When you assume, as you have done, you do not have to conclude anything







If you were able to remember your own posts (something you've been shown unable to do twice today) you'd realize that "16th" was a typo. We were referring to YOUR claim that "6th" had been violated.
Click to expand...

I assume that they use the same types of woods, from largely the same sources...Is that wrong?

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
I assume that they use the same types of woods, from largely the same sources...Is that wrong?

j-mac
Click to expand...
yes
10 char
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Catawba. Grounds for a warrant is not the same as to be charged. Surely you know this ..... or maybe not ?
Click to expand...

I thought the court authorized search is what you and the others were complaining about? If not that, what???
 
j-mac said:
If it is indeed such a delusion, and you seem to be insinuating that the music industry is replete similar raids and confiscations to that which has happened to Gibson Guitar. If that is the case, then you should have no problem just linking to the others that have been raided, with their product confiscated...


j-mac
Click to expand...

Umm, there is evidence that Gibson violated the law, and no evidence that any other guitar manufaturer violated the LA, so how is it "singling out" to go after the ONLY corp that evidence shows may have violated the law?
 
j-mac said:
I assume that they use the same types of woods, from largely the same sources...Is that wrong?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Yes

There has been no evidence posted to support your assumption and "largely the same sources" is not the same as "the same sources"
 
sangha said:
And *that* is the point. Ockhams argument is so dishonest, he can't admit to this clear and obvious point

And as YOU have pointed out, there is no evidence that this has happened in this case. Ockhams delusional claims are supported only by partisanship and a dishonest refusal to admit to obvious truths
Click to expand...

LOL ... look, get off whatever high horse you are on, even if just a high hobby-horse.

The opinion that they have been targeted has merit. So does the opinion that perhaps not. What is wrong with the discussion of such, rather than this continued stupid flow of very poor posts by you.

Most would agree that the government has failed in its due process, and 6th Amendment guarantees. Some of us see that our right to our assets should be protected just as our rights to our freedom, and I believe there is likely SCOTUS precedent supporting such, but that is an OK argument as well. Why not just a fair debate over these topics, and anything else, instead of all this "he's delusional" crappola ?
 
Catawba said:
I thought the court authorized search is what you and the others were complaining about? If not that, what???
Click to expand...

The Feds confiscated assets.
 
sangha said:
Umm, there is evidence that Gibson violated the law, and no evidence that any other guitar manufaturer violated the LA, so how is it "singling out" to go after the ONLY corp that evidence shows may have violated the law?
Click to expand...

Why should the law single out just those who there is evidence are breaking the law? Why not investigate everyone, regardless if there is any evidence?

Oh, that would be asinine, wouldn't it. Never mind.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
The Feds confiscated assets.
Click to expand...
while they did seize the assets and secure them, they were not confiscated
but prove me wrong
show us how the ownership of that property was turned over to the government
 
Eighty Deuce said:
LOL ... look, get off whatever high horse you are on, even if just a high hobby-horse.
Click to expand...

Meaningless blather that, despite your obvious intent, does nothing to bolster your position

The opinion that they have been targeted has merit.
Click to expand...


Without any evidence to support it, it has NO MERIT
 
j-mac said:
I assume that they use the same types of woods, from largely the same sources...Is that wrong?

j-mac
Click to expand...

justabubba said:
yes
10 char
Click to expand...

That would seem incorrect. Many do use the same kind of wood. And trust me that Madagascar rosewood comes from Madagascar. The issue with that particular wood at this time was that it was cut from protected forests in Madagascar, and not from unrestricted forests. Its more abundant in the former, a practice with endangered wood all over.

We do not know that others have, or have not, gotten suspect shipments. My experience would tell me that a lot of the wood out there is dirty, if any of it is.
 
sangha said:
Umm, there is evidence that Gibson violated the law, and no evidence that any other guitar manufaturer violated the LA, so how is it "singling out" to go after the ONLY corp that evidence shows may have violated the law?
Click to expand...

Who's law? As far as I know, this is about the finger board blanks not being finished by Indian workers...So now we enforce Indian law?


j-mac
 
Catawba said:
And? Is search and seizure unusual in a criminal investigation?
Click to expand...

No. I don't believe anyone has said that seizure is uncommon. But to go four years without being charged, or without getting your wood back, is one of the main issues here.
 
Ockham said:
Indeed, you cannot grasp my argument, even after posting it multiple times. I can lead the horse to water but cannot make him think. :shrug:

Your claims that Gibson was not singled out, wrong. You're inability to grasp basic concepts of the argument - wasted. You're knowledge about what the government's process is - none and no better than mine. Sorry you're so lost... but there's nothing more I can help you with. (BTW - feel free to get in the last word, you know, to garner those fictional "forum" points you tally up.)
Click to expand...

You have not proven that Gibson was singled out. I have shown where the law was applied in various instances; that is my position.

I have outlined the government's procedure, which I believe does not give all parties a chance to adequately defend themselves.
 
j-mac said:
I assume that they use the same types of woods, from largely the same sources...Is that wrong?

j-mac
Click to expand...

j-mac said:
Who's law? As far as I know, this is about the finger board blanks not being finished by Indian workers...So now we enforce Indian law?


j-mac
Click to expand...

That is one of the issues. And it illustrates one of the huge problems with such as the Lacey Act. If there was a process in another country, having anything to do with the flora and fauna, that was illegal in that country ............ then you may have your product confiscated here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom