Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on August 01, 2014, 08:12:06 PM
-
Very brief story, so there may be more background, but kinda ridiculous to firstly, just come and seize it and the others without prior notification so the owners could have options, secondly for showing up apparently in battle rattle.
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/08/01/feds-raid-nc-womans-home-seize-land-rover
-
Executive Order???
-
Wow.That's rough.
A good use of manpower though.Efficient.
Glad we don't have tailpipe sniffers here.
Places to move to;Georgia,nope-rampant ebola,North Carolina,nope-grey market emission Stasi,Texas,Arizona,New Mexico-border situation.Florida-ummm, :-X
-
Yet there are those that will question and mock the idea that tyranny has arrived.
Maybe the landrover didn't meet the requisite number of tax dollars stolen from 'merkins to produce.
-
Yet there are those that will question and mock the idea that tyranny has arrived.
Maybe the landrover didn't meet the requisite number of tax dollars stolen from 'merkins to produce.
It snuck in sublty, quietly, inch by inch, over the last 82 years .......... [tinfoil]
-
Brinkley said the agents didn't even know the reasoning behind the seizure because the case was sealed, but told her it might be related to the vehicle failing to meet Clean Air Act emissions standards.
"There were 40 seized that day all over the United States,"
:O
-
I'm not saying it's a Good Law, but the law was broken and these people got busted.
These were allegedly newer trucks that had vins from 25 y.o. trucks swapped onto them. Many came through a single N.C. .importer. They were brought in illegally, without dot safety features or proper papers, and anyone who bought into the idea that they could somehow leagally own a new defender simply by titling it as a series, and paying 60,000 dollars for the opportunity knew this was a possibility.
In the words of one "victim". "I came home from work to find an oil puddle in my driveway and a warrant nailed to my front door."
-
It was new and had an oil puddle?
-
I'm not saying it's a Good Law, but the law was broken and these people got busted.
These were allegedly newer trucks that had vins from 25 y.o. trucks swapped onto them. Many came through a single N.C. .importer. They were brought in illegally, without dot safety features or proper papers, and anyone who bought into the idea that they could somehow leagally own a new defender simply by titling it as a series, and paying 60,000 dollars for the opportunity knew this was a possibility.
In the words of one "victim". "I came home from work to find an oil puddle in my driveway and a warrant nailed to my front door."
But hey, we needed a swat team to confiscate the vehicle? Something private repossessors do all the time with two grease monkeys and a tow truck?
-
But hey, we needed a swat team to confiscate the vehicle? Something private repossessors do all the time with two grease monkeys and a tow truck?
Repossessors are grabbing the vehicle to get it back to the rightful owner. This is nothing more than armed robbery done under the color of 'law' not passed by congress, but by administrators.
-
Repossessors are grabbing the vehicle to get it back to the rightful owner. This is nothing more than armed robbery done under the color of 'law' not passed by congress, but by administrators.
But police are the good guys, our friends. :facepalm:
-
It was new and had an oil puddle?
The oil puddle was probably from the super eco friendly swat team van.
I'm not saying it's a Good Law, but the law was broken and these people got busted.
;/
-
I'm not saying it's a Good Law, but the law was broken and these people got busted.
Did you not read the article?
This lady was driving a British car manufactured in the '80's. What more punishment can we give her, a Reliant Robin?
-
These were allegedly newer trucks that had vins from 25 y.o. trucks swapped onto them. Many came through a single N.C. .importer. They were brought in illegally, without dot safety features or proper papers, and anyone who bought into the idea that they could somehow leagally own a new defender simply by titling it as a series, and paying 60,000 dollars for the opportunity knew this was a possibility.
In the words of one "victim". "I came home from work to find an oil puddle in my driveway and a warrant nailed to my front door."
From the video, this woman was the fifth owner of the vehicle. If there were any VIN swaps during the original import, how would she have known about them? Personally, I would have had no idea that this was an illegal vehicle (if it is in fact illegal) to own in the US. If it was a titled vehicle that I saw for sale and had a hankerin' to own, I would have bought it.
Ignorance of the law may not be an excuse, but it goes back to there being so many laws in our country that no one can know when they're breaking one. Another reason for them to have made a phone call, or at least for a guy in a suit to have shown up instead of an (apparently) tactical team.
-
Oops
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/44/4476.asp
http://blog.caranddriver.com/exclusive-feds-declare-war-on-black-market-land-rover-defenders/
Maybe not
-
Oops
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/44/4476.asp
http://blog.caranddriver.com/exclusive-feds-declare-war-on-black-market-land-rover-defenders/
Maybe not
Well I for one am glad that our heroic border protectors have gotten our border so secure that they have time to track down something as banal as a fraudulently aged Land Rover. Remember the bad old days when we used to worry about drugs, weapons, and people (many of them slaves) coming through the ports? At least those problems have been solved.
-
It was new and had an oil puddle?
British
-
Well I for one am glad that our heroic border protectors have gotten our border so secure that they have time to track down something as banal as a fraudulently aged Land Rover. Remember the bad old days when we used to worry about drugs, weapons, and people (many of them slaves) coming through the ports? At least those problems have been solved.
So I'm still unclear if it's "fraudulent aging" or EPA regs, or both. As the woman stated in the video, the vehicle was modified to pass smog inspection, and as she stated, there is also not a need to even pass. Even in CA, we he have exclusions for vehicles over a certain age (I can't remember what) OR if a vehicle failed its smog check three times, it gets an exemption (I guess because by that time, the state got enough fee money out of the owner).
-
So I'm still unclear if it's "fraudulent aging" or EPA regs, or both. As the woman stated in the video, the vehicle was modified to pass smog inspection, and as she stated, there is also not a need to even pass. Even in CA, we he have exclusions for vehicles over a certain age (I can't remember what) OR if a vehicle failed its smog check three times, it gets an exemption (I guess because by that time, the state got enough fee money out of the owner).
The feds are claiming that that's not actually a 1985 (or whatever) Land Rover. It's a 2007 (or whatever). The claim is that folks are taking new Defenders (which WOULD be subject to EPA and crash laws) and slapping the VIN's of older vehicles on them to get around EPA and NHTSA regs. So "fraudulently aging" or making them seem older than they are.
My give a damn seems to be busted about the idea that folks might have snuck in a 2005 Land Rover as a 1985 one however.
-
Oops
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/44/4476.asp
http://blog.caranddriver.com/exclusive-feds-declare-war-on-black-market-land-rover-defenders/
Maybe not
Any reason to send heavily armed JBT's into someone's house, eh?
-
My give a damn seems to be busted about the idea that folks might have snuck in a 2005 Land Rover as a 1985 one however.
Yeah, seems like Wesley Mouch is the only guy that should care about that. More "money for the government" law enforcement versus actual law enforcement.
-
Any reason to send heavily armed JBT's into someone's house, eh?
Do you have pictures? I don't mean to question the ladies narrative but wearing vests covers a great deal of ground. In the rural area I live in they all wear vests all the time and all warrant service they usually heavy up. It's kinda odd on occasion they folks are not friendly and the warrant service is for something minor but look and behold when they arrive they find folks up to more serious shenanigans.
Did they go in someone's house? Or did they grab her car from driveway? Shoot even the high sunblock folk like you take your rides serious. Might shoot to protect their whip.
-
The claim is that folks are taking new Defenders (which WOULD be subject to EPA and crash laws) and slapping the VIN's of older vehicles on them to get around EPA and NHTSA regs
That's pretty much the gist of the issue, there is a whole cottage industry sprung up around taking a newer Defender, with the diesel and all the product improvements, and putting the VIN number of an old Defender on it.
That said, I think it's rediculous for it to be against the law to import a newer Land Rover and own it but that's government bureaucracy for ya. The EPA has run amok.
-
That's pretty much the gist of the issue, there is a whole cottage industry sprung up around taking a newer Defender, with the diesel and all the product improvements, and putting the VIN number of an old Defender on it.
That said, I think it's rediculous for it to be against the law to import a newer Land Rover and own it but that's government bureaucracy for ya. The EPA has run amok.
The whole EPA diesel hate thing is a big scam IMO. I don't know how they do it in other states, but in CA, we started having to get biannual smog inspections on diesels around five years ago. I've been in twice.
When I take my gasser in, they stick a sniffer in the tailpipe, measure various gases, check vacuum, and a bunch of other stuff with minimum standards to pass for gas outputs. When I take my diesel in, all they do is check the gas cap and look to see that I haven't disconnected anything. They take NO gas measurements and they're done in like five minutes. I take my vehicles to the same shop for smog. The charge for the diesel inspection is twice as much as for the gasser. If diesels are such evil polluters, why aren't they taking any gas readings?
-
Did you not read the article?
This lady was driving a British car manufactured in the '80's. What more punishment can we give her, a Reliant Robin?
Thank you for the laugh of the day. =D
-
I had made initial contact with Aaron, the dealer central to the investigation, several years ago when the 25 yo trucks became legal. My spidey sense told me to run run away, because basic questions were unanswered. The land rover community knew he was running a racket, and some folks just didn't want to believe they couldn't have what they wanted. Is well known among rover enthusiasts that we can't have a diesel rover unless.we do the conversion to a truck that was imported as stock. I wanted one, read the rules, saw the limitations and moved on.
The quip about the oil stain is a British car joke. Believe me when I say you don't want to understand.
The seizures I read about were all knock, serve and tow. Supposedly the seized cars all came through the same dealer, Aaron. He went off the grid about the same time I sold.my rover.
In my opinion we have a.duty when it comes to laws. We either follow them, or change them. I f I choose to break them, the consequences are mine. The owners of the illegal vehicles lusted forbidden fruit. The snake bit them.
-
Next they'll be going after black market beagles.
-
Do you have pictures? I don't mean to question the ladies narrative but wearing vests covers a great deal of ground. In the rural area I live in they all wear vests all the time and all warrant service they usually heavy up. It's kinda odd on occasion they folks are not friendly and the warrant service is for something minor but look and behold when they arrive they find folks up to more serious shenanigans.
Did they go in someone's house? Or did they grab her car from driveway? Shoot even the high sunblock folk like you take your rides serious. Might shoot to protect their whip.
You don't quit, do you?
We let process servers deliver divorce decrees and RO's. Two uniformed officers and a tow truck driver should be the normal for this seizure without plain knowledge of another threat. This is why the police state is what is is.
She describes a swat raid. To seize a car.
Anything to kiss the police state's rear end, though.
-
Next they'll be going after black market beagles.
I hear they have smallish oil stains.
-
You don't quit, do you?
We let process servers deliver divorce decrees and RO's. Two uniformed officers and a tow truck driver should be the normal for this seizure without plain knowledge of another threat. This is why the police state is what is is.
She describes a swat raid. To seize a car.
Anything to kiss the police state's rear end, though.
That's a no? How many folks served her? And the other 40 folks? Are any of them claiming a swat team? Or was it knock serve and tow everywhere else but her house?
Perish the thought but a woman might exaggerate a bit in my experience if she's miffed
-
That's a no? How many folks served her? And the other 40 folks? Are any of them claiming a swat team? Or was it knock serve and tow everywhere else but her house?
Perish the thought but a woman might exaggerate a bit in my experience if she's miffed
;/
-
For example any of the folks mentioned in this article making those claims? Even the guy in the same state?
http://jalopnik.com/the-feds-just-seized-40-land-rovers-imported-to-the-u-s-1605985758
Or then there's video where the woman describes them coming and knocking on her door. And to quote the reporter "almost like a raid"
http://dailysignal.com/2014/08/01/federal-agents-storm-couples-property-seize-60000-car-violating-emissions-standards/
-
When Land Rovers are outlawed, only outlaws will have Land Rovers.
-
The gummint's arguments ring hollow.
If Land Rover never produced galvanized frames, then how does the presence of galvanizing on the frame prove that it's newer than 2000?
As for the "impossibility" of retrofitting the diesel into the newer chassis, that's just bull. People in the U.S. are shoehorning diesel engines into the craziest of vehicles -- in some cases just to prove they can do it. A number of years ago my wife and I visited Macchu Picchu in Peru. One taxi we rode in was a Ford Crown Victoria of fairly recent vintage. So I was quite intrigued to see that it had a manual transmission, and not a floor shift -- it was three-on-the-tree. And the engine sounded and smelled suspiciously like a diesel. So I asked the woman who owned and drove it, and she confirmed that because diesel is so much cheaper than gasoline in Peru, she had a Nissan diesel engine installed.
"It can't be done" is all it takes to get automotive types fired up.
-
I hear they have smallish oil stains.
That's not oil.
-
As for the "impossibility" of retrofitting the diesel into the newer chassis, that's just bull. People in the U.S. are shoehorning diesel engines into the craziest of vehicles -- in some cases just to prove they can do it.
Yup. There used to be a guy around here who made pretty decent money fabricating motor mounts and adapter plates to swap incompatible engines.
I think the most impressive was a Caterpillar engine in an old Ford 4WD. The hood was pretty much just a ring around the 1/3 or so of the engine that stuck up, but they had it up and running for the tractor pulls.
-
In my opinion we have a.duty when it comes to laws. We either follow them, or change them. I f I choose to break them, the consequences are mine. The owners of the illegal vehicles lusted forbidden fruit. The snake bit them.
Meh.
I assign that standard to the Constitution, and nothing lower.
On anything lower, I have zero issues with folks breaking the law if the law is immoral, unethical or just plain ridiculously and overwhelming stupid. There's an expression that should be applied to all laws, in addition to their Constitutional or other legal standing. If a defendant can legitimately say "Are you friggin excrementing me?" and the question is warranted, the law should be invalid. Oh yea, and maybe a mens rea test as well.
In a less legalistically corrupt state, I'd very much agree with you. But I'm too familiar with the law to respect it as much as you seem to do.
I just see the system as a) byzantine, b) systematically corrupt and c) virtually impervious to substantial or meaningful change.
-
So, out of curiosity, what part of a car does the term "car" really apply to? I mean, what's the equivalent of the lower receiver? Obviously not the engine, since engine swaps are fairly common.
IOW, if I counted up all the parts in my car, went out and bought each individual part from a different junkyard specimen, and assembled them into a whole car, which part would the VIN come from? Given that there are at least a few models and years with parts completely interchangeable, presumably the model name and year would also come from that part.
-
So, out of curiosity, what part of a car does the term "car" really apply to? I mean, what's the equivalent of the lower receiver? Obviously not the engine, since engine swaps are fairly common.
IOW, if I counted up all the parts in my car, went out and bought each individual part from a different junkyard specimen, and assembled them into a whole car, which part would the VIN come from? Given that there are at least a few models and years with parts completely interchangeable, presumably the model name and year would also come from that part.
Used to be the frame, IIRC. Now the frame and body are all one piece (except for Land Rover and pickups, etc).
I'm not sure how they figure the pickups if you swap cabs ???
-
Used to be the frame, IIRC. Now the frame and body are all one piece (except for Land Rover and pickups, etc).
And not all frames are really one piece...and even if they are, I've seen plenty of cut-and-welded frames from putting together a front-end trashed and a rear-end trashed vehicle into one good one that were still on the road and doing fine tens of thousands of miles after the work was done.
-
And not all frames are really one piece...and even if they are, I've seen plenty of cut-and-welded frames from putting together a front-end trashed and a rear-end trashed vehicle into one good one that were still on the road and doing fine tens of thousands of miles after the work was done.
Guy I used to work for wanted a different rear-end/suspension in his Peterbilt (also know as a PTRBLT =D ) so he did it the easy way and just cut the truck in half and spliced in a different rear frame/axle/walking beam.
At one point I was considering putting a newer cab and front end on my old C-60 GMC to replace the rusting out cab.
And then there was Johnny Cash ... ;)
-
If Land Rover never produced galvanized frames, then how does the presence of galvanizing on the frame prove that it's newer than 2000?
I thought it was the newer Defenders that were galvanized, but not the 25 y.o. ones. I'm no Land Rover expert or nothin' though, I don't give a *expletive deleted* about any cars made by the Brits. It's just what I've heard, that the galvanized frames is one hallmark of a newer Defender, while there are apparently minor differences in the frames that allow the production years to be determined.
Again, should it be illegal, no. Does it make any sense to allow an older vehicle in but not a newer more fuel efficient vehicle solely due to emissions regulations, no. Is it illegal to bring in such a vehicle, yes. You can holler till you are blue in the face about it but you ain't gonna change THAT fact.
-
This isn't about illegal or legal inanimate objects, its about dispelling the quaint notion of private property ownership amongst the serf class.
The DHS buying billions of rounds of ammunition- it was for training purposes mmkay.
-
Anyone surprised by this action by the the DHS is behind the curve in understanding what 'fundamentally transforming America' means.
Americans are close to the point where they will have to choose to nut up and start shooting the communist bastards or give up their birthright.
-
The DHS buying billions of rounds of ammunition- it was for training purposes mmkay.
Oh Jesus Christ, not this *expletive deleted* again.
Americans are close to the point where they will have to choose to nut up and start shooting the communist bastards or give up their birthright.
Feel free to go first...
-
I am not hearing the hue and cry from the rover owners i'd expect. It make me wonder if the docs scam was an open secret.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
-
Wtf is dhs doing jerking off with ugly brit iron when we have a mfing immivasion on the border?
-
Oh Jesus Christ, not this *expletive deleted* again.
Feel free to go first...
Wake the *expletive deleted*ck up. This is no longer the 'merka you think it is.
-
I wonder how long the bullets and 2800 mraps story will continue to bevrecycled
-
I am not hearing the hue and cry from the rover owners i'd expect. It make me wonder if the docs scam was an open secret.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Maybe, but it seems it would be more so to people specifically aware of and looking to buy that vehicle, hence first time registrants at time of import who were looking for a loophole. If the story is accurate as to the woman being the fifth registrant, well, if I'm buying a vehicle that the seller had legally registered, and DMV lets me legally register it, how am I to know it was illegally imported?
Maybe she just wanted a diesel Land Rover and didn't know that particular model was verboten. There are tons of diesel Mercedes and Volkswagens in the country of various vintages. I would have no idea if one of them were illegal if I bought it, especially if it had a valid pink slip.
-
Maybe, but it seems it would be more so to people specifically aware of and looking to buy that vehicle, hence first time registrants at time of import who were looking for a loophole. If the story is accurate as to the woman being the fifth registrant, well, if I'm buying a vehicle that the seller had legally registered, and DMV lets me legally register it, how am I to know it was illegally imported?
Maybe she just wanted a diesel Land Rover and didn't know that particular model was verboten. There are tons of diesel Mercedes and Volkswagens in the country of various vintages. I would have no idea if one of them were illegal if I bought it, especially if it had a valid pink slip.
Shes not being charged. If the car was stolen and resold she'd lose it even if she was unaware. At least the chiro might have assets to recover tiur costd from
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
-
Wtf is dhs doing jerking off with ugly brit iron when we have a mfing immivasion on the border?
I expect, given druthers, most would prefer being paid to play with toys rather than herd illegals...
-
They are nothing more than armed tax collectors.
There's no money in rounding up illegals.
-
The DHS buying billions of rounds of ammunition- it was for training purposes mmkay.
Sigh... That was a standard indefinite delivery contract (http://www.wingovernmentcontracts.com/types-of-government-contracts.htm#Indefinite_-_Delivery_Contracts__), subsection indefinite quantity. - "Provides for furnishing of an indefinite quantity, within stated limits, of specified supplies or services, during a specified contract period, with deliveries to be scheduled by the timely placement of orders upon the contractor."
Basically it was a deal between the DHS and the winner of the bid to provide up to that quantity at the contracted price for the duration of said contract. There's no way they were going to buy all that ammo. The way it was written they weren't even sure what calibers they were going to be using.
As for seizing the vehicles - they need to have their due process. Sounds like they're not getting that, what with providing details about the case AFTER the deadline to appeal had passed, various rubber-stampings, honest disputes, etc...
Hell, just the confiscation without trial should catch the supreme court's interest.
-
Sigh... That was a standard indefinite delivery contract, subsection indefinite quantity. - "Provides for furnishing of an indefinite quantity, within stated limits, of specified supplies or services, during a specified contract period, with deliveries to be scheduled by the timely placement of orders upon the contractor."
Basically it was a deal between the DHS and the winner of the bid to provide up to that quantity at the contracted price for the duration of said contract. There's no way they were going to buy all that ammo. The way it was written they weren't even sure what calibers they were going to be using.
Sigh...
Maybe I made too flip of a statement, seeing that it got a flip answer back.
And the whole purpose of the DHS is?
They seem to be heavy on harassing and spying on citizens who are going about their own business and pretty light on securing borders and catch terrrsts. So what is this 'training ammo' training them for exactly?
There are reasons why I don't accept the explanation of 'cost savings' at face value, let alone the fact that 'cost savings' and ' federal government' have never fit into the same sentence before.
-
And the whole purpose of the DHS is?
They seem to be heavy on harassing and spying on citizens who are going about their own business and pretty light on securing borders and catch terrrsts. So what is this 'training ammo' training them for exactly?
There are reasons why I don't accept the explanation of 'cost savings' at face value, let alone the fact that 'cost savings' and ' federal government' have never fit into the same sentence before.
Note that my post didn't mention 'cost savings'. ;)
But ding DHS for what they are and how they execute their 'mission', not a pissant contract that pretty much any armed branch of the government writes on a routine basis. Ammo goes fast when you're qualifying your agents on two weapons(M-9/M-14 for the military) on a semi-annual basis utilizing several hundred rounds per weapon. 1k agents can easily consume 1M rounds in 1 year.
-
I like to diss DHS as much as the next guy, but this was in fact a standard .gov contract vehicle. A bunch of agencies used the DHS BPO to get ammo for this particular purchase. My old one was included in it and I remember looking up our contract when this first came up in the news.
Government buying a ton of ammo is certainly a valid debate subject, but in this case it was a bunch of agencies doing a "group buy" not just DHS.
-
I like to diss DHS as much as the next guy, but this was in fact a standard .gov contract vehicle. A bunch of agencies used the DHS BPO to get ammo for this particular purchase. My old one was included in it and I remember looking up our contract when this first came up in the news.
Government buying a ton of ammo is certainly a valid debate subject, but in this case it was a bunch of agencies doing a "group buy" not just DHS.
NOAA ???
What caliber for tornadoes? =|
-
Fishery cops
-
NOAA ???
What caliber for tornadoes?
.45ACP, as God intended.
-
Wtf is dhs doing jerking off with ugly brit iron when we have a mfing immivasion on the border?
In some part because the owners of gray market cars are a lot less likely to shoot back.
-
In some part because the yuppie owners of $ixty grand gray market cars are a lot less likely to shoot back.
FTFY ;)
-
FTFY ;)
But if they REALLY were 25 plus years old, like the VINs indicate, they'd be $6,000 cars.
-
But if they REALLY were 25 plus years old, like the VINs indicate, they'd be $6,000 cars.
So they replaced a few parts :P
You ever heard of Joshua Slocum rebuilding the "Spray" ???
He started out replacing a few planks and ended up with a new keel, new stem, new transom, new ribs, new planking, new deck, new cabin, and new mast and rigging. Then he proceeded to sail around the world in a 100 year old boat ;)
-
So they replaced a few parts :P
You ever heard of Joshua Slocum rebuilding the "Spray" ???
He started out replacing a few planks and ended up with a new keel, new stem, new transom, new ribs, new planking, new deck, new cabin, and new mast and rigging. Then he proceeded to sail around the world in a 100 year old boat ;)
HaHa. Let's replace one little piece on the frame under the steering box, Now let's replace the dashboard, and finally, take just a little bit off the block casting.
Excellent.
Good as a quarter century old!
-
He started out replacing a few planks and ended up with a new keel, new stem, new transom, new ribs, new planking, new deck, new cabin, and new mast and rigging. Then he proceeded to sail around the world in a 100 year old boat
Sort of like great granddad's mattock; had several new handles and a couple of new heads, but it still works just as good as the day his worker forged it.
-
So they replaced a few parts :P
You ever heard of Joshua Slocum rebuilding the "Spray" ???
He started out replacing a few planks and ended up with a new keel, new stem, new transom, new ribs, new planking, new deck, new cabin, and new mast and rigging. Then he proceeded to sail around the world in a 100 year old boat ;)
Sort of like the USS Constitution, not much is original.
-
So they replaced a few parts :P
You ever heard of Joshua Slocum rebuilding the "Spray" ???
He started out replacing a few planks and ended up with a new keel, new stem, new transom, new ribs, new planking, new deck, new cabin, and new mast and rigging. Then he proceeded to sail around the world in a 100 year old boat ALONE ;)
FTFY.
Great story, great read.
-
Then he proceeded to sail around the world in a 100 year old boat ;)
"This is my grandfather's axe. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus#Modern_day) Sure, my father replaced the handle, and I replaced the head, but it's still my grandfather's axe"
HaHa. Let's replace one little piece on the frame under the steering box, Now let's replace the dashboard, and finally, take just a little bit off the block casting.
What I find amazing is that Land Rover is sufficiently like Jeep in that their vehicles have lasted so long in basically the same shape that you can, without significant modification, put parts for a 2014 edition of the vehicle and stick it on a 1985 year one.
-
What I find amazing is that Land Rover is sufficiently like Jeep in that their vehicles have lasted so long in basically the same shape that you can, without significant modification, put parts for a 2014 edition of the vehicle and stick it on a 1985 year one.
Gee, I'd like to have a 1965 Land Rover ;/
-
I stumbled across this today on Jalopnick and thought about youse guyses.
It answers some of the questions posed in last summer's thread, and raises several more.
http://jalopnik.com/why-are-the-feds-obsessed-with-seizing-these-peoples-ol-1672381729
The article is pretty long, but it's worth a read if you have any interest in importing automobiles and covers the corporate influence that brought about the end of gray market imports.
Jalopnik as a whole has some very good auto enthusiast material.
-
I stumbled across this today on Jalopnick and thought about youse guyses.
It answers some of the questions posed in last summer's thread, and raises several more.
http://jalopnik.com/why-are-the-feds-obsessed-with-seizing-these-peoples-ol-1672381729
The article is pretty long, but it's worth a read if you have any interest in importing automobiles and covers the corporate influence that brought about the end of gray market imports.
Jalopnik as a whole has some very good auto enthusiast material.
That article makes me very angry. :mad:
-
Its a good sign that dhs has finally eliminated illegal immigration if they have the resources to track down a few illegally imported trucks.
-
I stumbled across this today on Jalopnick and thought about youse guyses.
It answers some of the questions posed in last summer's thread, and raises several more.
http://jalopnik.com/why-are-the-feds-obsessed-with-seizing-these-peoples-ol-1672381729
The article is pretty long, but it's worth a read if you have any interest in importing automobiles and covers the corporate influence that brought about the end of gray market imports.
Jalopnik as a whole has some very good auto enthusiast material.
Good article. Thanks for posting!
-
Thread necro. The woman in the OP, and several others, got their vehicles back:
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/06/12/feds-driven-to-admit-dozens-land-rover-seizures-were-wrong/?intcmp=features
-
Thread necro. The woman in the OP, and several others, got their vehicles back:
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/06/12/feds-driven-to-admit-dozens-land-rover-seizures-were-wrong/?intcmp=features
With the help of a pro-bono lawyer. Would have been a lost cause otherwise, even for a $60K vehicle.
At least the feds hadn't crushed them yet.
-
With the help of a pro-bono lawyer. Would have been a lost cause otherwise, even for a $60K vehicle.
At least the feds hadn't crushed them yet.
This is true. As with so many other things, the government has people paid to come in every day and do stuff like this, and citizens have to pay to get justice.
If it were up to me, every time an enforcement agency did something like this, or asset forfeiture, or what have you, and were found to be in the wrong, whether malicious or even out of ignorance, their budget would be cut by 10%. Might make them think twice the next time they freeze somebody's bank account if they realize that forty or so "mistakes" would effectively put them out of business. I'd really like to see it applied to agencies like the EPA and IRS.
-
The process is the punishment.
-
The process is the punishment.
This.
Also i think recompense to those citizens who are not convicted is a fine idea.
-
If it were up to me, every time an enforcement agency did something like this, or asset forfeiture, or what have you, and were found to be in the wrong, whether malicious or even out of ignorance, their budget would be cut by 10%.
Not good enough for asset forfeiture. Asset forfeiture is nothing but theft under color of law. Remember, with asset forfeiture the government seizes the assets before any conviction, usually before any charges have even been filed, and often before the victim even knows he/she is under suspicion. I cannot reconcile that with the (purportedly) clear language of the Fourth Amendment.
IMHO, asset forfeiture should simply not be allowed. Period.
Ditto for no-knock and so-called "knock and announce" warrant "services."
-
Not good enough for asset forfeiture. Asset forfeiture is nothing but theft under color of law. Remember, with asset forfeiture the government seizes the assets before any conviction, usually before any charges have even been filed, and often before the victim even knows he/she is under suspicion. I cannot reconcile that with the (purportedly) clear language of the Fourth Amendment.
IMHO, asset forfeiture should simply not be allowed. Period.
Ditto for no-knock and so-called "knock and announce" warrant "services."
Point taken, and as my previous posts on the subjects indicate, I am 100% in agreement with you that both of them need to go. :)
However, while bad laws exist, there should be significant penalties for their misuse.
On a positive note, it seems more and more states are passing laws against forfeited assets being converted for the use of the agencies that took them. Until there is a federal law however, it's not going to help much, since all local LE agencies have to do is partner with fed LE as the lead agency, and they can split the profits.
On loser pays, I'm generally in favor of that as well. Except that when it comes to government, taxpayers end up being the losers when the government loses. For that matter, more often than not, we end up being the losers when the government wins.
-
Point taken, and as my previous posts on the subjects indicate, I am 100% in agreement with you that both of them need to go. :)
However, while bad laws exist, there should be significant penalties for their misuse.
On a positive note, it seems more and more states are passing laws against forfeited assets being converted for the use of the agencies that took them. Until there is a federal law however, it's not going to help much, since all local LE agencies have to do is partner with fed LE as the lead agency, and they can split the profits.
On loser pays, I'm generally in favor of that as well. Except that when it comes to government, taxpayers end up being the losers when the government loses. For that matter, more often than not, we end up being the losers when the government wins.
Rope is cheap and gravity is free.
-
Not good enough for asset forfeiture. Asset forfeiture is nothing but theft under color of law. Remember, with asset forfeiture the government seizes the assets before any conviction, usually before any charges have even been filed, and often before the victim even knows he/she is under suspicion. I cannot reconcile that with the (purportedly) clear language of the Fourth Amendment.
IMHO, asset forfeiture should simply not be allowed. Period.
Ditto for no-knock and so-called "knock and announce" warrant "services."
Whenever any LEO who gets shot while performing an asset forfeiture or no knock raid, it should be unprosecutable because they were shot while in commission of an armed robbery. Further, LEOs committing an asset forfeiture or no knock warrant should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
-
IMHO, asset forfeiture should simply not be allowed. Period.
I recently did a write up on what I think the next constitutional amendment should be, and guess what made the list?
Then again, I already think it's against the constitution because they're depriving people of their property without conviction(due process) or compensation(eminent domain).
-
Also i think recompense to those citizens who are not convicted is a fine idea.
Yup. What would it cost to rent that model Land Rover at the regular daily rate for a year?