milod Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 I just listened to the podcast. Frankly it has me even more concerned than I had been. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 Here's my frustration. We had a meeting on an upcoming election whether or not to increase local taxes to support the school district after major cuts in per-student funding from both state and federal sources. What frustrated me wasn't whether people were for or against, but rather some questions along the lines of "why didn't you let people know?" Yet the issue had been covered extensively both in print and on line ever since it came up. Stein's right: People don't really care about "government" until it's their sidewalk, their storm disaster or their job or hobby. Then it's like, "Why didn't anybody tell us?" As an old newspaper business manager once told me, "Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't." That's not an insult to Stein or anybody else on an individual basis. It's just that we as a culture are so bombarded by so much information from so many sources that we tend not to look at information on the things we do care about. I personally can't believe how ignorant people in general are today about their local governments, let alone things that affect them on a "state" and "national" level. That then is translated into the appearance of apathy, it not its reality. It's then exploited by politicians - and admittedly the media - only when it becomes a "crisis" of some sort. m <sigh> I agree, but as stated above, the result is that politicans and special interest seem to take advantage of this. My frustration is not so much that we SHOULD have been informed and were not, but that decisions are made and changes occur that clearly are not what the public would agree to HAD we been aware or took the time to get informed. So, to me the fact that the public is ignorant either from their own doing or someone else's does not excuse actions that are clearly not what the public would agree to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 If anyone is really interested , listen to this. A calm rational explanation. Its a little dry but if you care about having an INFORMED opinion then you really have to know the story. http://www.fretboardjournal.com/podcast/podcast-41-cites-lacey-act-and-gibson-guitars-raid That is a good of long and boring explanation of the simple facts. While it is enough to be able to draw conclusions and understand what is actually happening, it does not really get to the point of what the problem truly is. The real question of what is legal and not, and what are the consequences of the case is the true importance. Does the Lacey act and the current law make undocumented wood illegal and subject to seizure and investigation? Or does there have to be something illegal about the wood in order to enforce the law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyK Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 Great post. I don't personally find much logic in the "Obama conspiracy" theories floating around the subject of Gibson's legal troubles, but your comments on the problem of legislative and law enforcement functions passing to administrative agencies is spot on. I do a lot of work in the administrative/agency law field, and there is the increasing reluctance of legislatures to actually pass legislation that means anything. Instead, some broad principles are stated, (which allows a sufficiently imprecise consensus to provide a majority for passage) and the actual rulemaking is shoved off to an agency. The legislation is practically meaningless, and the rule making battle, which is largely carried out safe from the public eye, is everything. The courts then give deference to the interpretations of the agency because of its "expertise" in its specific area. This has very negative consequences: first, the less accountable power of agencies increases. Second, that power becomes easily manipulable dependant on which party appoints the head of the agency. Consequently, what is properly a congressional function (lawmaking) moves to the president because of the power to appoint agency heads. Third, it makes for an unstable situation in which no-one can rely on the "law" (e.g. the agency interpretations and enforcement priorities) because they may suddenly change depending on the priorities of whoever is in charge. Legislation that should only be changed by a very public vote in congress can be gutted, expanded or reversed 180 degrees in its meaning by an agency interpretation. Both parties perform the sort of manipulation to avoid the democratic law making process. Kind of turns the whole three branches of government and the balance of power on it's ear eh? When I was a young man: Legislative Branch: Makes the laws Executive Branch: Enforces the laws Judicial Branch: Determines the constitutionality of the laws. Now: Legislative Branch: Makes vague laws that have to be interpreted. Judicial Branch: 'Interprets' the law based on their own agenda i.e. makes the laws. Executive Branch: Enforces the law by appointing enforcers based on his agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyK Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 IT is a crying shame that most people in our society wont 'spend' the time to keep up on what is happening to their immediate community. You can bellyache and moan about what those idoits on the other side of the world are doing, what the morons in Washington D.C. are screwing up now, and how those bozos in the state capital are wasting our money. But if you ask them what is going on in their neighborhood, they draw a blank. Most probably cannot tell you the name of the mayor of Podunk, nor their councilman. The damnable part of it is that your vote has more impact on local government than anywhere else. Your showing up at the meetings can and will make a difference if you will just shut the tube off after supper and go up to the village board meeting. And.. if you are a mind to, you can very likely get elected or appointed to the board just by asking. Most positions go unfilled due to lack of candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 I hate to say this, but Tommy's right about "most positions go unfilled..." At least where I live. @#$%@#$%#@$%#$%#%@# I'll also agree about what's happened with the "regulators." There are so many regulations that functionally are "law" that there's no way anybody can keep up with all of 'em regardless of the line of work one might be in - or even if one is retired and thinks there's nothing to be concerned about. Technically too, one can find copies of various regulations but how they're enforced too often depends on the bureaucrat with enforcement power. The podcast also notes that one should not have problems traveling with a guitar - but the "expert" carefully did no say you would not have problems. There's a huge difference. The interpretation of various rules depends entirely on the enforcer. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyK Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 In regards to a rosewood adorned guitar or other musical instrument... what it boils down to is that whether or not you get hooked or stopped or detained or arrested for a rosewood looking guitar depends upon what kind of a day the TSA worker is having and if the last guit tar toting passenger pissed him off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Interesting article, forwarded to me, from a friend, from Woodworking Network.com http://www.woodworkingnetwork.com/news/Gibson-Guitar-petitions-Obama-for-help-129669963.html CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 If I understand this right, any Gibson built before 1900 isn't covered by the Lacey Act....... Time to go shopping !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :unsure: ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cam011235 Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 It seems the intensity of this recent raid was due to the failure of the 2009 raid the feds inability to prove that the madagascar ebony may have been sourced from the state forest in this country which is the only illicit timber..this was the importer who was under scrutiny not gibson who has done nothing wrong..nor the importer either for that matter the raids seem to be more about the middle man importer rather than gibson..they seem to be getting the wrath of the feds..who seem to be using a subjective interpretation of the lacey act .. the federal agents involved in these raids appear to be acting in a hostile unprofessional manner with an apparent vendetta against gibson largely owing to the lack of evidence that any laws have been broken and the inability to put a case together at all it seems to be an infantile aggressive attack on a company that has done nothing wrong what so ever as it has been pointed out there has been no intervention or raid on fender prs etc who are in the same boat it is a sad reflection of the times with public servants federal agents going beyond the requirements of the responsibility and professional requirements wrongly targeting a company that is solid and done nothing wrong at all there should be an inquiry into the federal agents who have handled this case and the total lack of justice and professionalism the term bumbling feds comes to mind even maxwell smart would not have been this stupid or vindictive..it has frightening indicators beyond guitar and strikes and the heart of our free society and stinks of dictatorship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Californiaman Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I just wrote AG Eric Holder at the U.S. Justice Dept. I'll post his reply—if he writes back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff-7 Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I just wrote AG Eric Holder at the U.S. Justice Dept. I'll post his reply—if he writes back. I did the same a couple weeks ago, no reply... go figure eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 If Gibson had illegal wood, they must pay the piper. If Gibson is to be the best of the best in mass-produced guitars, they need to be a responsible corporation and their reputation should be beyond reproach. 'Made in the USA' means something, ferchristsakes. That isn't the point. Yes - if a person or corporation breaks the law , they should pay the penalty. Yes, all corporations should have reputations beyond reproach. Yes that is why we have the FDA, OIG, FAA, NTSB, FnW and ten thousand other bureacracies. (because people and corporations comprised of people aren't beyond reproach). The point, HOWEVER, is DID they break a law? or is FnW politically motivated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Forty... My sources indicate that both suggestions of yours have a degree of validity. The govt. feels Gibson is, or probably is, involved in something that may be construed as against the law, but it's not like overtime parking where it's awfully obvious. At what point, for example, should you be busted if you're perhaps crossing an intersection during the yellow light and the yellow's lamp is burned out, there's no cross traffic and traffic is moving on the other side? The law may have been broken; the question is why the singling out of one driver. Then depending on one's definition of "politics," it should be noted that there often is a tendency by agents and agencies that if something gets them angry and they can keep a judge going with them, they can make life hell for a person/organization regardless what even they might believe a jury might decide. I don't know what side to take on this due to some input I'm getting from an exceptionally reliable source. But I'm also bothered about the fact that Gibson alone seems to be targeted in this. I do know also that in the past a zealous federal agent was even asked to be removed by the governor and parallel state agency. I'm told he was a nice guy and cared about the law. Apparently he didn't care enough about people involved all the way up the state food chain. Who's right? I dunno. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cam011235 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Forty... My sources indicate that both suggestions of yours have a degree of validity. The govt. feels Gibson is, or probably is, involved in something that may be construed as against the law, but it's not like overtime parking where it's awfully obvious. At what point, for example, should you be busted if you're perhaps crossing an intersection during the yellow light and the yellow's lamp is burned out, there's no cross traffic and traffic is moving on the other side? The law may have been broken; the question is why the singling out of one driver. Who's right? I dunno. m you make some good points here..i think what is obvious that this action has been based more desire to targtet gibson rather than solid concrete evidence to which there has been none produced so far..it may have been originally started by the middle man importer having some issues raised but never qualified but it seems the wrath is being directed at gibson..it would appear to be more vindictive than genuine concern over the lacey act being compromised certainly with these type of authorities once in their bad books you would have to watch out..there would appear to be 4th amendment violations where excessive force was used in raid..a swat team with automatic weapons drawn is excessive in a factory full of workers who are entitled to a safe work environment..and 6th amendment violations to a fast and speedy trial as regards to the 2009 raids which have stalemated and possibly provoked this second raid with the failure of F&W ability to mount a case...as they would have to be able to prove that madagasscar ebony was sourced from state forests which they cant..suppose time will tell but the handling of this situation by federal authorities is a concern for civil and legal rights and is a shocking blow for american industry in a time if economic crisis..it is sad for us musos who love their guitars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Camo... I could give some of the govt rationale but I won't... <grin> It gets complicated. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluemoon Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Rigt or wrong... The government will make an example of one high profile company after introducing new regs or modifying existing regs. It sends the message that they are serious about enforcement. Looks like Gibson is the guinea pig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cam011235 Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 thats the thing the government will make decisions behind closed doors and will not advertise its true intent..it well could be that they decided to act on the lacy act here by setting an example against what i see as the top company..there could be all sorts of hidden agendas here there will be very little transparency from a public sector department..i get concerned that this is the start of something bigger that it wont end here but may snowball part of the reasons we are given rights in our free countries is to exercise them the constitution is placed for peoples legal and civil rights and to stop excessive or totalitarianism behavior..to me it is important gibson set a precedent here as nothing concrete in terms of evidence or case has surfaced but there seems to be an institutional attempt to cripple their business ability..there is so much mystery and duplicity over the handling of this case by authorities it is unhealthy and concerning that legislative bodies could operate in this way if gibson are found guilty of breaching lacey act and are prosecuted i will still maintain the handling of this case has been poor unprofessional and vindictive and it has set a frightening precedent trust me if i was quietly working and someone waved an automatic weapon at me i would be very worried..i assume there is lethal intent there ..that is not fair to the staff at those factories..this was not a meth lab bust it was unarmed people;e peacefully working making guitars..that is wrong that sounds like nazism to me.. it is horrific and totally unacceptable in a developed free country and a clear 4th amendment violation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.