Has anyone actually had their guitar seized?

[River side]

I'm not in a popularity contest, apparently.

At least I'm not in it to try and win.

I'm still looking for someone to tell a story of having had their guitar seized, though.

There have been lots of posts where it's been opined that the boogeyman will get you. I just wonder why any of these guys think that.

I've been across many borders with my guitars, many times, without incident.

But that's not a story, and it wasn't the question.

[Ddavid]

Originally Posted by River side

Tell us what you know about the law as it pertains to making it smoothly through Customs with your guitar.

Tell us about your experience.

Zero. I have no experience in traveling with a guitar, I just started playing about two months ago. However I do have experience with customs, TSA, Fish&Wildlife from years of traveling with equipment over 100k miles per year as a photographer. I also had an experience with F&W in which they confiscated my property. Maybe not the credentials you require but it's my experience.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I wasn't talking about you being popular, River Side; I was talking about your view, which is somewhat sensible, gaining a broader audience. But macht nicht, apparently, because you don't care.

But if you're wondering why people might think the way they do, as you say you do, you might get more substantive responses with an approach that doesn't belittle your interlocutor.

Also, I think Colchar gave a story about a Taylor being seized, in post #15 in this thread. He apparently knows of someone to whom this has happened.

Did you read the Fretboard Journal article he linked? Pretty interesting stuff there.

[River side]

Originally Posted by Thumpalumpacus

Did you read the Fretboard Journal article he linked? Pretty interesting stuff there.

I did.

I didn't see anything in it that led me to believe that the incident was anything more than a blip in the statistical noise.

It looks like the guy who runs L&M doesn't seem to give a crap about the issue.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Yeah, the problem strikes me as one of the action being permitted at all. Even if it is only a "blip in the statistical noise", the fact that if it does happen there is little recourse to be had strikes me as relying on government workers to practice common sense in applying the law.

It's hard for me to not think of that reliance as a little naive.

Rather than rely on the innate common sense of a low-level functionary, it seems better to me to limit what the government may do, in writing, so that no misunderstandings such as the one Colchar reports can legally occur.

Now, if you're happy trusting the government, have at it. It's hard for me to muster the sort of faith that would require.

[Ddavid]

Originally Posted by Thumpalumpacus

I wasn't talking about you being popular, River Side; I was talking about your view, which is somewhat sensible, gaining a broader audience. But macht nicht, apparently, because you don't care.

But if you're wondering why people might think the way they do, as you say you do, you might get more substantive responses with an approach that doesn't belittle your interlocutor.

Also, I think Colchar gave a story about a Taylor being seized, in post #15 in this thread. He apparently knows of someone to whom this has happened.

Did you read the Fretboard Journal article he linked? Pretty interesting stuff there.

So if Indian rosewood over 6mm is retroactively classified as an appendix I species then the same thing could happen to people's beloved guitars? It seems that clarification and grandfathering of Lacey and CITES regulations would be a good thing.

[River side]

Originally Posted by Thumpalumpacus

Yeah, the problem strikes me as one of the action being permitted at all. Even if it is only a "blip in the statistical noise", the fact that if it does happen there is little recourse to be had strikes me as relying on government workers to practice common sense in applying the law.

It's hard for me to not think of that reliance as a little naive.

Rather than rely on the innate common sense of a low-level functionary, it seems better to me to limit what the government may do, in writing, so that no misunderstandings such as the one Colchar reports can legally occur.

Now, if you're happy trusting the government, have at it. It's hard for me to muster the sort of faith that would require.

That's a pretty bogus string of bullshit, right there.

There have been disputes in Customs Houses everywhere, for as long as they have existed. They exist because of laws being written to be enforced by functionaries. I didn't invent the circumstance, nor have I expressed an opinion as to whether or not this one or that has my "trust".

I'm just looking for that one example - which so far, hasn't been documented beyond a third-party recollection "featured" in an internet article from "Fall 2008".

You know as well as I do that were the Lacey Act to be repealed tomorrow, any number of governmental functionaries could impound a guitar for just about any (or no) reason what so ever.

That's a different question than that posed in the first sentence of the OP.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Originally Posted by Ddavid

So if Indian rosewood over 6mm is retroactively classified as an appendix I species then the same thing could happen to people's beloved guitars? It seems that clarification and grandfathering of Lacey and CITES regulations would be a good thing.

I agree. I don't have a problem with using the law to protect the environment. I would ask that the law go some ways to achieving its stated objectives, and that it be clearly composed so that while guilty parties are appropriately penalized, innocent parties aren't.

The way it is now, it seems to me that the potential for abuse by petty officials is present ... and as I indicated, I don't trust low-level government inspectors to have a helluva lot of common sense. I certainly have no basis in experience for granting them that trust if we're talking about a $2000 instrument.

[strat]

yeah.... I left it on the side walk a week ago... haven't seen it since...

[Ddavid]

Originally Posted by River side

You know as well as I do that were the Lacey Act to be repealed tomorrow, any number of governmental functionaries could impound a guitar for just about any (or no) reason what so ever. .

True, but I prefer the good old days when guitars were seized because there was a kilo hidden inside. At least you knew ahead of time why it might be seized.

[Ddavid]

Originally Posted by Thumpalumpacus

I certainly have no basis in experience for granting them that trust if we're talking about a $2000 instrument.

The watch Of mine that Fish & Wildlife confiscated because of the strap was worth $22k. I don't they give a crap once you fall into their jurisdiction..

[The_Sentry]

Originally Posted by River side

Make up all the nonsensical crap you like -

All I'm saying is that fake paperwork doesn't seem to work really well.

Or are you saying that you have a better plan to implement the fake-paperwork thing?

River Side,

You're the one who made claims that a specific person advocated breaking the law, and you have not made delineation between the Mercantile Company or Gibson.

Let's have the name, please....I'd certainly like to know who this person is that you're talking about.

[River side]

Originally Posted by The_Sentry

River Side,

You're the one who made claims that a specific person advocated breaking the law, and you have not made delineation between the Mercantile Company or Gibson.

Let's have the name, please....I'd certainly like to know who this person is that you're talking about.

This:

Originally Posted by Tone deaf

If you ever got stopped, tell the flunky who stops you that it is a 2012 Richlite (i.e. not wood) fingerboard). Let it roll right off your tongue. "What? Dude, that isn't even real wood. Don't they train you about that stuff?" The guy/gal might just feel like he/she is potentially wrong-enough to make the organization look as bad as it is and might just let it go (because he/she doesn't have a clue as to what it is and just doesn't want to be wrong). They spend all their time training on how to frisk the elderly, not identifying wood species. What is in it for them? Really, are they going to get a medal for a seized guitar? Just give them a reason to let it pass.

If I was traveling with one of my older guitars with dark hardwood on it, I might very well have a sales receipt for a Richlite guitar with me (thanks photoshop)...well, look, I'm not suggesting anything that wouldn't be legal, but this whole issue is bullsh*t. The Lacey Act, as enacted into law in 1900 NEVER was intended to extend to finished wood products, NO MATTER WHAT. The Lacey Act, as enacted in 1900, has always been intrusive on individual's Constitutionally guaranteed rights. The Lacey Act, as Amended in 2008, is a f*cking contra-constitutional abomination.

Anyhow, that's my contribution to the subject.

[AXE]

Mike.

His name is Mike.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Originally Posted by AXE

Mike.

His name is Mike.

Why, you -- !

[The_Sentry]

Originally Posted by AXE

Mike.

His name is Mike.

Thanks, AXE.

[lǎo​wài]

Oh, and have you been around here long enough to understand what the purple font means?

Actually uhhh, no. From reading this forum, my guess is purple means 'do not take seriously' or it replaces the /sarcasm tag. Amirite?

[lǎo​wài]

Originally Posted by River side

.001%?

Is that like one beer out of a 36 pack?

Actually, it would be one beer out of a 10,000 pack. But still. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty f'n pissed when someone drinks my last beer.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Originally Posted by River side

That's a pretty bogus string of bullshit, right there.

There have been disputes in Customs Houses everywhere, for as long as they have existed. They exist because of laws being written to be enforced by functionaries. I didn't invent the circumstance, nor have I expressed an opinion as to whether or not this one or that has my "trust".

Nonsense. You're being deliberately obtuse in implying that the same agency which is showing an inability to recognize other proscribed materials -- namely, watchbands -- will not display the same incompetence with guitars.

I made no claim nor implication that you created the situation, either, which means that that comment is a red herring.

You have, however, made it clear that you are skeptical that any petty bureaucrat might use this law incorrectly, and that constitutes a form of trust on your part.

Finally, before I move on to your next point, I'd like to point up your double-standard in arguing that presenting the example of the watch isn't relevant because it isn't a guitar, and then appealing to these things happening "for as long as they have existed".

I'm just looking for that one example - which so far, hasn't been documented beyond a third-party recollection "featured" in an internet article from "Fall 2008".

Moving the goalposts; now you're implying that there's a specific time-period criterion, a non-Internet source, and apparently the article must be buried in the back pages of the hard copy, as well.

Any other requirements? Perhaps the book must be hard-bound in leather and printed in 2009? 2010?

Be specific.

You know as well as I do that were the Lacey Act to be repealed tomorrow, any number of governmental functionaries could impound a guitar for just about any (or no) reason what so ever.

Absent other criminal activity being involved, will they be able to impound your guitar simply because it's made with proscribed materials? Cite a law, please, and put the relevant passage in your reply, please.

That's a different question than that posed in the first sentence of the OP.

1) There's four questions there. I answered one, Colchar answered one, one strikes me as leading and not worth my while, and one strikes me as obvious and not worth my while.
2) The conversation has moved a little, as happens on occasion in threads.

In short, you're being obtuse, adhering to a double standard, and on top of all else, getting testy over being treated as you treat others.

Now, go fetch that law that says they can take your guitar because it's Sunday and the Tigers lost both games in the doubleheader. Remember, code, section, and quote the relevant passage.

[lǎo​wài]

Like I said earlier, the main concern from my reading is instruments shipped via freight rather than ones carried on or gate checked by traveling individuals.

That senators Lamar Alexander and Ron Wyden are demanding the Lacey act be revised to explicitly state that instruments made from woods harvested before 2008 can not be confiscated by the government should be sufficient evidence that the law, as written, could result in unintended consequences.

Considering the lack of transparency of the process, that no one here can document instruments actually being seized 1) doesn't mean it hasn't happened and 2) doesn't change the fact that the law, as it exists today, exposes anyone traveling to losing their property at the whim of a customs/border agent. That, and everything Thumpalumpacus and Ddavid said.

When traveling, the only thing I want to worry about is what the mystery meal is going to do to me after my flight.

[straybeat]

I always thought in the past that if you owned a product which became illegal over time, then you were grandfathered in for keeping it. Unless the product was poisonous/ dangerous/ used to kick puppies, then you could bring it in to a center and dispose of it.

[edhalen]

I've had mine seized by the local gvt due to the "wife-says-it's-time-to-stop-playing" act

[lǎo​wài]

Originally Posted by edhalen

I've had mine seized by the local gvt due to the "wife-says-it's-time-to-stop-playing" act

Those seizures are the worst because that authority can nab ya right in your own living room, and absolutely no appeals will be entertained.

[River side]

Originally Posted by lǎo​wài

Actually, it would be one beer out of a 10,000 pack. But still. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty f'n pissed when someone drinks my last beer.

So math is a challenge, too?

What's an order of magnitude among friends?

That last beer is a bitch, though.

[River side]

Obtuse?

The issue at hand (Has anyone actually had their guitar seized due to the lacey act or anything else related to that? Ever heard of it happening due to rare woods?) has yet to be addressed.

Has anyone had anything seized for any reason? Perhaps - but those reasons don't point to the original question.

The examples given so far haven't addressed a circumstance wherein a guitar was seized for the stated reason of having violated the Lacey Act - in it's current form, or even that of some pre-Gibson hoopla.

If you are afraid of traveling with your stuff, that's a problem that you have based upon pretty much an undefined fear that someone might make an issue of it - based upon what?

Certainly not anyone's experience.

And you want me to quote chapter and verse?

[edhalen]

Originally Posted by lǎo​wài

Those seizures are the worst because that authority can nab ya right in your own living room, and absolutely no appeals will be entertained.

BINGO!!!

[River side]

Originally Posted by edhalen

I've had mine seized by the local gvt due to the "wife-says-it's-time-to-stop-playing" act

Oh - tell us more!

They actually took away your property?

[The_Penguin]

Originally Posted by River side

Oh - tell us more!

They actually took away your property?

Whooosh.

[River side]

Originally Posted by The_Penguin

Whooosh.

That.

And not a single guitar in the whole bunch.

Busted! Nine border control horror stories

[Ddavid]

Originally Posted by River side

That.

And not a single guitar in the whole bunch.

Busted! Nine border control horror stories

You don't get it. Who would have thought that Gibson, an American icon (who the nation was rooting for after the flood), would be raided by our own government and have their property stolen. By our own government on the behalf of another government who said that Gibson followed their laws! There have been no charges filed. Gibson's business has been almost destroyed and forced them re-design almost every product and try to market it as a good thing instead of them making lemonaide.

And you lack any ability to foresee a single citizen having their guitar seized? Really? You want an example but when something is offered you discount it because it isn't specific enough or it doesn't fit your criteria! Why the obtuse denial? throughout history people have been in denial and said "surely it couldn't happen to me, they wouldn't do that!"