Fox News running story on LR confiscations

[Ray_G]

Do you work for the Govt?

Maybe you aren't as connected to the community as others, but based on several off line conversations, some of the seizures were very oppressive in nature. And as for the true reason these trucks were seized, that has yet to be released. EPA and DOT rules are what CBP is enforcing. To say is was or it wasn't anything specific is speculation at this point. As for being 'unsealed' the only thing unsealed was the complaint, that clearly states that the case presented in it was not the entire case, but rather enough for them to justify the seizure.

-Jeff

Jeff-
We can go around on this over on D90 (I'm sure we will) but let's bet honest-most people don't know what oppression is, and this specific situation doesn't equal that.

Oh, and since I do work for the gov't, I'll point out a few things:
raid = limited objective attack with a planned withdrawal (I've done a few hundred of them). In a law enforcement capacity you could substitute attack and change some words around, but the fact of the matter is that continuing to use that verbiage is inflammatory (by design).
Heavily armed 'Agents'; likewise conveys imagery of the gestapo, by design. Someone showing up on your door who has a holstered handgun doesn't equate to heavily armed. When I think of heavily armed I think of toting an M4 with an M203, a few hundred rounds of 7.62 link for the 240, some frags, thermites, and a LAAW. Once again, this doesn't equal that.
'Machine guns'; someone had an M2, MK-19, or at least an M240? Unlikely. Is it possible someone had a long gun? Yes, for the reasons described given the current state of things in this country. One need to look no further than the commentary in these threads and in the comments of the articles to understand why someone may want to have backup or a long gun just in case-how much 'come and take it' 'cold dead hands' 'molon labe' and other posturing has to be conveyed before there is a commensurate reaction?
'SWAT Team'; really? Did they isolate the objective and punch in riot control agents on a no-knock warrant at the bottom of the circadian cycle-or was it a hard hit with flashbangs on NOD's?

Or was it guys wearing some 5.11 pants because, let's face it, they were seizing a Land Rover so you know they might get dirty just trying to start/move the thing given how much they leak.

My point is the words have meaning, and aside from being tiresome, the fact is that it is blowing things out of proportion and doing a disservice to the actual situation at hand.

But I'm a jackbooted thug, right?
r-
Ray

 

[JSBriggs]

Jeff-
We can go around on this over on D90 (I'm sure we will) but let's bet honest-most people don't know what oppression is, and this specific situation doesn't equal that.

Oh, and since I do work for the gov't, I'll point out a few things:
raid = limited objective attack with a planned withdrawal (I've done a few hundred of them). In a law enforcement capacity you could substitute attack and change some words around, but the fact of the matter is that continuing to use that verbiage is inflammatory (by design).
Heavily armed 'Agents'; likewise conveys imagery of the gestapo, by design. Someone showing up on your door who has a holstered handgun doesn't equate to heavily armed. When I think of heavily armed I think of toting an M4 with an M203, a few hundred rounds of 7.62 link for the 240, some frags, thermites, and a LAAW. Once again, this doesn't equal that.
'Machine guns'; someone had an M2, MK-19, or at least an M240? Unlikely. Is it possible someone had a long gun? Yes, for the reasons described given the current state of things in this country. One need to look no further than the commentary in these threads and in the comments of the articles to understand why someone may want to have backup or a long gun just in case-how much 'come and take it' 'cold dead hands' 'molon labe' and other posturing has to be conveyed before there is a commensurate reaction?
'SWAT Team'; really? Did they isolate the objective and punch in riot control agents on a no-knock warrant at the bottom of the circadian cycle-or was it a hard hit with flashbangs on NOD's?

Or was it guys wearing some 5.11 pants because, let's face it, they were seizing a Land Rover so you know they might get dirty just trying to start/move the thing given how much they leak.

My point is the words have meaning, and aside from being tiresome, the fact is that it is blowing things out of proportion and doing a disservice to the actual situation at hand.

But I'm a jackbooted thug, right?
r-
Ray

You like to squabble over language, and stir the pot from the mountaintop of your position of privileged information. But the real issue between us is Jackboots. Do you, or do you not, wear them on a regular basis in the course of your employment. And as for 5.11 pants,... Please. This is Expo. They are called Adventure pants.

-Jeff

 

[pugslyyy]

Gentleman,

I am the attorney that is representing Mrs. Brinkley. I am also a member of this site and Defenderssource.com, and have been for quite sometime. I'm truly disappointed by some of the recent comments you've shared concerning my client's television interview. She is just as much a Land Rover enthusiast as any one of you are.

She was given very strict parameters by me concerning what she could talk about, as this is an ongoing case involving numerous parties. I think that she did very well given the level of questions she was asked and the tempo at which the interview took place. And, regardless of what you all think, ultimately, she has furthered our cause.

Now, I can easily see you all giving one of our fellow Expedition Portal members a hard time, it's almost customary. But, I think that it is less than honorable for you all to pick on a woman, who's only trying to call attention to this matter and the manner in which these seizures took place. I actually find myself more than a little bit embarrassed of all of you right now. You should strive to be gentleman....not children.

And, let me remind you all, that people other than yourselves and federal agents read your posts on this website. What you type on your keyboard is a reflection of our community. And, the reflection I'm seeing right now is not one that I am proud of......

Will Hedrick

"Defender of the Defenders"

I thought the lady did fine and apologize if I gave a different impression, that was not my intent. I do, however, believe that the "reporting" was a horrendous piece of garbage that did not pursue truth, facts, or data but was just trying to sensationalize the situation.

 

[Ray_G]

You like to squabble over language, and stir the pot from the mountaintop of your position of privileged information. But the real issue between us is Jackboots. Do you, or do you not, wear them on a regular basis in the course of your employment. And as for 5.11 pants,... Please. This is Expo. They are called Adventure pants.

-Jeff

You know damn well my preferred term is 'angry hiker' apparel! I look down on 5.11 and instead prefer MK, and in particular Kuhl or Patagonia because it illustrates my sensitive side.

Also I'm too old for jackboots, I have people to do that. Much more comfortable in a pair of Merrills.

r-
Ray

 

[Finlay]

Do you work for the Govt? EPA and DOT rules are what CBP is enforcing. To say is was or it wasn't anything specific is speculation at this point.
-Jeff

Well, that's just it - the EPA and DOT rules don't apply to vehicles legally imported beyond the 25 year limit. So, to say this was an EPA/DOT enforcement action is missing the point - if everything had been done and the up and up, these seizures would not have occurred.

This started as an investigation into stolen rovers and parts and unfortunately, lots of people are collateral damage because their trucks are potential evidence to be used against the bad actors involved. Sucks for them, but, what - law enforcement shouldn't secure evidence of criminal activity because fee-fees might get hurt ?

I'm not trying to be a jerk - I know how this goes - a brazillian years ago, I bought a bike from a kid in my neighborhood for 200 bucks - that was about 2 month's pay at the burgershack, so it wasn't nothing. The cops showed up a few weeks later and just took it, because they claimed it was stolen. They did tell me I could sue the kid to get my money back (yeah, right). Sucked for me, but, caveat emptor.

 

[ROKTAXI]

http://www.infowars.com/homeland-se...-land-rover-for-violation-of-epa-regulations/

 

[pugslyyy]

http://www.infowars.com/homeland-se...-land-rover-for-violation-of-epa-regulations/

For people who view fox news as too middle of the road?

"the Brinkleys should probably count themselves lucky that they didn't have guns pointed at their head during the seizure of the Land Rover"

 

[meatblanket]

Well, that's just it - the EPA and DOT rules don't apply to vehicles legally imported beyond the 25 year limit. So, to say this was an EPA/DOT enforcement action is missing the point - if everything had been done and the up and up, these seizures would not have occurred.

The seizures occurred because of an allegation by the government that the vehicles in question were in fact < 25 years old, did not meet EPA and NHTSA standards, and were therefore imported illegally. Then the government decided that it was wrong about 6 of them and gave them back. Also, CBP had all of the paperwork and inspected these vehicles when they came in, and were satisfied at that time that they were legal imports. Knowing that background, why on earth would you have any confidence that any of the remaining allegations are true?

This started as an investigation into stolen rovers and parts

Where did you get that idea?

 

[Ray_G]

The seizures occurred because of an allegation by the government that the vehicles in question were in fact < 25 years old, did not meet EPA and NHTSA standards, and were therefore imported illegally. Then the government decided that it was wrong about 6 of them and gave them back. Also, CBP had all of the paperwork and inspected these vehicles when they came in, and were satisfied at that time that they were legal imports. Knowing that background, why on earth would you have any confidence that any of the remaining allegations are true?



Where did you get that idea?

As discussed on D90, the idea comes from the statements of persons involved.

 

[meatblanket]

As discussed on D90, the idea comes from the statements of persons involved.

But nobody has said (or maybe I've missed it?) that the trucks or component parts are alleged to have been stolen.

 

[wreckdiver1321]

The only news agency covering the US that I've found with absolutely zero spin? BBC News. Yeah, they only cover major stories, but they stick with the facts.

 

[LtFuzz]

Aren't political discussions not allowed here precisely because they inevitably turn into this peanut gallery foodfight nonsense?

 

[Finlay]

Also, CBP had all of the paperwork and inspected these vehicles when they came in, and were satisfied at that time that they were legal imports.

So, the cars should be considered legal because somebody successfully duped the customs inspectors ? I'm pretty sure that is incorrect, but if you could provide a cite to the relevant statute, I'd appreciate it.

 

[REDrum]

Amazing how gullible people are. Particularly when the media is stoking up their anger towards politicians. The Tea party used a stock swat team raid photo in one of their spin articles on the matter.

 

[wreckdiver1321]

Aren't political discussions not allowed here precisely because they inevitably turn into this peanut gallery foodfight nonsense?

It seems that rule is only loosely enforced.