More on Gibson Guitar Woes

Remember, they hate us because we are free:

It isn’t just Gibson that is sweating. Musicians who play vintage guitars and other instruments made of environmentally protected materials are worried the authorities may be coming for them next.

If you are the lucky owner of a 1920s Martin guitar, it may well be made, in part, of Brazilian rosewood. Cross an international border with an instrument made of that now-restricted wood, and you better have correct and complete documentation proving the age of the instrument. Otherwise, you could lose it to a zealous customs agent—not to mention face fines and prosecution.

We have to take our country back from these people. It’s not enough just to change Congress around. You really need a whole Congress and a President who’s on board with raining in the abuses of the bureaucracy. One man can’t do it, so don’t expect Ron Paul to be able to fix much as President.

Related posts (automatically generated):

  1. Dick Morris on President Obama
  2. Down the Wikihole: The Photoplayer
  3. Transcription Errors

11 thoughts on “More on Gibson Guitar Woes”

  1. I have some Gibson guitars, some Fender guitars, some Guilds, some Martins, some Taylors and a host of others.
    I hope they have a great warrant to come into my house!

  3. Absolutely! We must stop these unconstitutional abuses of…

    OMG!!! Lady Gaga just came out with a new single!!!!1!

  4. I’m not lucky enough to own anything likely to be effected, but this is ridiculous and – even better – may have actually gotten my father up in arms. Stuff like this can help us – not everyone cares about guns, but guitar nuts are just as passionate about their instruments.

  5. “One man can’t do it, so don’t expect Ron Paul to be able to fix much as President.” So true. I hate to be in the bind we always seem to be in when we get to the general election, or even in the primaries: vote for the lesser of two evils or, “throw your vote away” by voting your conscience with the understanding that it might actually help elect the worse of two evils if enough people also vote theirs. There’s got to be a better way; parliamentary systems with a high threshold for getting a first seat (say, 10%) is looking pretty good right now.

  6. The burden should be on the state/feds to prove the possessed wood product is illegal and not us to carry paperwork showing it’s not.

    Screw ’em.

  7. Scott,

    If someone challenges them on the burden of proof, they will win. But it won’t be cheap. I won a case in the 5th Circuit this last spring on an attempt by EPA to reverse the burden of proof for violations of the clean water act. Wasn’t cheap, but got it done. Unfortunately, the bureaucratic monster will simply ignore the decision and create new rules that also need to be challenged.

    As Sebastian said, we need a wholesale reform of this treacherous beast.

  8. This kind of thing makes my blood boil.

    Innocence until proven guilty? Not for you!

    Goods confiscated without due process? Of course! After all, we’re not putting you on trial–we’re putting your goods on trial!

    As for Ron Paul fixing things: I think we’d do well if the next President just fired all the Federal Employees, and hired more people from scratch. Unfortunately, there’s obstacles do doing that–Federal employment is more secure than the position of the Rocky Mountains–but, at the very least, the Federal Government could use a good gutting!

  9. Civil Service rules exist for a reason – the alternative was tried and led to different kinds of corruption. That having been said, the bureaus have gone MUCH too far and need to be reined in.

  10. The burden should be on the state/feds to prove the possessed wood product is illegal and not us to carry paperwork showing it’s not.

Comments are closed.