DHS now goes after purse counterfeiters, right here in Indiana

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    47,969
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    Mother of . . .

    Who do you think Customs is a part of? Sweet Mother of Pearl on a pogo stick. United States Customs, you know the people responsible for enforcing the prohibition on the import of this merchandise, is PART OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.

    Remember when all the wookies were running around with their furry suits on fire about the ammo capacity that DHS reserved and I posted the TO for DHS?

    Here it is again:

    http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/dhs-orgchart.pdf

    See that, in the bottom left hand corner? Right, its frickin' Customs.
     

    Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    47,969
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    I know I personally feel more secure now that counterfeit purses are off the street.

    Ahh, the confusing INGO Property Rights dance, when property rights are sacred, unless they are someone else's rights then they do not matter.

    So, you don't believe in property rights then?

    If you don't believe in property rights, then can people come to your house or bank and take your stuff without permission?

    This is about property rights.
     

    Liberty1911

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 25, 2012
    1,722
    38
    Ahh, the confusing INGO Property Rights dance, when property rights are sacred, unless they are someone else's rights then they do not matter.

    So, you don't believe in property rights then?

    If you don't believe in property rights, then can people come to your house or bank and take your stuff without permission?

    This is about property rights.


    Right. I don't believe in property rights because I think DHS shouldn't be the one to enforce them. :rolleyes:

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6cxNR9ML8k[/ame]
     

    Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    47,969
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    Right. I don't believe in property rights because I think DHS shouldn't be the one to enforce them. :rolleyes:

    The purpose of the federal government is to defend our rights, including INGO-hated property rights.

    This case is about property rights. Why does INGO hate property rights so?

    If Customs is not investigating and enforcing these crimes who do you want enforcing them?:dunno:
     

    Liberty1911

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 25, 2012
    1,722
    38
    The purpose of the federal government is to defend our rights, including INGO-hated property rights.

    This case is about property rights. Why does INGO hate property rights so?

    If Customs is not investigating and enforcing these crimes who do you want enforcing them?:dunno:


    What are INGO-hated property rights? :dunno:
     

    GunnerDan

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 16, 2012
    770
    18
    Clark County Indiana
    I personally dont care who gets rid of counterfeit handbags/purses/wallets whatever, just keep they out of here. I myself have paid enough money for my wife's REAL Prada handbag and my Louis Vuitton wallet that I am happy I didnt have to worry that what I was purchasing was some knock-off. Heck even my daughters Vera Bradley backpack was pricey enough that I dont want to have to worry about them being knock-off's. I myself have no problems with keeping counterfeit items out of the supply chain.

    Gunner
     

    Stubz

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    57   0   0
    May 2, 2011
    599
    16
    Alexandria, IN
    The purpose of the federal government is to defend our rights, including INGO-hated property rights.

    This case is about property rights. Why does INGO hate property rights so?

    If Customs is not investigating and enforcing these crimes who do you want enforcing them?:dunno:

    Are we talking about property (ie land, buildings, physical locations) or more intellectual property (product design, ideas, brands, names ,etc...)?

    :dunno:
     

    Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    47,969
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    What are INGO-hated property rights?

    That would be property rights in general.

    Are we talking about property (ie land, buildings, physical locations) or more intellectual property (product design, ideas, brands, names ,etc...)?

    Same bundle of sticks.

    This case is about property rights. Why some here do not wish to defend property I do not understand especially given all the rhetoric about how property rights are sacred.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    What are INGO-hated property rights? :dunno:
    That's when you hate individual property rights enough to turn entire towns into giant (non-voluntary) HOAs with nannyish regulations. Everything from grass length to exterior siding should be micro-managed by the collective, not the individual.
     

    Liberty1911

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 25, 2012
    1,722
    38
    That would be property rights in general.

    Same bundle of sticks.

    This case is about property rights. Why some here do not wish to defend property I do not understand especially given all the rhetoric about how property rights are sacred.


    I'm not sure where you get all that from. There must be some history here that I'm not aware of.

    I took this thread to be an objection that customs is now part of DHS, perhaps expanding into things that really have nothing to do with actual "security" of citizens.

    I have no idea how you jump from that to "INGO-hating property rights." :dunno:
     

    Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    47,969
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    I took this thread to be an objection that customs is now part of DHS, perhaps expanding into things that really have nothing to do with actual "security" of citizens.

    The OP did not mention Customs, I did.

    This is not about security, it is about property rights. Customs enforced property rights before it was re-shuffled into DHS.

    I have no idea how you jump from that to "INGO-hating property rights."

    Because we have heard how sacred property rights are every single time someone gets fined for fouling their nest but when property rights are upheld by the government as in this case we have to hear about how defending property rights is wrong.

    It is a dance. Sometimes property rights are good on INGO, sometimes property rights can be overlooked on INGO.
     

    steveh_131

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    10,046
    83
    Porter County
    Same bundle of sticks.

    This case is about property rights. Why some here do not wish to defend property I do not understand especially given all the rhetoric about how property rights are sacred.

    No, it is NOT the same bundle of sticks.

    If we followed your logic to its natural conclusion, we would have DHS monitoring our internet connections and using the Patriot act to detain suspected copyright infringers.

    This is about fraud, not property rights. And it should be a state issue.
     

    Liberty1911

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 25, 2012
    1,722
    38
    The OP did not mention Customs, I did.

    This is not about security, it is about property rights. Customs enforced property rights before it was re-shuffled into DHS.

    Because we have heard how sacred property rights are every single time someone gets fined for fouling their nest but when property rights are upheld by the government as in this case we have to hear about how defending property rights is wrong.

    It is a dance. Sometimes property rights are good on INGO, sometimes property rights can be overlooked on INGO.


    I don't know the history of your debates but you didn't get any of that from me.

    I think it's a valid point to object to DHS enforcing property rights, as opposed to actual security issues, without being accused of "hating property rights". So, lighten up Francis.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113
    This is about fraud, not property rights. And it should be a state issue.

    Its about both, actually. Fraud on the part of the seller and customer within the state, property rights for the owner of the actual company that has the rights to produce the legitimate items.

    It would be a reasonable guess that these fakes come from China or somewhere in Asia. Pretty easy to see how this is a both a state and federal issue.
     
    Top Bottom