If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Big 1059)   Murder, rape, refunding an out of state 10 cent can. "What are things you can go to jail for?"   (big1059.com) divider line 52
    More: Weird  
•       •       •

6760 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Feb 2013 at 7:31 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



52 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-19 05:39:29 PM
I live in Maine and I can tell you they dont fark around when it comes to that in New Hampshire
 
2013-02-19 05:41:34 PM
images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-02-19 05:48:07 PM
If passed, someone who attempts to return between 100 and 10,000 non-returnable containers could face a maximum fine of $1,000 or up to 93 days in jail. Current law sets penalties only for people that have actually returned fraudulent containers.

Where I live the law says generally that attempting to commit a crime is a crime in itself. There is no need to pass a law separately criminalizing attempt for each crime. This is how they get you for chatting up "14 year old girls" online. It's an attempt to commit a sex crime.
 
2013-02-19 06:25:02 PM
Angela Madden and every other person I have met involved in the can and bottle deposit system all lie.  I have heard some doozies like "Once a glass bottle is sent through, the bottle cannot be fed through again.  The machine won't accept that particular bar code again."  The bar codes and machines are not that complex.  I called the guy on the mathematical impossibility of producing billions of containers with all unique bar codes and not occasionally messing with other products' bar codes.

Anyway, Ms. Madden is wrong, the scam is unethical but it hurts the state not the businesses.  When beverage companies bottle the beverage they send a check for the deposit to the state.  When the beverage is delivered to the store, the store reimburses the manufacturer.  When the customer buys the beverage they reimburse the store.  When the customers returns the container for reimbursement the store sends the bill to the state for reimbursement.  If a container comes up missing and is never returned, the state is who keeps the 10 cents.  The state doesn't want competition.  For the scam to work, you would have to take the containers to either a little store that just counts the containers and hand you cash or get the containers from a nickel deposit state to double your money.  Either, is a bigger pain than it is worth.
 
2013-02-19 07:07:39 PM
Yes, but cracking a cold one is still legal in most states. So is re-enacting horsegag.avi.

Such a wierd, wierd system we have. Hmm.
 
2013-02-19 07:11:15 PM
 
2013-02-19 07:27:20 PM

ZAZ: If passed, someone who attempts to return between 100 and 10,000 non-returnable containers could face a maximum fine of $1,000 or up to 93 days in jail. Current law sets penalties only for people that have actually returned fraudulent containers.

Where I live the law says generally that attempting to commit a crime is a crime in itself. There is no need to pass a law separately criminalizing attempt for each crime. This is how they get you for chatting up "14 year old girls" online. It's an attempt to commit a sex crime.


Yeah, that's what gets me... can't you throw 'attempted' in front of almost any crime and charge someone with it?
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-02-19 07:36:15 PM
House bill 4051 (introduced)

I don't see why the added language matters, except for the "civil" fine for 25-100 containers which may not be subject to the general law on criminal attempt.
 
2013-02-19 07:38:58 PM
If the cans had guns, this wouldn't happen.
 
2013-02-19 07:39:17 PM
www.morethings.com


"Refunding an out of state 10 cent can..."

"Doesn't sound like much of a CRIME."

"To the Vatican?"
 
2013-02-19 07:44:24 PM

Oznog: [www.morethings.com image 599x407]


"Refunding an out of state 10 cent can..."

"Doesn't sound like much of a CRIME."

"To the Vatican?"


Kinkyyy.
 
2013-02-19 07:44:38 PM
Rape, murder, arson, refunding a 10 cent out of state can, and rape
 
2013-02-19 07:45:06 PM

lack of warmth: Angela Madden and every other person I have met involved in the can and bottle deposit system all lie.  I have heard some doozies like "Once a glass bottle is sent through, the bottle cannot be fed through again.  The machine won't accept that particular bar code again."  The bar codes and machines are not that complex.  I called the guy on the mathematical impossibility of producing billions of containers with all unique bar codes and not occasionally messing with other products' bar codes.

Anyway, Ms. Madden is wrong, the scam is unethical but it hurts the state not the businesses.  When beverage companies bottle the beverage they send a check for the deposit to the state.  When the beverage is delivered to the store, the store reimburses the manufacturer.  When the customer buys the beverage they reimburse the store.  When the customers returns the container for reimbursement the store sends the bill to the state for reimbursement.  If a container comes up missing and is never returned, the state is who keeps the 10 cents.  The state doesn't want competition.  For the scam to work, you would have to take the containers to either a little store that just counts the containers and hand you cash or get the containers from a nickel deposit state to double your money.  Either, is a bigger pain than it is worth.


I had to note the paradox here in this model- that the motivation is to prevent littering and encourage recycling by charging a deposit.

Yet the state now has a vested interest in those cans and bottles NOT being returned as frequently.  They taxed a deposit when sold, but every one which gets "lost" is money in the bank for the state!  Just sayin', there's a lot of trust here, and in my experience trust in the state where free money is involved is not well-placed.
 
2013-02-19 07:45:25 PM
I live near a liquor store where all the cashiers in there give you a hard time if you just return bottles without buying anything in return. One time the cashier even asked me if I bought my beer somewhere else. I keep hoping the Massachusetts Liquor Board comes down on them for trying to make it tough to return empties.
 
2013-02-19 07:45:40 PM
And creating a nuisance.
 
2013-02-19 07:47:11 PM

lack of warmth: Oznog: [www.morethings.com image 599x407]


"Refunding an out of state 10 cent can..."

"Doesn't sound like much of a CRIME."

"To the Vatican?"

Kinkyyy.


5 min 17 seconds... surprised it took so long.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-02-19 07:48:17 PM
According to the bill text I posted, under existing and proposed new law you are not subject to a fine unless you return 25 or more containers and you can not go to jail unless you return more than 100.
 
2013-02-19 07:51:21 PM

Oznog: lack of warmth: Angela Madden and every other person I have met involved in the can and bottle deposit system all lie.  I have heard some doozies like "Once a glass bottle is sent through, the bottle cannot be fed through again.  The machine won't accept that particular bar code again."  The bar codes and machines are not that complex.  I called the guy on the mathematical impossibility of producing billions of containers with all unique bar codes and not occasionally messing with other products' bar codes.

Anyway, Ms. Madden is wrong, the scam is unethical but it hurts the state not the businesses.  When beverage companies bottle the beverage they send a check for the deposit to the state.  When the beverage is delivered to the store, the store reimburses the manufacturer.  When the customer buys the beverage they reimburse the store.  When the customers returns the container for reimbursement the store sends the bill to the state for reimbursement.  If a container comes up missing and is never returned, the state is who keeps the 10 cents.  The state doesn't want competition.  For the scam to work, you would have to take the containers to either a little store that just counts the containers and hand you cash or get the containers from a nickel deposit state to double your money.  Either, is a bigger pain than it is worth.

I had to note the paradox here in this model- that the motivation is to prevent littering and encourage recycling by charging a deposit.

Yet the state now has a vested interest in those cans and bottles NOT being returned as frequently.  They taxed a deposit when sold, but every one which gets "lost" is money in the bank for the state!  Just sayin', there's a lot of trust here, and in my experience trust in the state where free money is involved is not well-placed.


The unclaimed deposit money goes directly into environmental programs and back to the retailers.  There's no using the money for the general fund.
 
2013-02-19 07:53:47 PM
Collecting bottles and cans funded my summers as a young lad in Michigan. We'd go down to the park on Monday's and collect trash bags full of bottles and cans. Once we had the cash, it was off to the mall to blow it all at the arcade.
 
2013-02-19 07:54:18 PM
I don't see a problem with this, fraud is fraud.  My question would be why do they print the deposit info on cans sold in states that don't have a deposit?
 
2013-02-19 08:03:08 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Collecting bottles and cans funded my summers as a young lad in Michigan. We'd go down to the park on Monday's and collect trash bags full of bottles and cans. Once we had the cash, it was off to the mall to blow it all at the arcade.


Same here, except I was lucky enough to live near Michigan International Speedway.  Set up a target with a hole in it and watch the drunks throw their empties at it when they drive past.  Good times.

ReapTheChaos: I don't see a problem with this, fraud is fraud.  My question would be why do they print the deposit info on cans sold in states that don't have a deposit?


Printing different labels for different states(I imagine) would be too much of a pain in the ass/cost to justify it.
 
2013-02-19 08:03:32 PM

Oldiron_79: Rape, murder, arson, refunding a 10 cent out of state can, and rape


You said rape twice...
 
2013-02-19 08:03:32 PM
If passed, someone who attempts to return between 100 and 10,000 non-returnable containers could face a maximum fine of $1,000 or up to 93 days in jail.

OK, so IF it passes--which it hasn't--someone who attempts to return more than 100 nonreturnable containers COULD face--which means they could also not face--a MAXIMUM fine--which means anything from $0 on up to $1000--OR UP TO--again, which could mean zero days or up to--93 days in jail.

That's a lot of ifs, coulds, and maybes. First, the law hasn't even passed yet. Second, there's a lot of room for discretion and bargaining. Third, you know how you get around it? You return 99 nonreturnable containers at a time. Go to the next station, rinse and repeat.

Even without looking at the law, I can see that this is intended to stop out-of-state recyclers from sending truckloads of excess over into a state that has a more generous refund policy, and cashing in, so they're trying to stop that, and at the same time head off any complaints by said recyclers about trash-pickers who handed in a sack of bottles that had a few out-of-state empties in it. So stop freaking out.
 
2013-02-19 08:04:32 PM
Oznog:
I had to note the paradox here in this model- that the motivation is to prevent littering and encourage recycling by charging a deposit.

Yet the state now has a vested interest in those cans and bottles NOT being returned as frequently.  They taxed a deposit when sold, but every one which gets "lost" is money in the bank for the state!  Just sayin', there's a lot of trust here, and in my experience trust in the state where free money is involved is not well-placed.


If the container is damaged and the machine cannot read the bar code, it is trash, the store doesn't have to reimburse you.  Also, if the store doesn't sell that brand of pop or beer, they don't reimburse you.  Only a problem if you buy some unusual brand, while traveling, from some folksy store out in the boonies then you are without your dime.  They know you won't drive all that distance back to return it.  It's a lovely system that nets the state seven digits annually easy.  It doesn't really help with litter, since their is so much other stuff to toss out the car window.  Only beer and pop containers have a deposit, which does not include teas, water or fast food cups.

It's all about the FDR's
 
2013-02-19 08:07:37 PM
Mood_For_Trouble: Oldiron_79: Rape, murder, arson, refunding a 10 cent out of state can, and rape

You said rape twice...


I really like rape
 
2013-02-19 08:08:16 PM
Most successful recycling program in the country is Michigan's 10 cent deposit.

www.bottlebill.org

That said, screw you Ohio-ians coming over the border.

lack of warmth: If the container is damaged and the machine cannot read the bar code, it is trash, the store doesn't have to reimburse you. Also, if the store doesn't sell that brand of pop or beer, they don't reimburse you.


I've *never* had a problem going to customer service and asking that they refund bottles the machine wouldn't take.  If it's just a few they go in the recycle bin though.

Yeah, they only have to accept what they sell.  Not that big a deal.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-02-19 08:08:54 PM
why do they print the deposit info on cans sold in states that don't have a deposit?

Fewer can art designs mean lower costs. In practice bottlers don't lose much money from fraudulent returns. They don't get to keep deposits and the redemption rate inclusive of fraud is not over 100% (not anywhere I have heard of).

It may be that grocery stores, bulk redemption centers, and state governments lose money. That is not the bottler's problem.
 
2013-02-19 08:10:11 PM
phenibut
 
2013-02-19 08:12:20 PM
Oregon soda can law is sorta funny. It has to be carbonated soda. YooHoo chocolate cans have no deposit here.
 
2013-02-19 08:14:43 PM

ZAZ: why do they print the deposit info on cans sold in states that don't have a deposit?

Fewer can art designs mean lower costs. In practice bottlers don't lose much money from fraudulent returns. They don't get to keep deposits and the redemption rate inclusive of fraud is not over 100% (not anywhere I have heard of).

It may be that grocery stores, bulk redemption centers, and state governments lose money. That is not the bottler's problem.


IIRC, there have been attempts recently by Michigan to require state-unique barcodes.
 
2013-02-19 08:16:49 PM

Gyrfalcon: That's a lot of ifs, coulds, and maybes. First, the law hasn't even passed yet. Second, there's a lot of room for discretion and bargaining. Third, you know how you get around it? You return 99 nonreturnable containers at a time. Go to the next station, rinse and repeat.


Then the legislature is naive and needs to look at federal statutes regarding structuring financial transactions to avoid federal reporting laws.
 
2013-02-19 08:26:13 PM
I definitely never knew any guys from Michigan in college that would raid the recycling bins before any trips home from PA.  I certainly didn't know any guys that would use that money to buy a bunch of weed to smoke during the break!  That would be just terrible.
 
2013-02-19 08:26:53 PM

ReapTheChaos: I don't see a problem with this, fraud is fraud.  My question would be why do they print the deposit info on cans sold in states that don't have a deposit?


I haven't seen the deposit info on cans in non-deposit states.  Also, non-deposit state cans will have a different upc than deposit state cans.  However, the deposit states don't want cans traveling across state lines because the state giving you a dime should be the same state that got the dime to begin with.  Or nickel in some states.  The special upc's help when you turn them in at big stores that have machines that will reject containers if damaged, wrong brand or from a non-deposit state.  We do get a lot of visitors from the nickel states that may be bringing some containers with them.  It is easier to trace the non-deposit containers and it is usually the little store that takes them because they handle the transaction by hand, but may not take the time to check.

/I bought a 20 oz pop from Canada and noticed the metric conversion to 591 ml.  Doesn't roll off the tongue very well.
//Although we do have the option of half liters, just in case 591 ml is too much.
 
2013-02-19 08:29:14 PM

Happy Hours: Gyrfalcon: That's a lot of ifs, coulds, and maybes. First, the law hasn't even passed yet. Second, there's a lot of room for discretion and bargaining. Third, you know how you get around it? You return 99 nonreturnable containers at a time. Go to the next station, rinse and repeat.

Then the legislature is naive and needs to look at federal statutes regarding structuring financial transactions to avoid federal reporting laws.


It's a state law, they can do what they want in-state. Cross-state, they can do what they want as long as they avoid the dormant commerce clause restrictions.
 
2013-02-19 08:38:33 PM
Oldiron_79 ... thank you.  you said Rape twice
 
2013-02-19 08:44:30 PM
I know of a Michigan based flight attendant that got sent to jail for keeping and returning all the cans from her flights.

Fired for stealing from the company.  Jailed for returning cans from all across the country.

Retarded for carrying empty cans through the airport like some homeless embarrassment to her profession.
 
2013-02-19 08:48:24 PM
StreetlightInTheGhetto:

I wonder how much the chart would change if they were able to stop deposit containers from crossing state lines.  I know in my small pocket of living, I see people waste a lot of deposit containers and wonder how much is that being offset by 'illegal' returns.  Although, I am one of those folks who is not ashamed to pick up a can.  I figure you have no right to complain about your pay, price of gas or taxes if you are willing to throw away a FDR everytime you are thirsty.  I do know several people that never save their bottles.

However, from another angle, what are they really going to be able to do about enforcement?  They couldn't stop fireworks for all those years they were banned, nor was able to slow this in all the years of the deposit.
 
2013-02-19 08:53:32 PM

Professor Science: And creating a nuisance.


Came here for this.
 
2013-02-19 08:57:05 PM

StreetlightInTheGhetto: Most successful recycling program in the country is Michigan's 10 cent deposit.

That said, screw you Ohio-ians coming over the border.


I knew people from Michigan who would do the 15 min drive over the border to buy beer in Sylvania and then get the dime in Michigan.  My old college roomie used to do the same with all of our cans- paid for all our toilet paper in the dorms.

Back when Coke was sold at $1.50 per 12-pack on Ohio State's campus my freshman year when it went on some insane promotion, we certainly took advantage of his trips back home.  Nothing like 3¢/can net cost.
 
2013-02-19 08:58:25 PM

BronyMedic: Yes, but cracking a cold one is still legal in most states. So is re-enacting horsegag.avi.

Such a wierd, wierd system we have. Hmm.


+1 one for KrispyKritter. Hey, don't judge me. Sometimes an acquired taste becomes a required taste.

/ Never trust a woman with a pulse
// favorite line I ever heard uttered on a episode of Law & order
 
2013-02-19 09:00:18 PM
Does Washington have a bottle deposit? I know cans I've bought there get taken back in Oregon just fine.
 
2013-02-19 09:12:09 PM

Point02GPA: Oregon soda can law is sorta funny. It has to be carbonated soda. YooHoo chocolate cans have no deposit here.


They have been discussing expanding the deposit law here to include non-carbonated and non beer containers as well.  The growing popularity of water and energy drinks has rehashed the discussion.  One draw back that is holding things up is the cost of changing the machines out to accept gallon size jugs, and no one has an answer on 2.5gal water jugs.  I am all for it.  It would involve so much material that is going into landfills like plastics and glass and would only leave fastfood cups being tossed out of cars.  The only answer I have for non-deposit cans is to turn them in for scrap.

/recycling is one of three reasons I like scrapping
//cash and learning by reverse engineering are the other two
 
2013-02-19 09:19:13 PM

Gyrfalcon: Happy Hours: Gyrfalcon: That's a lot of ifs, coulds, and maybes. First, the law hasn't even passed yet. Second, there's a lot of room for discretion and bargaining. Third, you know how you get around it? You return 99 nonreturnable containers at a time. Go to the next station, rinse and repeat.

Then the legislature is naive and needs to look at federal statutes regarding structuring financial transactions to avoid federal reporting laws.

It's a state law, they can do what they want in-state. Cross-state, they can do what they want as long as they avoid the dormant commerce clause restrictions.


My point was they could take a lesson from federal law.

If you start returning 99 (or 24) cans at a time to avoid prosecution but return 99 cans each to 10 different places in one day they could make that illegal too.

Just as if I have $99,000 in money that I don't want reported to the fed and I deposit $9,900 a day for 10 days into my bank account I would be in violation of federal law.
 
2013-02-19 11:33:22 PM

lack of warmth: Point02GPA: Oregon soda can law is sorta funny. It has to be carbonated soda. YooHoo chocolate cans have no deposit here.

They have been discussing expanding the deposit law here to include non-carbonated and non beer containers as well.  The growing popularity of water and energy drinks has rehashed the discussion.  One draw back that is holding things up is the cost of changing the machines out to accept gallon size jugs, and no one has an answer on 2.5gal water jugs.  I am all for it.  It would involve so much material that is going into landfills like plastics and glass and would only leave fastfood cups being tossed out of cars.  The only answer I have for non-deposit cans is to turn them in for scrap.

/recycling is one of three reasons I like scrapping
//cash and learning by reverse engineering are the other two


What about liquor bottles?
 
2013-02-19 11:55:18 PM
Probably end up with more jail time for the bottles than for the rape or murder.
 
2013-02-20 12:48:13 AM
It's considered theft in Oregon to take back more than 144 bottle or cans at the same time.
 
2013-02-20 01:31:11 AM

Oldiron_79: Rape, murder, arson, refunding a 10 cent out of state can, and rape


Someone needs to go back and get a shiatload of dimes.
 
2013-02-20 05:13:41 AM

Gyrfalcon: If passed, someone who attempts to return between 100 and 10,000 non-returnable containers could face a maximum fine of $1,000 or up to 93 days in jail.

OK, so IF it passes--which it hasn't--someone who attempts to return more than 100 nonreturnable containers COULD face--which means they could also not face--a MAXIMUM fine--which means anything from $0 on up to $1000--OR UP TO--again, which could mean zero days or up to--93 days in jail.

That's a lot of ifs, coulds, and maybes. First, the law hasn't even passed yet. Second, there's a lot of room for discretion and bargaining. Third, you know how you get around it? You return 99 nonreturnable containers at a time. Go to the next station, rinse and repeat.

Even without looking at the law, I can see that this is intended to stop out-of-state recyclers from sending truckloads of excess over into a state that has a more generous refund policy, and cashing in, so they're trying to stop that, and at the same time head off any complaints by said recyclers about trash-pickers who handed in a sack of bottles that had a few out-of-state empties in it. So stop freaking out.


Maybe another way around it would be to return 10,001 or more bottles at a time. Does the law have anything to say about that?
 
2013-02-20 05:20:45 AM

BGates: It's considered theft in Oregon to take back more than 144 bottle or cans at the same time.


Really, why?
 
2013-02-20 08:36:18 AM
I read an article written by a former fed prosecutor. He said that if he followed ANYBODY around for a month, 24/7, he could put that person in a federal prison for the rest of his/her life. Land of the free, my ass.
 
Displayed 50 of 52 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report