Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(The Raw Story)   You're an internationally renowned flautist from Canada who lovingly crafts your flutes by hand. U.S. Customs officials: These are made of wood, which makes them agricultural products and therefore must be destroyed   (rawstory.com) divider line 313
    More: Asinine, U.S. Customs, customs officer, Measuring instrument, virtuoso, Canadian citizen, disc injury, John F. Kennedy International Airport  
•       •       •

14361 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Jan 2014 at 11:20 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-01 12:49:25 PM  

redmid17: I don't have to be a psychic. I'm expecting the government to follow some sort of method, a due process maybe, to determine whether or not these instruments violated some import law, which by CBP guidelines are to allow these kind of instruments into the country.



And yet, you have no way of knowing that they didn't. You have a one-sided story that's long on outrage and short on facts and details... which you are conveniently filling in with your imagination according to your own bias.
 
2014-01-01 12:51:02 PM  
So is it safe to bring a Strad into the U.S.?  They're made of wood, after all.  "Sorry, your multi-million dollar violin was an 'agricultural product', so we destroyed it."
 
2014-01-01 12:51:36 PM  

technicolor-misfit: redmid17: I don't have to be a psychic. I'm expecting the government to follow some sort of method, a due process maybe, to determine whether or not these instruments violated some import law, which by CBP guidelines are to allow these kind of instruments into the country.

And yet, you have no way of knowing that they didn't. You have a one-sided story that's long on outrage and short on facts and details... which you are conveniently filling in with your imagination according to your own bias.


The government has been given a chance to comment. They haven't. I'm haranguing them for not providing a reason. That's entirely their doing. If they had a legitimate reason, they were in the right.
 
2014-01-01 12:52:46 PM  

edmo: So much for traveling with my guitar.

Seriously, I'm with the "These guys are assholes" crowd here and you "it's the law" types should just go back to your bedrooms and let the NSA continue filming you or whatever.


If you're traveling with a guitar and not going to play a show you're a douchebag.
 
2014-01-01 12:52:56 PM  
If the standard is:  agricultural product  at a border crossing
Then what about the following:
    cotton clothing or cotton blend - hand over those clothes
    alcohol - hand over that booze
    wood sided station wagons (woodies) - from a long time ago - park your car over there
    wood insert dash boards on high end cars - park your car over there
    furniture and cabinets - hand over that guitar amp
    paper money - turn in that money
    leather wallets, shaving kits, belts and shoes - hand them over
    real hair toupees - hand over that rug
    books, note paper, letters - hand those over
    snacks, food, many animals - hand them over

Let's go completely zero tolerance and cripple the borders.
 
2014-01-01 12:53:42 PM  

Xanadone: So is it safe to bring a Strad into the U.S.?  They're made of wood, after all.  "Sorry, your multi-million dollar violin was an 'agricultural product', so we destroyed it."


Probably.

1) Those came from Europe, so the illegal wood angle wouldn't apply
2) Violins are sealed, so I don't think beetles would go for them anyway
3) Those are expensive but common enough that even the US government would get a lot of instant backlash if they destroyed one
 
2014-01-01 12:53:51 PM  
Oh, and he also says there was "raw" material to make other flutes in the case. (I put raw in quotation to denote the fact that we don't know what state the material was in, only that it was not yet carved into an instrument.

"Boujemaa adds some specifics of the case:
What was in the case? they called Bamboo case
1)     11 nays (flutes) made by me some of them in Canada some in US
2)      material to make new nays in the case
3)      flight  AA 0095    Madrid to JFK
4)      time : 12/22/2013   (notice : on 12/23/2013)
5)      Reason :   nays from plants which is agricultural items (so l can't play nay)"


http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2014/01/my-smashed-instrument s- brought-peace-and-joy.html
 
2014-01-01 12:54:46 PM  

redmid17: Meanwhile nothing in the US CBP guidelines mentions wood at all:

http://cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/clearing/agri_prod_inus.xml

I suppose it could be under "other biological material" but that would is completely dead and maybe sealed. Anyone got a particular reason why CBP would destroy these?


First off because they could.
Secondly,because this one time at Band Camp...
 
2014-01-01 12:54:57 PM  
By that logic, jeans which are made of cotton would be an agricultural product too.

Sooo...sorry folks, no pants at the airport.
 
2014-01-01 12:55:07 PM  

pueblonative: So in one article, he's saying that he got a note.  In another he says that the customs official took it out in front of him.  Hmm, seems we have an unreliable narrator here.


Or an unreliable source. Your first link says they were unable to reach the guy to talk to him about it when they wrote the story.

In the update contained at the end of your link, where they do talk to him, they give a cursory overview of the situation and it say: "We did not press him for further particulars.

Why the fark not? Isn't that what journalists do for a living?
 
2014-01-01 12:55:09 PM  

Por que tan serioso: pyrotek85: pueblonative: So his ignorance of what is in the laws should be an excuse.  Wonder if that's ever been ruled on by the courts?

I agree with that in principle, but how far can you take it when we have tens of thousands of laws? Yeah, laws that are  malum in se in nature you don't have an excuse for not knowing, but most of this crap is  malum prohibitum. There's no way to know about every obscure law, or when TSA is suddenly to going to interpret the law differently on the spot.

Know how I know you are a 1L?


A what?
 
2014-01-01 12:56:35 PM  

theflatline: How can you not declare booze unless you have it wrapped in plastic buried in your suitcase wrapped in your dirty undies.

I round trip Colombia all the time and I declare booze, coffee, sweets, all on the little paper, and my shiat never gets searched and TSA and customs are nice as hell to me.

People who like to break the rules who then get farked with are the first ones to scream discrimination.


They don't search bags unless they have to and a bottle of alcohol doesn't weigh enough to trip any warning signs so it doesn't have to be hid.  If they find it they can have it I just don't want to be pulled out as a "random" search and have them go through all my shiat all because I listed a bottle of booze.  I never been searched or had issues with the numerous times I've done it and it's not hurting anyone it's not like I'm bringing cases and selling them per bottle.

My parents brought back a retarded amount the one time and I have no idea how they got through without them batting an eye.  I mean their bags were so damn heavy because of bottles of wine, it was all for personal consumption and all but it was over the "limit".
 
2014-01-01 12:58:45 PM  

technicolor-misfit: Oh, and he also says there was "raw" material to make other flutes in the case. (I put raw in quotation to denote the fact that we don't know what state the material was in, only that it was not yet carved into an instrument.

"Boujemaa adds some specifics of the case:
What was in the case? they called Bamboo case
1)     11 nays (flutes) made by me some of them in Canada some in US
2)      material to make new nays in the case
3)      flight  AA 0095    Madrid to JFK
4)      time : 12/22/2013   (notice : on 12/23/2013)
5)      Reason :   nays from plants which is agricultural items (so l can't play nay)"


http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2014/01/my-smashed-instrument s- brought-peace-and-joy.html


Neither TFA, the linked article within TFA, nor any other source I've read said he had raw materials in the bag with him. Those should have been destroyed. The carved flutes should not have been destroyed. Got a source for that?
 
2014-01-01 12:59:01 PM  
Aren't silk, cotton, flax, and leather also agricultural products?  If so, shouldn't travelers' clothes be confiscated and destroyed at the borders?  Especially if they belong to hot chicks?
 
2014-01-01 12:59:12 PM  

AgentKGB: Agricultural products...


Good god, there are children that readthese articles
 
2014-01-01 12:59:44 PM  

technicolor-misfit: To add to my last post, why is the guy being coy about what the flutes were made of?

If it were me, and I were launching an internet outrage party, I'd lay my farking case out like Matlock, listing each and every flute and the type of wood or bamboo that they were made from and the pertinent import laws showing that they should NOT have been subject to any sort of ban.

And yet, he's just:

"The ney flute can be made with bamboo. Is that agricultural?"

Which sounds like some high schooler's attempt to be clever. "Yeah, you saw me drinking out of a Jim Beam bottle. But, how do you KNOW it was Jim Beam? It might have been an empty Jim Beam bottle that I poured sweet tea into!"


High schooler and lawyer logic are not so far apart. It is the government's job to prove their case. A cop can testify that it looked like a Jim Beam bottle. But the judge or jury is going to want to see the bottle.  If they destroyed the evidence, it is usually best for the defendant to just stfu
 
2014-01-01 01:00:03 PM  

Endive Wombat: By that logic, jeans which are made of cotton would be an agricultural product too.

Sooo...sorry folks, no pants at the airport.


www.cybergorillas.com

Not so fast...
 
2014-01-01 01:00:31 PM  

WTFDYW: Might have something to do with the Emerald Ash Borer. We're not even allowed to haul firewood from one county to another in most areas.


More likely it has to do with the Canadian-US softwood lumber dispute. If they weren't allowed in the country (or out of it) why not just allow them to be shipped elsewhere instead of seizing and destroying them? With an obvious art object there's a level of assholery about.
 
2014-01-01 01:01:03 PM  

redmid17: Bamboo grows up to 3" a day. You're going to have to trim or split it to get the rough size you want to carve. Otherwise you are going to be making a gigantic flute.


wouldn't splitting it mess up the shape, thus making it difficult or impossible to make a flute out of it.  Seems like it wood (heh!) but I really don't know.
 
2014-01-01 01:01:48 PM  
If you want to see outrage, wait until they apply this logic to hunting rifle stocks.
 
2014-01-01 01:02:16 PM  

redmid17: technicolor-misfit: redmid17: I don't have to be a psychic. I'm expecting the government to follow some sort of method, a due process maybe, to determine whether or not these instruments violated some import law, which by CBP guidelines are to allow these kind of instruments into the country.

And yet, you have no way of knowing that they didn't. You have a one-sided story that's long on outrage and short on facts and details... which you are conveniently filling in with your imagination according to your own bias.

The government has been given a chance to comment. They haven't. I'm haranguing them for not providing a reason. That's entirely their doing. If they had a legitimate reason, they were in the right.



Well, given that the story broke on New Years Eve, well after business hours, and it's been a whopping 19 hours since it was published, I can certainly see why it's reasonable to conclude that they're being evasive as a clear sign of guilt, rather than you know... it's a very busy time for them, and they probably have a lot of irons in the fire, and even in the best circumstances, something like this would generally require a fair amount of time for an organization to investigate, gather the relevant details, make an assessment of what transpired, and respond to.
 
2014-01-01 01:02:45 PM  

Fano: Endive Wombat: By that logic, jeans which are made of cotton would be an agricultural product too.

Sooo...sorry folks, no pants at the airport.

[www.cybergorillas.com image 500x447]

Not so fast...


Yup, can't fly by the seat of your pants if you got no pants.
 
2014-01-01 01:02:59 PM  

Lee451: [userserve-ak.last.fm image 500x590]
Does not approve


+1 Came here for this. Disappointed it took so long.

/snot is running down his nose
 
2014-01-01 01:04:00 PM  

Sticky Hands: redmid17: Bamboo grows up to 3" a day. You're going to have to trim or split it to get the rough size you want to carve. Otherwise you are going to be making a gigantic flute.

wouldn't splitting it mess up the shape, thus making it difficult or impossible to make a flute out of it.  Seems like it wood (heh!) but I really don't know.


Like I said, I'm not Nick Offerman but you'd need to trim a bamboo plant/shoot at some point unless you found a shoot that was roughly the size you want it to be.
 
2014-01-01 01:07:24 PM  

pyrotek85: Por que tan serioso: pyrotek85: pueblonative: So his ignorance of what is in the laws should be an excuse.  Wonder if that's ever been ruled on by the courts?

I agree with that in principle, but how far can you take it when we have tens of thousands of laws? Yeah, laws that are  malum in se in nature you don't have an excuse for not knowing, but most of this crap is  malum prohibitum. There's no way to know about every obscure law, or when TSA is suddenly to going to interpret the law differently on the spot.

Know how I know you are a 1L?

A what?


He's calling you a first-year law student (hence 1L) for using Latin and making what he perceives to be a bad argument.

In other words. typical dismissive Fark behavior.
 
2014-01-01 01:08:28 PM  

badhatharry: technicolor-misfit: To add to my last post, why is the guy being coy about what the flutes were made of?

If it were me, and I were launching an internet outrage party, I'd lay my farking case out like Matlock, listing each and every flute and the type of wood or bamboo that they were made from and the pertinent import laws showing that they should NOT have been subject to any sort of ban.

And yet, he's just:

"The ney flute can be made with bamboo. Is that agricultural?"

Which sounds like some high schooler's attempt to be clever. "Yeah, you saw me drinking out of a Jim Beam bottle. But, how do you KNOW it was Jim Beam? It might have been an empty Jim Beam bottle that I poured sweet tea into!"

High schooler and lawyer logic are not so far apart. It is the government's job to prove their case. A cop can testify that it looked like a Jim Beam bottle. But the judge or jury is going to want to see the bottle.  If they destroyed the evidence, it is usually best for the defendant to just stfu



Sure... but we're not in a court of law, and for me, his coyness casts a shadow of doubt on the reliability of his claims... which was my point.

If he's got nothing to hide, and is indeed in the right, why does he not lay his case out completely and clearly?

In THIS story, the customs agents are the defendants on trial for wanton and baseless destruction of personal property.
 
2014-01-01 01:12:30 PM  
That is so bizarre. Last year I flew back to the US from Indonesia with a bag packed full of local wood carvings, and the TSA didn't even ask about them.
 
2014-01-01 01:12:44 PM  

technicolor-misfit: badhatharry: technicolor-misfit: To add to my last post, why is the guy being coy about what the flutes were made of?

If it were me, and I were launching an internet outrage party, I'd lay my farking case out like Matlock, listing each and every flute and the type of wood or bamboo that they were made from and the pertinent import laws showing that they should NOT have been subject to any sort of ban.

And yet, he's just:

"The ney flute can be made with bamboo. Is that agricultural?"

Which sounds like some high schooler's attempt to be clever. "Yeah, you saw me drinking out of a Jim Beam bottle. But, how do you KNOW it was Jim Beam? It might have been an empty Jim Beam bottle that I poured sweet tea into!"

High schooler and lawyer logic are not so far apart. It is the government's job to prove their case. A cop can testify that it looked like a Jim Beam bottle. But the judge or jury is going to want to see the bottle.  If they destroyed the evidence, it is usually best for the defendant to just stfu


Sure... but we're not in a court of law, and for me, his coyness casts a shadow of doubt on the reliability of his claims... which was my point.

If he's got nothing to hide, and is indeed in the right, why does he not lay his case out completely and clearly?

In THIS story, the customs agents are the defendants on trial for wanton and baseless destruction of personal property.


They are defendants asserting an affirmative defense. They need to present evidence and they need to achieve the preponderance of evidence being in their favor to "be innocent."
 
2014-01-01 01:13:27 PM  
Typical capricious inconsistent behavior.   If we ran the stock market like we enforce our laws we would be a collapsed economy with little hope.
 
2014-01-01 01:13:51 PM  
www.roundtree7.com
can we build a bridge out of em'?
 
2014-01-01 01:13:58 PM  
Something doesn't quite pass the smell test here. Very few finished wood products are prohibited by the USDA, unless they are very specific species or from very specific countries. And CBP only enforces USDA regs with respect to agricultural products. Just because it was wooden wouldn't trigger destruction.
 
2014-01-01 01:14:13 PM  

redmid17: technicolor-misfit: Oh, and he also says there was "raw" material to make other flutes in the case. (I put raw in quotation to denote the fact that we don't know what state the material was in, only that it was not yet carved into an instrument.

"Boujemaa adds some specifics of the case:
What was in the case? they called Bamboo case
1)     11 nays (flutes) made by me some of them in Canada some in US
2)      material to make new nays in the case
3)      flight  AA 0095    Madrid to JFK
4)      time : 12/22/2013   (notice : on 12/23/2013)
5)      Reason :   nays from plants which is agricultural items (so l can't play nay)"


http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2014/01/my-smashed-instrument s- brought-peace-and-joy.html

Neither TFA, the linked article within TFA, nor any other source I've read said he had raw materials in the bag with him. Those should have been destroyed. The carved flutes should not have been destroyed. Got a source for that?


It's there in the link I posted... right there above your reply.

"The flute virtuoso Boujemaa Razgui, whose instruments were seized and destroyed by US Customs at JFK Airport, has been in touch with us again to thank Slipped Disc for its support. His English is not fluent or precise - it may, perhaps, have perplexed Customs agents - but there is no mistaking Boujemaa's sincerity or his pain when writing about his hand-crafted neys (or nays).

Here's what he writes, sharing with us a unique picture of the precious, lovingly crafted neys:

'
I have  such great memories with these nays through the past years, from culture to any moment that I remember.
Of course l will not hurt any body  with nays. They were my huge art connection with North America and Europe, through churches, synagogues (all of them in Montreal and almost all in Toronto), universities, colleges, theaters, com.centers , mosques, all kind of ceremonies , marriages, helulas , barMetzvahs, you name it.
Crossing the US in my travels, l got to educate myself, meet other people and exchange ideas.
Boujemaa adds some specifics of the case:
What was in the case? they called Bamboo case
1)     11 nays (flutes) made by me some of them in Canada some in US
2)      material to make new nays in the case
3)      flight  AA 0095    Madrid to JFK
4)      time : 12/22/2013   (notice : on 12/23/2013)
5)      Reason :   nays from plants which is agricultural items (so l can't play nay)'"


According to the site HE is the direct source for that information.

And if the instruments were packed with "raw" materials, that likely gives (at the very least) greater concern that if the raw material is contaminated by pests, then the instruments may well be contaminated by those pests too.
 
2014-01-01 01:19:02 PM  
He should have just eaten them before bringing them in...
hilahcooking.com

mmmmm, flautas...
 
2014-01-01 01:19:11 PM  

redmid17: technicolor-misfit: badhatharry: technicolor-misfit: To add to my last post, why is the guy being coy about what the flutes were made of?

If it were me, and I were launching an internet outrage party, I'd lay my farking case out like Matlock, listing each and every flute and the type of wood or bamboo that they were made from and the pertinent import laws showing that they should NOT have been subject to any sort of ban.

And yet, he's just:

"The ney flute can be made with bamboo. Is that agricultural?"

Which sounds like some high schooler's attempt to be clever. "Yeah, you saw me drinking out of a Jim Beam bottle. But, how do you KNOW it was Jim Beam? It might have been an empty Jim Beam bottle that I poured sweet tea into!"

High schooler and lawyer logic are not so far apart. It is the government's job to prove their case. A cop can testify that it looked like a Jim Beam bottle. But the judge or jury is going to want to see the bottle.  If they destroyed the evidence, it is usually best for the defendant to just stfu


Sure... but we're not in a court of law, and for me, his coyness casts a shadow of doubt on the reliability of his claims... which was my point.

If he's got nothing to hide, and is indeed in the right, why does he not lay his case out completely and clearly?

In THIS story, the customs agents are the defendants on trial for wanton and baseless destruction of personal property.

They are defendants asserting an affirmative defense. They need to present evidence and they need to achieve the preponderance of evidence being in their favor to "be innocent."



They haven't asserted ANY defense, nor been given reasonable time to respond. We have still only heard a one-sided accusation that's not long on actual details.

They should not be presumed "guilty until they prove themselves innocent."
 
2014-01-01 01:19:51 PM  

pueblonative: So in one article, he's saying that he got a note. In another he says that the customs official took it out in front of him. Hmm, seems we have an unreliable narrator here.


I don't see the phrase "in front of him" in the article you linked to. All I see is:

Boujemaa Razgui, a flute virtuoso who lives in New York and works with many US ensembles, was returning to base over the holiday when Customs officials at Kennedy Airport asked to see his instruments.
...
At JFK, the officials removed and smashed each and every one of his instruments. No reason was given.


Now, I suppose you could say that his claim of what they did (smashed the flutes) implies he was there to see it. Except that is not a quote from him.
 
2014-01-01 01:19:58 PM  
assets.sbnation.com
 
2014-01-01 01:20:59 PM  

technicolor-misfit: redmid17: technicolor-misfit: Oh, and he also says there was "raw" material to make other flutes in the case. (I put raw in quotation to denote the fact that we don't know what state the material was in, only that it was not yet carved into an instrument.

"Boujemaa adds some specifics of the case:
What was in the case? they called Bamboo case
1)     11 nays (flutes) made by me some of them in Canada some in US
2)      material to make new nays in the case
3)      flight  AA 0095    Madrid to JFK
4)      time : 12/22/2013   (notice : on 12/23/2013)
5)      Reason :   nays from plants which is agricultural items (so l can't play nay)"


http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2014/01/my-smashed-instrument s- brought-peace-and-joy.html

Neither TFA, the linked article within TFA, nor any other source I've read said he had raw materials in the bag with him. Those should have been destroyed. The carved flutes should not have been destroyed. Got a source for that?

It's there in the link I posted... right there above your reply.

"The flute virtuoso Boujemaa Razgui, whose instruments were seized and destroyed by US Customs at JFK Airport, has been in touch with us again to thank Slipped Disc for its support. His English is not fluent or precise - it may, perhaps, have perplexed Customs agents - but there is no mistaking Boujemaa's sincerity or his pain when writing about his hand-crafted neys (or nays).

Here's what he writes, sharing with us a unique picture of the precious, lovingly crafted neys:

'
I have  such great memories with these nays through the past years, from culture to any moment that I remember.
Of course l will not hurt any body  with nays. They were my huge art connection with North America and Europe, through churches, synagogues (all of them in Montreal and almost all in Toronto), universities, colleges, theaters, com.centers , mosques, all kind of ceremonies , marriages, helulas , barMetzvahs, you name it.
Crossing the US in my travels, l got to educa ...


Well they were definitely right to destroy the raw material. The picture in your link shows sealed wood as far as I can tell, so I doubt any pests would go after them. Wouldn't CBP need to destroy the rest of the contents of the suitcase if there was a suspected bug infestation though?
 
2014-01-01 01:22:50 PM  

technicolor-misfit: redmid17: technicolor-misfit: badhatharry: technicolor-misfit: To add to my last post, why is the guy being coy about what the flutes were made of?

If it were me, and I were launching an internet outrage party, I'd lay my farking case out like Matlock, listing each and every flute and the type of wood or bamboo that they were made from and the pertinent import laws showing that they should NOT have been subject to any sort of ban.

And yet, he's just:

"The ney flute can be made with bamboo. Is that agricultural?"

Which sounds like some high schooler's attempt to be clever. "Yeah, you saw me drinking out of a Jim Beam bottle. But, how do you KNOW it was Jim Beam? It might have been an empty Jim Beam bottle that I poured sweet tea into!"

High schooler and lawyer logic are not so far apart. It is the government's job to prove their case. A cop can testify that it looked like a Jim Beam bottle. But the judge or jury is going to want to see the bottle.  If they destroyed the evidence, it is usually best for the defendant to just stfu


Sure... but we're not in a court of law, and for me, his coyness casts a shadow of doubt on the reliability of his claims... which was my point.

If he's got nothing to hide, and is indeed in the right, why does he not lay his case out completely and clearly?

In THIS story, the customs agents are the defendants on trial for wanton and baseless destruction of personal property.

They are defendants asserting an affirmative defense. They need to present evidence and they need to achieve the preponderance of evidence being in their favor to "be innocent."


They haven't asserted ANY defense, nor been given reasonable time to respond. We have still only heard a one-sided accusation that's not long on actual details.

They should not be presumed "guilty until they prove themselves innocent."


They've already admitted to destroying the flutes. Now it's just a matter of determining whether or not it was justified, hence the affirmative defense.
 
2014-01-01 01:23:24 PM  

Paul Baumer: [asset.soup.io image 500x495]obligatory


Obligatory?

Never saw it, but that is awesome.
 
2014-01-01 01:23:50 PM  

technicolor-misfit:
9 times out 10 these stories go from "OUTRAGE!!!" to "Oh, well that's actually pretty reasonable." within a day or so when all the details come out. Unfortunately, 9 out of 10 people who get "OUTRAGED!!!" by these stories have an ideological axe to grind and refuse to acknowledege the new information or have short attention spans and have already moved to the next "outrage du jour."


Fox News and Daily Mail playbook that is, right there.
 
2014-01-01 01:25:21 PM  

redmid17: Sticky Hands: redmid17: Bamboo grows up to 3" a day. You're going to have to trim or split it to get the rough size you want to carve. Otherwise you are going to be making a gigantic flute.

wouldn't splitting it mess up the shape, thus making it difficult or impossible to make a flute out of it.  Seems like it wood (heh!) but I really don't know.

Like I said, I'm not Nick Offerman but you'd need to trim a bamboo plant/shoot at some point unless you found a shoot that was roughly the size you want it to be.



 When I think of "split" I'm thinking of something like this:
 www.guaduabamboo.com

while a flute looks something like this:
image.rakuten.co.jp


If the bamboo also has to be split in addition to being dry, then the second picture does not qualify.
Maybe that's what landed this guy's work in trouble.

Borders can be nasty though, I remember a bit from some import/export training where the trainer talked about having to pay a $90,000 fine to the Canadian government on some piece of equipment that they had LOANED to Canada for the Olympics because of some paperwork mistake. I don't remember if they managed to get the equipment back.
 
2014-01-01 01:25:31 PM  

some_beer_drinker: [www.roundtree7.com image 800x441]
can we build a bridge out of em'?


*shakes fist
 
2014-01-01 01:26:12 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: pyrotek85: Por que tan serioso: pyrotek85: pueblonative: So his ignorance of what is in the laws should be an excuse.  Wonder if that's ever been ruled on by the courts?

I agree with that in principle, but how far can you take it when we have tens of thousands of laws? Yeah, laws that are  malum in se in nature you don't have an excuse for not knowing, but most of this crap is  malum prohibitum. There's no way to know about every obscure law, or when TSA is suddenly to going to interpret the law differently on the spot.

Know how I know you are a 1L?

A what?

He's calling you a first-year law student (hence 1L) for using Latin and making what he perceives to be a bad argument.

In other words. typical dismissive Fark behavior.


Oh, I'm not lol, and I hope I'm not coming off off as one. I think those two phrases are pretty basic principles of law that anyone should be familiar with though, and it helps illustrate my point that it's not realistic for people to know every arbitrary law under the sun. And again, even if you did, they can still reinterpret them at will. Then when you complain, people on the internet will say that you should have known better.

I don't know if the guy was in the wrong or not, but if it was an honest mistake like not declaring or something, then I don't think they should be heavy handed about it. They don't think he's a drug smuggler.
 
2014-01-01 01:27:27 PM  
Wood is an agricultural product.  What's so hard to understand about that?  Just because it's been processed into a finished item it doesn't cease to be an agricultural product.  Just like when cotton is processed into clothing, it's still an agricultural product.  Or at least that's the justification they used last week when I flew into Boston last week and they took my pants away from me.
 
2014-01-01 01:35:32 PM  

edmo: So much for traveling with my guitar.

Seriously, I'm with the "These guys are assholes" crowd here and you "it's the law" types should just go back to your bedrooms and let the NSA continue filming you or whatever.


Laws are generally dreamed up by overpaid, tiny-minded bureaucrats, who never have to actually be in the situations where their precious laws inconvenience them.

An example is those speed bumps that the municipal seat-warmers insist on installing in parking lots. There's zero evidence these are effective in reducing injuries (Just speak to paramedics how they hate driving their ambulances over these things!).

And those officials that enforce these sorts of rules generally know the rules are asinine, but they happily throw judgement to the wind when they enforce them, because, hey, it's so fulfilling just to harass people!
 
2014-01-01 01:37:47 PM  

redmid17: Well they were definitely right to destroy the raw material. The picture in your link shows sealed wood as far as I can tell, so I doubt any pests would go after them. Wouldn't CBP need to destroy the rest of the contents of the suitcase if there was a suspected bug infestation though?



I would think so. But, I don't know enough about it to know what should be destroyed and what shouldn't be destroyed in regard to any of it.

I don't know what the law is, what the flutes where made of, what the "raw" material was or exactly how "raw" it was, whether any of it (instruments or material) was rare or endangered. I don't know what pests may have posed a danger, what sort of danger they pose, or what the likelihood is that any of those possible pests might infest what materials or to what degree, nor how difficult it is to conclusively rule out the presence of such pests.

In short, I can't make a determination regarding the justifiability of the actions of the customs agents because I am an untrained, uninformed layman who lacks the necessary expertise to offer an informed opinion with any semblance of knowing what the hell I'm talking about, and neither so is everyone else in this thread.
 
2014-01-01 01:38:09 PM  

redmid17: Brosephus: redmid17: Brosephus: r1niceboy: pueblonative: r1niceboy: RussianPooper: pueblonative: It's almost as if you have to consult customs laws when you travel abroad.

Only 4 posts to get to the asshole apologist.

If there's one thing about natives of pueblos, they certainly know how to be submissive to the point of Ned Beatty.

Here's a experiment: go to another country bringing prohibited items and try out the "I didn't know the laws" excuse while asserting your rights and screaming about the fairness of the situation.  Then come back and tell us how many turkish prison cell rapes you experienced.

I've been to lots of countries, none of which took perverse pleasure in enforcing asinine laws. Now, please, explain the harm that a carved piece of wood could do. Please feel free to compare it to, say, a species of invasive fish.

http://www.emeraldashborer.info/#sthash.dZwYnM8p.dpbs

http://www.ohiochapterisa.org/news/87453/

How exactly would it be difficult for CBP to examine carved wooden flutes for the presence of beetles? It's not as if they were being brought into the country by truck because they weighed several tons.

It's not difficult at all.  They would be visually inspected, and if one even has a hint of damage by pest, they would all be destroyed to prohibit the possibility of any pests being introduced into this country.  Likewise, if there are any indicators, such as exoskeleton that has been molted, they will be destroyed even without the presence of the pest.  After pouring several billions of dollars into fighting invasive species, the government thought it would be better to prevent them from entering as opposed to spending billions fighting them after they arrive.

Check out information on the Khapra beetle, Emerald Ash Borer, Mediterranean Fruit Fly, Gypsy Moth, and other invasive species that has cost us billions of dollars.

I don't have to read up on invasive species. I'm well aware of how pervasive they can be (asian carp, zebra mussels, pythons in south florida, et al). My point is, they'd have at least told him if they saw evidence of any of that (or should have told him).

So CBP destroyed his flutes. Possible explanations have been 1) Lacey Act violation or 2) Invasive species, but we haven't seen any proof CBP suspected or proved either. Basically we have a guy whose livelihood has been ruined because CBP had a reason but was too sickish to explain why or just sickish.

Does this strike anyone as acceptable?


So, just because the evidence isn't presented in these 2 highly biased articles, you assume it doesn't exist?
 
2014-01-01 01:38:24 PM  
content6.flixster.com
 
2014-01-01 01:39:16 PM  
technicolor-mistitand neither so is everyone else in this thread 

FTFM.
 
2014-01-01 01:40:45 PM  

machodonkeywrestler: redmid17: Brosephus: redmid17: Brosephus: r1niceboy: pueblonative: r1niceboy: RussianPooper: pueblonative: It's almost as if you have to consult customs laws when you travel abroad.

Only 4 posts to get to the asshole apologist.

If there's one thing about natives of pueblos, they certainly know how to be submissive to the point of Ned Beatty.

Here's a experiment: go to another country bringing prohibited items and try out the "I didn't know the laws" excuse while asserting your rights and screaming about the fairness of the situation.  Then come back and tell us how many turkish prison cell rapes you experienced.

I've been to lots of countries, none of which took perverse pleasure in enforcing asinine laws. Now, please, explain the harm that a carved piece of wood could do. Please feel free to compare it to, say, a species of invasive fish.

http://www.emeraldashborer.info/#sthash.dZwYnM8p.dpbs

http://www.ohiochapterisa.org/news/87453/

How exactly would it be difficult for CBP to examine carved wooden flutes for the presence of beetles? It's not as if they were being brought into the country by truck because they weighed several tons.

It's not difficult at all.  They would be visually inspected, and if one even has a hint of damage by pest, they would all be destroyed to prohibit the possibility of any pests being introduced into this country.  Likewise, if there are any indicators, such as exoskeleton that has been molted, they will be destroyed even without the presence of the pest.  After pouring several billions of dollars into fighting invasive species, the government thought it would be better to prevent them from entering as opposed to spending billions fighting them after they arrive.

Check out information on the Khapra beetle, Emerald Ash Borer, Mediterranean Fruit Fly, Gypsy Moth, and other invasive species that has cost us billions of dollars.

I don't have to read up on invasive species. I'm well aware of how pervasive they can be (asian carp, zeb ...


The Boston Globe article was highly, highly biased, let me tell you. The CBP told him "We broke your shiat. Call the Department of Agriculture."
 
Displayed 50 of 313 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report