PACT Act [peaceful discussion, please.]

[Snusdog]

OK let’s say I’m a Swedish vender. Compliance with a law from a country that is not my own will cost me a large portion of my internet business. Non-compliance has zero consequences. Why in the hell would I not just give a different, vague, broadly inclusive description on the customs label and save my business?

I am UPS Sweden or Swedish post. Compliance means that I lose all the sales figures for this portion of the industry. I could care less what the American shirts are doing on their side of the pond. I am responsible for my figures and my territory. Why then would I not turn a blind eye and ask no questions when I pick up the package, especially when there is zero risk to me and zero advantage in complying? Let the boys over in the USA weed it all out since it’s obviously their crusade.

This is not like Lucky Strikes. There are no international trademark laws involved. This is not like the EU ban on snus. The USA is not in the EU.

It is unenforceable.

And on our side of the pond, the expense of policing snus and snuff sales will far out way any advantage gained. Outside of a few confiscated packages (which I was buying for the collectable value of the tins and not the tobacco contents) life will go on. So divide your large orders up to insure that if something is confiscated you will not lose everything.

We shall see

You would think so. I would think so.

I would also think that the Europeans could give a damn less about the Empire's bizarre Cuban embargo.

And yet, here I am, very much unable to order Monte Cristo and Romeo y Julliete snus from Buysnus.

So, yeah... For some reason, they do go out of their way to enforce moronic US laws.

That is a very good point your honor with only one detail that leans in our favor: Monte Cristo is one tin...not the whole damn inventory

[RRK]

I would also think that the Europeans could give a damn less about the Empire's bizarre Cuban embargo.

And yet, here I am, very much unable to order Monte Cristo and Romeo y Julliete snus from Buysnus.

As a cigar lover I am very interested in those brands and I think those names would go a long way for getting snus into cigar shops. Let's hope the embargo goes the way of the dodo.

[tom502]

I have about 100 cans of snus, so I was not prompted to get more, with the Pact possibility, largely due to space limitations. If I had a garage and a deep freezer, it might not be a bad idea just to have a large stock, but I did feel slighly prompted to order some nasal snuffs I wanted, nothing big, just a $20 order, that I did sorta feel, I ought to go on and do it "just in case".

[chadizzy1]

Any updates on the hearing today?

EDIT: Nevermind, found the answer.

S. 1147, Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act of 2009 (Kohl, Leahy, Schumer, Specter, Feinstein, Klobuchar)
Held Over

http://judiciary.senate.gov/

Held over.

[PsychoHazard]

Any updates on the hearing today?

EDIT: Nevermind, found the answer.

S. 1147, Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act of 2009 (Kohl, Leahy, Schumer, Specter, Feinstein, Klobuchar)
Held Over

http://judiciary.senate.gov/

Held over.

PACT was held over until their next meeting, which I am told is in 2 weeks, so we have 2 more weeks to hoard snus. :lol:

[Redbeard]

I have extreme concern because Swedish Snus is the only thing
that can keep me from going back to Cope/Grizzly and all the problems that those can cause.
Most of you ****ers are lucky in that, at the very least, you could buy
Swedish Snus locally if this Democrat-sponsored garbage were to pass.
I would have to drive like a bat outta hell for 2 hours to Nashville just to buy some $6 a tin General. Alabama will be the last place in the universe that Swedish Match starts marketing to.
.

I would think it would be just the opposite. I would think, being involved in all aspects of the smokeless market, SM would know that smokeless has less of a stigma to it in Southern markets. Thus, the easiest snus converts would be in markets where smokeless already has a good hold. Maybe I'm just looking at it wrong.

[sagedil]

There are actually no more meetings scheduled this year, you can see it on their calendar on that link

[RRK]

There are actually no more meetings scheduled this year, you can see it on their calendar on that link

I don't know how it works but when I was watching that meeting and they talked about another bill being held over someone said it would be held over until next week and the chairman said that actually it would be two weeks since they aren't in session next week. But I hope you are right.

[PsychoHazard]

There are actually no more meetings scheduled this year, you can see it on their calendar on that link

If there's no more meetings scheduled this year, I think that makes PACT DOA, doesn't it?

[NorSnuser]

Just in case people are wondering what "held over" means. I've seen this before and it generally means that this bill is dead this Session, especially since there are no further meetings scheduled before the holidays.

Obviously this bill (or a variation of it) could be introduced again next year but I think it is highly unlikely that they will schedule a meeting to discuss it before the Session is over.

Hey, PsychoHazard, where did you hear they were meeting again in two weeks? The schedule is empty as of now, but a meeting can be called three days before it occurs.

I. MEETINGS OF THE COMMITTEE

1. Meetings of the Committee may be called by the Chairman as he may deem necessary on three days' notice of the date, time, place and subject matter of the meeting, or in the alternative with the consent of the Ranking Minority Member, or pursuant to the provision of the Standing Rules of the Senate, as amended.

2. Unless a different date and time are set by the Chairman pursuant to (1) of this section, Committee meetings shall be held beginning at 10:00 a.m. on Thursdays the Senate is in session, which shall be the regular meeting day for the transaction of business.

3. At the request of any member, or by action of the Chairman, a bill, matter, or nomination on the agenda of the Committee may be held over until the next meeting of the Committee or for one week, whichever occurs later.

[sagedil]

That is what I think too, but won't fully relax until the last day of this year's session.

[PsychoHazard]

Hey, PsychoHazard, where did you hear they were meeting again in two weeks? The schedule is empty as of now, but a meeting can be called three days before it occurs.

I forget who had said it, but in one of the threads someone who had watched the webcast of the session said something about them saying they were meeting again in 2 weeks. I don't see it on the schedule either, so maybe someone heard wrong. I was at work at the time, so I didn't get to watch it myself.

[RRK]

Hey, PsychoHazard, where did you hear they were meeting again in two weeks? The schedule is empty as of now, but a meeting can be called three days before it occurs.

I forget who had said it, but in one of the threads someone who had watched the webcast of the session said something about them saying they were meeting again in 2 weeks. I don't see it on the schedule either, so maybe someone heard wrong. I was at work at the time, so I didn't get to watch it myself.

Probably me?

[PsychoHazard]

Hey, PsychoHazard, where did you hear they were meeting again in two weeks? The schedule is empty as of now, but a meeting can be called three days before it occurs.

I forget who had said it, but in one of the threads someone who had watched the webcast of the session said something about them saying they were meeting again in 2 weeks. I don't see it on the schedule either, so maybe someone heard wrong. I was at work at the time, so I didn't get to watch it myself.

Probably me?

I think it might have been, but I was too lazy to look it up and I didn't want to get it wrong. I'm a low-impact elitist. :lol:

[Redbeard]

I'm a low-impact elitist. :lol:

Lol.. Me too. 8)