PACT Act [peaceful discussion, please.]

[cj]

oh no no no no they only think they do when ever they do look at what happens just look through history one will see demacraps destroy every thing they touch

[chadizzy1]

oh no no no no they only think they do when ever they do look at what happens just look through history one will see demacraps destroy every thing they touch

Peaceful discussion.... *see title*

[texasmade]

its more peaceful than demoncraps

[cj]

lol i was being peace full 8)

[Redbeard]

C'mon now cj, the Democrats know what's best for you.
Just trust them, and surrender your liberty. Its best in
the long run, for everybody ya know.

Both parties would like you to surrender your liberty. Not just Democrats.

See: PATRIOT Act, Bush's illegal wiretapping, etc.

[snupy]

Both parties would like you to surrender your liberty. Not just Democrats.

See: PATRIOT Act, Bush's illegal wiretapping, etc.

Both parties do the will of their constituents, who are the industries and corporations that fund their election campaigns, not that this fact will stop anyone from falling for the false dichotomy of right vs left (as if we even HAVE a left in the US) or repub vs dem.

[Judge Faust]

Nov 5th is just the committee vote, will still need to be passed by the full Senate IF they get to it in time, will then need to be signed by the President, and then still 90 days. No company will lose money by stopping to ship until they absolutely have to.

Plus, expect someone will go to court over t. Could end up being years before it gos into effect even IF passed.

That's what I was thinking. Either someone will sue or they'll find a loophole or something. No reason to abandon hope yet.

Not quite... Assuming that it passes and is signed, it goes into effect that instant. It stays in effect throughout any litigation - unless you can convince a District Court to enter an injunction against the Act. But on what grounds? Like I said, it looks solid.

And who's going to sue, anyway? General could - but will it? Are the decreased earnings from the US market worth the millions of dollars that a major lawsuit would cost? I doubt it.

Or is one of us going to sue? Will you? I won't - I don't relish the idea of blowing several good years of my life on a meritless lawsuit. Honestly, I'd rather just pay more and get on with my life.

Basically, don't get your hopes up for the judicial option. The only real hope is that the bill is too obscure to gather much support in D.C. If it's not a priority, it may well be pushed back till next year. Hell, maybe it won't even be reintroduced if that happens...

[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

[BabaBooey]

S. 1147:

I try to stay out of this discussion, mainly because I am doing my own research on it and really don't need to hear other people's "opinions", no offense.

Here is the truth....

-This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills and resolutions first go to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills and resolutions never make it out of committee.

-Not to mention the previous PACT act got stalled. Plus the bill is sponsored by Herbert (Herb) Kohl, U.S. Senator, Wisconsin. Herbert Kohl has sponsored 215 bills since Jan 14, 1991 of which 190 haven't made it out of committee and 1 were successfully enacted.

-Looking at this Senators other current sponsored bills, he seems like a quack to me.

The only time I would even start to worry is if it makes it to the Senate vote, then it still has to pass the House Vote. Personally, I think way too many people are way too paranoid.

Just my two cents.

[tom502]

Paranoid maybe, but not without reason. I hope nothing comes from it, and perhaps nothing will. But as an adult American citizen, just the idea that powers that be want to stop me from purchasing and using a legal product, as a legal adult, irks me. We have so many more important real things going wrong with this nation, and some holier than thou bufoons actively seek to prevent legal adults purchasing a legal product can rightly set some paranoia into action.

[Snusdog]

Re: S. 1147:

I try to stay out of this discussion, mainly because I am doing my own research on it and really don't need to hear other people's "opinions", no offense.

Here is the truth....

-This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills and resolutions first go to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills and resolutions never make it out of committee.

-Not to mention the previous PACT act got stalled. Plus the bill is sponsored by Herbert (Herb) Kohl, U.S. Senator, Wisconsin. Herbert Kohl has sponsored 215 bills since Jan 14, 1991 of which 190 haven't made it out of committee and 1 were successfully enacted.

-Looking at this Senators other current sponsored bills, he seems like a quack to me.

The only time I would even start to worry is if it makes it to the Senate vote, then it still has to pass the House Vote. Personally, I think way too many people are way too paranoid.

Just my two cents.

Baba, my thoughts exactly (expressed of course with acknowledgment of the predisclosed apathy with which they are likely to be received).

Anyway, it is always good to see another Carolinian on the forum and since I have not done so already, allow me the illustrious privilege of welcoming you aboard. Welcome to the forum.


If it does pass, me and some of the boys are planning to retake Ft. Sumter--- you want in?



:wink:

[ProudMarineDad]

Re: S. 1147:

If it does pass, me and some of the boys are planning to retake Ft. Sumter--- you want in?



:wink:

Do you have to ask?

[Anthony]

Your government at work...

http://judiciary.senate.gov/webcast/livewebcast.cfm

[texasmade]

Your government at work...

http://judiciary.senate.gov/webcast/livewebcast.cfm

it works?

[NorSnuser]

The way this is going by the time they get to PACT they won't have enough present for a roll call. They're all probably out having a cigarette. :roll: