This hurts my soul...

[lupindub]

Originally Posted by mav1178

I understand your point exactly, contrary to what you may believe.

What was the ridiculousness of this law in question, if I may ask? That's what I am confused about, because you seem to think it's a stupid law and I don't seem to have any issues with it.

-alex

Do you agree or disagree that it is silly, and quite unreasonable to destroy a piece of property worth $15,000, instead of trying to auction it off like they do here in the states?

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by lupindub

Do you agree or disagree that it is silly, and quite unreasonable to destroy a piece of property worth $15,000, instead of trying to auction it off like they do here in the states?

Silly, yes.
Unreasonable, no.

sorry, illegally imported vehicles are almost always crushed by US Customs.

Source: I've seen plenty.

-alex

[mav1178]

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cult...imported-cars/

You don't have to like it. Just saying there's no auction process in the US nor in many other countries.

-alex

[lupindub]

Originally Posted by mav1178

Silly, yes.
Unreasonable, no.

sorry, illegally imported vehicles are almost always crushed by US Customs.

Source: I've seen plenty.

-alex

So what the hell are you arguing about if you think it's silly as well, which was my point from the beginning. The man could have made a pretty penny while saving resources (material to make the Ducati) if it wasn't for a silly law that calls for illegally imported cars to be crushed.

[lupindub]

Originally Posted by mav1178

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cult...imported-cars/

You don't have to like it. Just saying there's no auction process in the US nor in many other countries.

-alex

Isn't this further proving my point of the ridiculous bureaucracy, since the government ALREADY auctions off vehicles that have been confiscated by criminals (domestically)? So why not auction off illegally imported vehicles as well, since we already have a system set up to auction off vehicles we impound from drug dealers, etc.? One word - bureaucracy, end of discussion.

Source: https://www.usa.gov/auctions-and-sales

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by lupindub

So what the hell are you arguing about if you think it's silly as well, which was my point from the beginning. The man could have made a pretty penny while saving resources (material to make the Ducati) if it wasn't for a silly law that calls for illegally imported cars to be crushed.

Hey Lup the law does not say it "must be crushed". It says it must be either shipped back and brought in properly or crushed. The owner of the vehicle has the choice here and he is the one that decided that it be crushed. He could have simply shipped it back and done the paperwork like he should have in the first place.
Some governments have very strict rules on what cars can and can not be brought in (the US has some of the most stringent). These rules ensure that all vehicles at least start out safe and compliant and protect the auto industry in that country from cheap imports. Can you imagine the roads in the US if anybody that wanted to could bring in any vehicle they wanted whenever they wanted?
Laws like this may seem silly on the surface but there are some very deep reaching and reasonable purposes behind them.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by lupindub

So what the hell are you arguing about if you think it's silly as well, which was my point from the beginning. The man could have made a pretty penny while saving resources (material to make the Ducati) if it wasn't for a silly law that calls for illegally imported cars to be crushed.

My point is not about bureaucracy. It's about a law that is clearly stated, that the bike owner clearly did not think was a big issue (or worth his time), and he let the bike be crushed.

Australia is way better than the US, at least they allow you the option of exporting and then reimporting with the proper agency. If some rich guy wants to let their properly be destroyed, it clearly was not worth much to them to begin with.

Many of us want these things brought in because we fancy them. It would also help to understand the laws.

But yes, government bureaucracy is what you are worked up over. We definitely need to do away with it, but only for cars.

Originally Posted by lupindub

Isn't this further proving my point of the ridiculous bureaucracy, since the government ALREADY auctions off vehicles that have been confiscated by criminals (domestically)? So why not auction off illegally imported vehicles as well, since we already have a system set up to auction off vehicles we impound from drug dealers, etc.? One word - bureaucracy, end of discussion.

Source: https://www.usa.gov/auctions-and-sales

Auction off to... who? Others who still cannot own or legally possess it since it was brought in illegally? Or auction it off overseas?

-alex

[lupindub]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Hey Lup the law does not say it "must be crushed". It says it must be either shipped back and brought in properly or crushed. The owner of the vehicle has the choice here and he is the one that decided that it be crushed. He could have simply shipped it back and done the paperwork like he should have in the first place.
Some governments have very strict rules on what cars can and can not be brought in (the US has some of the most stringent). These rules ensure that all vehicles at least start out safe and compliant and protect the auto industry in that country from cheap imports. Can you imagine the roads in the US if anybody that wanted to could bring in any vehicle they wanted whenever they wanted?
Laws like this may seem silly on the surface but there are some very deep reaching and reasonable purposes behind them.

So why not make it "it must be either shipped back and brought in properly or we AUCTION it"? Seems like the more reasonable proposition to me.

Referring back to mavs article he posted, that stuff about safety is just a sham - lobbyists created it to protect the domestic car market - I don't know if this is true or not, but it sure sounds like American politics to me.

Article quote source: "Our problem is with the law that makes this enforcement necessary in the first place. It's touted as protecting American drivers from cars that don't meet our country's crash-safety requirements, but as anyone who's researched the gray market can tell you, that's not why it came about. It was written by automakers and lobbyists to prevent folks from, say, buying a Mercedes in Germany and shipping it here for less than what it would cost to buy from a U.S. dealer."

[lupindub]

Originally Posted by mav1178

Auction off to... who? Others who still cannot own or legally possess it since it was brought in illegally? Or auction it off overseas?

-alex

Uhh we have neighbors both upstairs and downstairs in the United States case. Transportation is cheap nowadays, even if we were speaking of having to ship overseas. Whatever it costs to ship, handle, and process, it will be nowhere near the price of that bike. I still stand by my statement of auctioning off expensive imported exotics instead of crushing them (if it comes this far), and bureaucracy is what is stopping us from doing so. Can we agree on this?

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by lupindub

Uhh we have neighbors both upstairs and downstairs in the United States case. Transportation is cheap nowadays, even if we were speaking of having to ship overseas. Whatever it costs to ship, handle, and process, it will be nowhere near the price of that bike. I still stand by my statement of auctioning off expensive imported exotics instead of crushing them (if it comes this far), and bureaucracy is what is stopping us from doing so. Can we agree on this?

That's not how the law (nor sovereignty) works in this case, but sure, auctioning off seized cars without any way for the bidders to own the cars is a great way to solve a problem.

I think it's better if we just threw them into a volcano as peace offerings.

-alex

[mdm]

Originally Posted by lupindub

Uhh we have neighbors both upstairs and downstairs in the United States case.

Aren't standards for vehicles pretty similar in the US and it's neighbors? So whatever is not legal in the US likely wouldn't be legal in Canada and Mexico either?

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by mdm

Aren't standards for vehicles pretty similar in the US and it's neighbors? So whatever is not legal in the US likely wouldn't be legal in Canada and Mexico either?

Well, we are a bit more open but odds are whoever got it at auction would have to ship it back to the country of origin and do the proper paper work to have it approved or have it destroyed so we are right back to square one.
Then if you got it approved there would be import fees, tariff, taxes and duty on the new value of it (not the auctioned price) which are very high for somebody bringing in one vehicle. Over all it would cost as much or more than buying a used one here and nobody would want it.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by lupindub

Uhh we have neighbors both upstairs and downstairs in the United States case. Transportation is cheap nowadays, even if we were speaking of having to ship overseas. Whatever it costs to ship, handle, and process, it will be nowhere near the price of that bike. I still stand by my statement of auctioning off expensive imported exotics instead of crushing them (if it comes this far), and bureaucracy is what is stopping us from doing so. Can we agree on this?

So why would the owner not just opt to send it back and do the paperwork?


Also you call it an "expensive" exotic but in the over all scheme of things it is dirt cheap. With how the governments work their auctioning it off would probably lose them money after they paid all the people required to do such a thing. Keep in mind if it was not approved for the original owner it is still not approved for a buyer. What happens if that person doesn't get it approved? Do they take it back and auction it again?

[lupindub]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

So why would the owner not just opt to send it back and do the paperwork?


Also you call it an "expensive" exotic but in the over all scheme of things it is dirt cheap. With how the governments work their auctioning it off would probably lose them money after they paid all the people required to do such a thing. Keep in mind if it was not approved for the original owner it is still not approved for a buyer. What happens if that person doesn't get it approved? Do they take it back and auction it again?

"So why would the owner not just opt to send it back and do the paperwork?"

My guess is as good as yours. There are stubborn people out there just like the Ducati owner in the OP.

As to your second point - isn't what your suggesting almost like an owner of a grocery store buying stuff from his own grocery? Obviously he has to pay money for the food he buys... but the money goes straight back to him. So i'm sure the government doesn't take a hit like ordinary citizens do when they ship THERE own property (in this case the seized Ducati).

As to your other point I don't think its very complicated. For example, if the highest bidder in the auction is not approved for whatever reason, it goes to the second highest bidder etc, etc.