Re: [MV] GL requiring demil 1 yr after sale

From: Ryan M Gill (rmgill@mindspring.com)
Date: Mon Apr 28 2003 - 09:01:42 PDT


At 10:42 AM -0400 4/28/03, Steve Grammont wrote:
>
>The Government clearly stated that they wished the Demil bill be passed
>so that they could go back and grab stuff that was sold, legally, but by
>accident. For example, the lister who detailed what appears to have been
>a FLIR system he bought (or something like that) which never should have
>been sold. But of course the legislation was horribly vauge which is
>unfortunately the norm. Those who pass legislation love to give
>themselves as much freedom of action as possible.

It seems like they have a mechanism for this already as evidenced by
the above story. Additional legislation to make it easy and a simple
process to screw over a tax payer to rectify a mistake by a
government employee is over the top.

-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill                         '01 Honda Insight -
- rmgill@SPAmindspring.com                          '85 CB700S -
- ryan.gill@SPAMturner.com               '76 Chevy Monte Carlo -
- www.mindspring.com/~rmgill                   '72 Honda CB750 -
-                                     '60 Daimler FV701H Mk2/3 -
-                                  '42 Daimler Scout Car Mk II -
-             I speak not for CNN, nor they for me             -
----------------------------------------------------------------
-        The director of Home Security encourages you to       - 
-          turn in your neighbor & spy on your friends.        -
----------------------------------------------------------------
-  C&R-FFL  /  Protect your electronic rights!    \ EFF-ACLU   -
- SAF & NRA/  Join the EFF!  http://www.eff.org/   \ DoD #0780 -         
----------------------------------------------------------------


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:18:40 PDT