Ginacue popped over ivory, hopefully much or all fake.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kid Dynomite said:
Then every cue maker is guilty if they ever had foreign customers!

In essence, they are saying that the cue maker has to anticipate what the customer plans to do and go!!!

A huge burden and unrealistic!

Kd

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Well look at the FOR SALE section. Sellers don't list disclaimers stating no sale to states that banned ivory commerce and selling out of the country.

I don't care as long as I make money mentality. 85k? Ernie is jumping on that.

You're going to tell me 85k worth of cues and he is not curious as to where they are going?

Its not like this is a high volume business. They know all their customers.
 
Last edited:
dom_poppa said:
You're going to tell me 85k worth of cues and he is not curious as to where they are going?Its not like this is a high volume business. They know all their customers.
Click to expand...

Nobody ever asked me what I was going to do with a cue when I bought it. They have no idea and I would tell them its none of there business. Now, they may know with some high profile customers but certainly not everyone. I know of several cue makers that sold to Asian guys where the cue makers side of the transaction took place at his shop or other domestic location. Of course I'm sure they view things differently now since July 1st.
 
jimmyg said:
In law the term is: "knew or should have known", both are treated the same.
Click to expand...

HawaiianEye said:
If the government wants to know, they will know....one way or another.

I'm quite sure that nobody orders cues worth that much without leaving behind a paper trail and phone call trail.

I don't think the "all Chinese look alike" defense is going to work.
Click to expand...

If a man buys a gun and takes it to a place where it's against the law to have a gun.....
....is the business that sold the gun liable?
 
pt109 said:
If a man buys a gun and takes it to a place where it's against the law to have a gun.....
....is the business that sold the gun liable?
Click to expand...

Yes the business is liable if they sold 85k worth of guns without at least finding out where they were going.

Anyways, a highly illegal contraband to most of the world, a very close deadline of July 1, and the builder gets popped in the same month.
 
Why do you do this to yourself ?

dom_poppa;5624107[COLOR="Red" said:
]Well look at the FOR SALE section. Sellers don't list disclaimers stating no sale to states that banned ivory commerce and selling out of the country[/COLOR].

I don't care as long as I make money mentality. 85k? Ernie is jumping on that.

You're going to tell me 85k worth of cues and he is not curious as to where they are going?

Its not like this is a high volume business. They know all their customers.
Click to expand...



Talking out your neck again .
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=258291
 
CJH said:
Nobody ever asked me what I was going to do with a cue when I bought it. They have no idea and I would tell them its none of there business. Now, they may know with some high profile customers but certainly not everyone. I know of several cue makers that sold to Asian guys where the cue makers side of the transaction took place at his shop or other domestic location. Of course I'm sure they view things differently now since July 1st.
Click to expand...


You're right it's nobody's business but at the same time you have to know where 85k worth of stuff that are deemed illegal in some parts of the world is going.

I am positive he knew where it was going.

Cue makers have a sixth sense when it comes to buyers. Someone buying that many cues from a guy, not a high volume production, has to know.

Cue makers like to know whether someone is a dealer or actual customers too.

Not everday you have a 85k sale unless to a dealer.
 
I know both Ernie and Chady. Both are gentlemen, in my book. I have owned and played with several Ginacues for 15 years, and my current cue, for the last 10 years is my beloved GC. My cue does contain ivory.

I feel just terrible for Ernie. He's always been a "buy the book" guy so this news both surprises and saddens me. As Tony mentioned, I sure hope he was accurate in that his paperwork was in order and that the transaction took place prior to the ban. Still, I'm concerned that if it is the case, under what grounds do the Feds think they have a case? There could be more to this. Or maybe this is just the govt taking a stab in the dark by issuing arrest warrants to force the cuemaker to produce the paperwork. I suppose they have no way of knowing if the ivory is pre ban until we get to this point. If Chady and his partner were arrested for "possession", they surely didn't have copies of Ernie's paperwork. I know as a tax paying citizen, I'd want investigators coming to my shop to see the paperwork before escalating the issue to where we are.

Edit: perhaps the charges pertain to a premeditated attempt to export the ivory (legal in the US) to another country, or to a country where it's prohibited. Perhaps just the attempt at any export is illegal. And maybe Chady, or someone else involved, turned over damaging emails.
 
Last edited:
dom_poppa said:
Yes the business is liable if they sold 85k worth of guns without at least finding out where they were going.

Anyways, a highly illegal contraband to most of the world, a very close deadline of July 1, and the builder gets popped in the same month.
Click to expand...

Dom y do u even give a shit u don't even own custom cues or ivory, u have a players cue.
An I'm willing to bet you'll never buy a custom cue.
 
dom_poppa said:
You're right it's nobody's business but at the same time you have to know where 85k worth of stuff that are deemed illegal in some parts of the world is going.

I am positive he knew where it was going.

Cue makers have a sixth sense when it comes to buyers. Someone buying that many cues from a guy, not a high volume production, has to know.

Cue makers like to know whether someone is a dealer or actual customers too.

Not everday you have a 85k sale unless to a dealer.
Click to expand...

Ernie knows chady well, fwiw.
 
Moet.1977 said:
Dom y do u even give a shit u don't even own custom cues or ivory, u have a players cue.

An I'm willing to bet you'll never buy a custom cue.
Click to expand...


I'm interested because this case will set a precedent towards ivory cues.

Whatever the outcome, we will learn from this.
 
dom_poppa said:
I'm interested because this case will set a precedent towards ivory cues.

Whatever the outcome, we will learn from this.
Click to expand...

This case won't set a precedent for anything. This case is about exporting cues with Ivory inlays/components. This is already illegal. What we will learn from this is whether Ernie conspired to export the cues. He is not the first US citizen to be charged in a case involving the import or export of Ivory.

You come across like you are out for Ernie's blood. Backing off would serve you well....
 
dom_poppa said:
Yes the business is liable if they sold 85k worth of guns without at least finding out where they were going.

Anyways, a highly illegal contraband to most of the world, a very close deadline of July 1, and the builder gets popped in the same month.
Click to expand...

Since when have the Democrats ever cared about law enforcement? Too bad Kate Steinle wasn't an elephant, she would have apparently warranted much more consideration by Harry Reid, and the rest of his ilk. This whole thing is the height of hypocrisy in my opinion. The entire state of Kalifornia, is in violation of federal immigration law/s everytime one of their "sanctuary" cities decides not to cooperate with ICE, and protects an ILLEGAL aggravated felon...Many of whom have defied deportation on multiple occasions, and committed any number of crimes, while on U.S. soil! Apparently no one informed the Demo's that enforcing the laws of the land, and protecting U.S. citizens might actually be at least as important as worrying about ivory trade. As a matter of fact, I believe one of these scenarios is actually one of their constitutional duties, and it's not the one that has anything to do with worrying about Ginacue.
What a crock.
j2
 
Originally Posted by jimmyg View Post
In law the term is: "knew or should have known", both are treated the same.
Click to expand...
pt109 said:
If a man buys a gun and takes it to a place where it's against the law to have a gun.....
....is the business that sold the gun liable?
Click to expand...

Sorry, it's not nearly as simple as my blanket statement suggested. I was thinking mainly of tort and product liability cases, not necessarily criminal. :o

Off the cuff, I would generally say "no" to your question, but it would be more likely to be dependent upon too many individual factors, including whether or not the seller followed state and federal laws involving the sale of firearms and/or had prior knowledge or involvement in the actual crime committed, for anyone to answer intelligently, especially someone like me who is unfamiliar with this area of law.
 
Last edited:
j2pac said:
Since when have the Democrats ever cared about law enforcement? Too bad Kate Steinle wasn't an elephant, she would have apparently warranted much more consideration by Harry Reid, and the rest of his ilk. This whole thing is the height of hypocrisy in my opinion. The entire state of Kalifornia, is in violation of federal immigration law/s everytime one of their "sanctuary" cities decides not to cooperate with ICE, and protects an ILLEGAL aggravated felon...Many of whom have defied deportation on multiple occasions, and committed any number of crimes, while on U.S. soil! Apparently no one informed the Demo's that enforcing the laws of the land, and protecting U.S. citizens might actually be at least as important as worrying about ivory trade. As a matter of fact, I believe one of these scenarios is actually one of their constitutional duties, and it's not the one that has anything to do with worrying about Ginacue.
What a crock.
j2
Click to expand...
Good post, IMO....this thinking comes from the same culture that will walk past a starving
child to save a seal....they should google priority.
jimmyg said:
Sorry, it's not nearly as simple as my blanket statement suggests. I was thinking mainly of tort and product liability cases, not necessarily criminal. :o

Off the cuff, I would generally say "no" to your question, but it would be more likely to be dependent upon too many individual factors, including whether or not the seller followed state and federal laws involving the sale of firearms and/or had prior knowledge or involvement in the actual crime committed, for anyone to answer intelligently, especially someone like me who is unfamiliar with this area of law.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know it gets complicated....you can't beat a speeding ticket because you didn't know the speed limit.
Some people around me tonight were saying if the ivory was bought legally,,,there should
be no problem....but it's not that easy either...if you have an old stock of lead-based paint...
...I got no problem with it being illegal to sell it.

But IVORY?????...what the hell...these morons will eventually make everybody a vegan.
....then we'll be neck-deep in animals that we used to devour.

pt....cheering for Ernie
 
dom_poppa said:
Yes the business is liable if they sold 85k worth of guns without at least finding out where they were going.

Anyways, a highly illegal contraband to most of the world, a very close deadline of July 1, and the builder gets popped in the same month.
Click to expand...

dom_poppa said:
I'm interested because this case will set a precedent towards ivory cues.

Whatever the outcome, we will learn from this.
Click to expand...

Fair enough I can't very knock anyone if their trying to learn something, I apologize
for that statement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top