From: dgrev (dgrev@iinet.net.au)
Date: Sun Feb 12 2006 - 14:19:17 PST
Everyone
With the advent of this new French law to prohibit the ownership of
MVs (not just armour!!!) we have all received a wake up call.
Has anyone noticed a pattern here?
1st it was the US Form 6 issue, the ban on importation of armor (this
spelling thing is a pain). That was eventually reduced to just US made
armor - no thanks to the MVPA at that time.
2nd it was no armour in France, that one slipped through almost
un-noticed?
Why, because the number of people who own armour is statistically small
even within the MV community and those affected were French speakers.
Now they have moved on to any MV, mil radios etc ie, the all
encompassing "implement of war" catch all, and by the way that can also
mean innocuous objects like ammo boxes. (I kid
you not, ammo boxes come with a detruction order in Oz - dangerous
weapon those ammo boxes!)
Over in Kansas we have Dave and his Ferret registration problem. Again
it is armour being targeted.
Does anyone notice a pattern here?
First they go for armor/armour, once they have slid that one in,
they can then go for MVs in general.
This is probably the last wake up call the collecting community is
going to get.
I don't care if the MVPA is a predominately US club, it needs to be
in there helping the French collectors as much as it can. We all know
that governments copy each others laws (easier than thinking up new ones
all by themselves), so don't think that if the French go down there
will all of a sudden be a lot of cheap jeeps on the market. Because it
won't be long before you will be fighting to keep that your jeep,
whether you live in Britain, USA or elsewhere!
The MVPA is sitting on 3/4 $million in the bank. It maybe they need to
spend some of this to help the French. Doing so will be a heck of a lot
cheaper than fighting it out in US courts.........
Time to stop being complacent.
Regards
Doug
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 18 2006 - 21:40:47 PDT