tctmp
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Looking to buy an A1ii in Tokyo this winter | |
shadow9d9 wrote:
tctmp wrote:
shadow9d9 wrote:
tctmp wrote:
shadow9d9 wrote:
I never actually advocated anything either way. That is just you projecting what you wish happened.
Right, that's my conclusion of what you said, that you are advocating fraud and smuggling. Others can read and make their own conclusions.
shadow9d9 wrote:
I pointed the ridiculously flimsy argument presented and how out of touch with reality it was.
I said there is $800 duty free limit when entering, you said that doesn't exist. Others have also pointed out you are wrong. It's obvious you are the one who's out of touch and need to keep up. Any rhetoric you try to put out does not change that fact.
You desperately want to jump to that conclusion so it could give you a way to attack. So, that's a big duh. You found what you needed/wanted. Easier to attack than defend. It comes from having a weak argument.
The reality of airports is very, very different than the reality. It was just alarmist nonsense that doesn't match reality in any way. And there is no way for anyone to know if one camera is newer than another. It doesn't even make sense from a basic logical perspective.
The $800 seems to be for imports, but not necessarily travelers. I was told by a close friend that the removal of $800 de minimis also applied to travelers. Looks like it is kept separate. I did a cursory search to confirm, but should have been more thorough. My apologies.
First, remember you were the one who started this, not me. I never responded to your first post even though I thought it's already nonsense. But when you saw my post, you somehow thought you had an opportunity to take cheap shots with your "I'm a world traveler, have you been out of the country? keep up with things if you are going to post" nonsense. Unfortunately that has clearly come back to haunt you. Of course, that's not the first time.
Now you are playing the words game of "blaming the friend". What a joke. For any frequent traveler who have entered US, they should have certainly noticed either on the form or electronically the question of "have you brought in merchandise with a value of more than $800". If you can't even get this $800 thing right (especially as a self proclaimed frequent traveler), why would people trust you on anything else. You have lost all your credibility. Again, of course that's not the first time.
So as a recap, I only said 3 things.
(1) There is a $800 duty free limit. You argued against it and you were wrong and I'm right.
(2) It's illegal to not declare something above $800. Everyone on this thread except you accepts that.
(3) The risk is not worthwhile. Of course as other people have shown that they clearly understand it's personal assessment, so no defense is ever needed. But the grumpy you somehow want to argue that it's wrong, so you are arguing "the risk is worthwhile". And with your strong rhetoric and insisting to people on this, that's certainly equivalent to advocating smuggling. And before smuggling, you also have to falsify to the US government. So you are certainly advocating fraud and smuggling. People with half a brain understands that with what you wrote.
Now I suggest you cut your loss and leave quietly on this discussion. At this point, any more rhetoric you put out is not going to help you.
"Started it."? What? So, in your world, pointing out a flimsy argument is starting something? No wonder you felt like you needed to completely fabricate something in order to attack! And it has also been backed up by extremely angry personal attack words. To top off all the internet cliches, you preemptively declared yourself the winner and that you will not need to provide further discussion. All right in the cliche argument book. 1. Make something up. 2. Attack made up accusation as if it were fact. 3. Declare yourself victor. "Right, that's my conclusion of what you said"- When you have to make something up to attack, you kinda admit freely that you had nothing.
Yes, I am away from the country most of the year. And I reportedly exactly what I saw. One of the biggest airports of the country without any declarations stations even open. And despite traveling 90-120 days a year out of the country each year, for the last decade, I have never had anyone question or search anything. So, yes, frequent traveler. Since it never happens, this is the reality of the situation. It is $800 on paper. That was exactly my argument. If you want to give a counter-argument, you would have to actually start giving examples of how this is not the case. You have not.
It doesn't matter to me what people do. Declare it, don't declare it. However, what I took umbrage to was that there was a "risk." Security theater is not real. The reality of the situation on the ground is that there would literally be no way for it to be found. Even if there were declaration stations open, it would literally be possible for them to know that one camera among multiple pieces of equipment was bought on a trip. The whole idea of that is preposterous on its face. And as I said, it speaks to someone that has not done international travel. This too remains unrefuted.
I said you are the one who started with nonsense cheap shots, so it's fair for the response to you to be to the point, especially if you don't have a leg to stand on, and this is not your first time spewing nonsense. And I logically explained why your own words worked against you, and why you lost all your credibility. There is for everyone to see and no point for me to repeat those.
I re-listed my 3 simple points in the previous post. The first two obviously you had nothing to argue against anymore.
The third, I said "the risk is not worthwhile". Everyone except you understands that risk tolerance is up to individuals to decide. Somehow the grumpy you claim I need to defend my point? What stupidity.
Now on your side, the only counter position to what I wrote is "the risk is worthwhile". Ok, you are saying there is no risk at all, so your position is "zero risk, so it's worthwhile" to falsify and smuggle? And you complain that I'm saying you advocating fraud and smuggling?
That's why I stand by what I said. Because if it's not worthwhile to start with, what's the point of you putting out all the stupid rhetoric of no risk. Risk or no risk, that's totally moot if it's not worthwhile. So I'm not stretching anything, it's a natural derivation of your writing. You are only trying to retract and rephrase now because it made you look bad.
Finally, only a fool will claim zero risk, no one with common sense will think that way, unless they are the traffickers who try to get mules to smuggle for them. If you are telling people no one in the last year, or last month or even last day had CBP found false declaration and got fined/confiscated, etc, I don't think anyone will believe you. So I suggest that you don't keep on spewing that there is no proof of risk, etc, before you further solidify your reputation of nonsense.
|
