Customs destroy illegally imported LR Defender

[EricTyrrell]

 

[EricWS]

You do know that you could buy new Defenders here from 1994-97, didn't you? These are all Defenders which were imported here by the manufacturer when new and sold here as new vehicles at a Land Rover dealership. Therefore they always have been legal here in the U.S.

That about sums it up! And take the time to learn what you can and can not import and follow the laws as stated.

 

[Antichrist]

Is somebody here who knows a great deal more about Land Rovers going to post with a straight face that a 2007 Rover is safer than a 1970s vintage Rover? I would be very surprised to learn that.

Ok, I can see now you've either never been around a 1970's Land Rover or never been around a 2007 Land Rover. Or both. I can assure you the 2007 is safer overall.
How important that difference is, is a very subjective thing, which is obvious from the vehicles I own. Even my '95 Defender is safer than my Series Rovers.

 

[ZG]

I can assure you it's quite safer for a number of reasons. While the 2012 Defender we have still lacks airbags, nearly every other component of safety has been upgraded.

 

[Antichrist]

Point was why bother arguing semantics? The truck was destroyed by a government agency for not being safe by the giovernment's own definition.

Since when is a VIN swap "semantics"?

 

[jh.]

There are about 7 separate arguments going on now.

 

[thedjjack]

Not safe??? Yet motorcycles are safe???? strange point way to keep everyone in the USA safe.... going back to enjoying the 15 year import rule in Canada

 

[Mack73]

Exactly. All of those issues are fairly well known. Point was why bother arguing semantics? The truck was destroyed by a government agency for not being safe by the giovernment's own definition.

No No Noooo. Why do you keep saying the government decided this was "unsafe" and therefore crushed? (ignore the idiot on the video).

The law says if it can or can't come into the country. Government decided it is an illegal import as it did not qualify for the 25 year exemption based on the letter of the law. Based on not complying with the importation law, the Government siezed the defender and crushed it.
.
Nothing in the 25 year old importation law talks about safety and the origins of the law have nothing to do with safety. The law does not exist to keep us safe. It exists to keep manufactures happy. If the law is not about safety, how can the crushing of this defender have anything to do with safety?
.
Seriously if you can't figure out that the crushing of this defender has NOTHING to do with safety, lord help us all.

 

[Antichrist]

Since you can't/haven't figured it out on your own, I'll explain it for you. Jaguar Land Rover North America is very much involved in these seizures. Customs inspects each truck upon arrival into the US. They take pictures of all aspects of the vehicle and send these pictures to EPA/DOT and Land Rover North America. Land Rover North America has designated employee's who pour over these photographs and point out each and every upgrade made to the antique vehicle. DOT then takes this list of modifications and decides whether or not to instruct Customs to deny entry.

I knew about the manufactures' involvement in the 25 year rule when it was passed, but didn't know the level of Land Rover's involvement with customs. That's enough for us to decide that if we buy a new car (an idea my wife has been floating) it definitely won't be a Land Rover.
In fact, since reading that, the thought has even crossed my mind that, after owning pretty much nothing but Land Rovers for 38 years, maybe it's time to move on to something else. I've always been a fan of International when it comes to older stuff.

 

[DividingCreek]

Tom JLRNA lost my allegiance when they sued every company in the US that had the word Rover in its company name or URL with the exception of Rovers North who is a licensed parts agent of LR UK. Pick up any Rover mag out of the UK and you see how LR UK feels about all the enthusiast companies, they love them. My letter from LR's attys is posted on the internet and accuses me of "confusing their would be customers" with my Dividing Creek Rover Imports name. I argued I only deal with 25+ year old vehicles that LR doesn't offer to the US market. Their response was the consumer is confused.

 

[Antichrist]

Tom JLRNA lost my allegiance when they sued every company in the US that had the word Rover in its company name or URL with the exception of Rovers North who is a licensed parts agent of LR UK.

Yeah, those shenanigans definitely put me on the fence, but this stuff with customs has pushed me off the other side, torn down the fence and and put up a brick wall with razor wire on top.

Their response was the consumer is confused.

Yeah, right. I'm sure you've gotten a lot of "Golly, I thought you were a Land Rover new car dealer." and LRNA has gotten a lot of calls looking for the number for their dealer called Dividing Creek Rover Imports.

 

[Nonimouse]

Don't the Brits pay outrageous prices for Harley Davidson Motorcycles? I heard that was the big thing, get a container of HD's and ship em to England.

Yup... And anything that has Chrysler written on it; including the servicing

We also pay through the nose for something called F U E L

 

[EricWS]

No No Noooo. Why do you keep saying the government decided this was "unsafe" and therefore crushed? (ignore the idiot on the video).

The law says if it can or can't come into the country. Government decided it is an illegal import as it did not qualify for the 25 year exemption based on the letter of the law. Based on not complying with the importation law, the Government siezed the defender and crushed it.
.
Nothing in the 25 year old importation law talks about safety and the origins of the law have nothing to do with safety. The law does not exist to keep us safe. It exists to keep manufactures happy. If the law is not about safety, how can the crushing of this defender have anything to do with safety?
.
Seriously if you can't figure out that the crushing of this defender has NOTHING to do with safety, lord help us all.

Lord help those that can't figure out that all cars imported to the US meet certain safety standards such as Anti-lock brakes et al since the late 90's. Easy to overlook when you are evangelically creating a strawman arguement. It's almost comical to make an arguement on safety and not know the corresponding law and just blindly focus on importation law and Customs.

The truly sad part is the argument has not changed in 10+ years. The only thing that has chaged are the folks making the arguement. CBP has crushed others and no doubt will crush more.

 

[Antichrist]

Lord help those that can't figure out that all cars imported to the US meet certain safety standards such as Anti-lock brakes et al since the late 90's.

I'm pretty sure the NHTSA doesn't require anti-lock brakes in light trucks and cars, based on their studies that the net effect of ABS is pretty much zero. Rear end crashes on on wet pavement is reduced significantly, as are pedestrian injuries, but injuries and fatalities when a car runs off the road also increased significantly (fatalities up by 40%), so it seems they've pretty much deemed it a wash and so haven't mandated ABS.

 

[Mack73]

I'm pretty sure the NHTSA doesn't require anti-lock brakes in light trucks and cars, based on their studies that the net effect of ABS is pretty much zero. Rear end crashes on on wet pavement is reduced significantly, as are pedestrian injuries, but injuries and fatalities when a car runs off the road also increased significantly (fatalities up by 40%), so it seems they've pretty much deemed it a wash and so haven't mandated ABS.

Yes not required by NHTSA: http://www.nhtsa.gov/Research/Light+Vehicle+Brake+Systems . Try again EricWS.

Still trying to figure out your logic- Any law that prevents a vehicle from coming into the country is to keep us "safe"?