For the "California Is a Nanny State" People: (buy, taxes)

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by Bulldogdad

Easy. Shall issue CCW in ALL counties.

I was going to say the same thing. Plus the scores of other firearm lawsthat restrict my civil rights.
We can also start with
Carb, not being able to modify your vehicle, having to use no spill gascontainers that do not work, not being able to heat your house with a fire,etc.
The silly speed limit, when other states have highways up to 85mph
The foods that we are not allowed to eat, shark fin soup, foie gras
The permit process to make modifications to your own property (county issue)but very prevalent across the state.

Not to mention the super high tax rates for everything; but don't worry, you can ski and surf in the same day.

[zdg]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

I was going to say the same thing. Plus the scores of other firearm lawsthat restrict my civil rights.
We can also start with
Carb, not being able to modify your vehicle, having to use no spill gascontainers that do not work, not being able to heat your house with a fire,etc.
The silly speed limit, when other states have highways up to 85mph
The foods that we are not allowed to eat, shark fin soup, foie gras
The permit process to make modifications to your own property (county issue)but very prevalent across the state.

Not to mention the super high tax rates for everything; but don't worry, you can ski and surf in the same day.

Real question for you: do you believe the onus is 100% on each buyer to ensure that the item they are purchasing is safe, properly constructed, properly maintained, and in the exact shape as advertised by the seller?

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by zdg

Real question for you: do you believe the onus is 100% on each buyer to ensure that the item they are purchasing is safe, properly constructed, properly maintained, and in the exact shape as advertised by the seller?

I am not sure what your getting at. As long as the seller is not falsifying information about what he is selling then the onus is on the buyer.
Caveat emptor

[zdg]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

I am not sure what your getting at. As long as the seller is not falsifying information about what he is selling then the onus is on the buyer.
Caveat emptor

In all cases? Including from a company or just from a private seller?

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by zdg

In all cases? Including from a company or just from a private seller?

Pretty much all cases, you would need to provide specific examples.

[zdg]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

Pretty much all cases, you would need to provide specific examples.

Certainly.

I walk into a large car dealership in my town with the intention of purchasing a $15,000 used luxury automobile that was $35,000 new. You are free to change the numbers to fit any financial situation. I choose an automobile that the dealership tells me has had no modifications done to it while the car was in their possession, but that obviously they can't vouch for what was done under previous owners (understandable).

When I get home, I drive it for a few hours when the car suddenly and out of nowhere will no longer run. The engine won't turn over and my car is reduced to a $15,000 pile of metal and plastic. I call a buddy of mine who is a mechanic. He looks at it and sees that clearly the dealership (because their decal is on the part) DID modify the car, it turns out using the wrong part, improperly installed, by a 16 year old on his first day on the job with no experience on cars of this type. The damage done is so expensive to fix that my buddy isn't even sure it's in my interest.

Are you suggesting I am out the $15,000 because the onus was on me? Do I have recourse? Who enforces that recourse if so?

[Woof]

Well, the solution for people who think that California's health and environmental regulations make it a "nanny state", the solution would simply be to move away. We have too many people here, the fewer the better, and especially the fewer rightwingers (libertarian) the better. Please go to Texas or wherever that no one cares about your secondhand smoke, or the toxic pollutants from unregulated cars and factories, or whether you destroy the wilderness and kill off numerous species of plants and animals in your quest for more strip malls and big box stores.

Seriously. Just go away.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by zdg

Certainly.

I walk into a large car dealership in my town with the intention of purchasing a $15,000 used luxury automobile that was $35,000 new. You are free to change the numbers to fit any financial situation. I choose an automobile that the dealership tells me has had no modifications done to it while the car was in their possession, but that obviously they can't vouch for what was done under previous owners (understandable).

When I get home, I drive it for a few hours when the car suddenly and out of nowhere will no longer run. The engine won't turn over and my car is reduced to a $15,000 pile of metal and plastic. I call a buddy of mine who is a mechanic. He looks at it and sees that clearly the dealership (because their decal is on the part) DID modify the car, it turns out using the wrong part, improperly installed, by a 16 year old on his first day on the job with no experience on cars of this type. The damage done is so expensive to fix that my buddy isn't even sure it's in my interest.

Are you suggesting I am out the $15,000 because the onus was on me? Do I have recourse? Who enforces that recourse if so?

You would have recourse because the dealer said it was not modified when they know it was. That is what the court system, specifically small claims, is for if you cannot work something out with the dealer.

If the dealer had no prior knowledge of the issue and no garunteed is promised then you are SOL.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by Woof

Well, the solution for people who think that California's health and environmental regulations make it a "nanny state", the solution would simply be to move away. We have too many people here, the fewer the better, and especially the fewer rightwingers (libertarian) the better. Please go to Texas or wherever that no one cares about your secondhand smoke, or the toxic pollutants from unregulated cars and factories, or whether you destroy the wilderness and kill off numerous species of plants and animals in your quest for more strip malls and big box stores.

Seriously. Just go away.

Very progresive and understanding of you. If you don't agree with me then leave. What happened to coexist?

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by Woof

Well, the solution for people who think that California's health and environmental regulations make it a "nanny state", the solution would simply be to move away. We have too many people here, the fewer the better, and especially the fewer rightwingers (libertarian) the better. Please go to Texas or wherever that no one cares about your secondhand smoke, or the toxic pollutants from unregulated cars and factories, or whether you destroy the wilderness and kill off numerous species of plants and animals in your quest for more strip malls and big box stores.

Seriously. Just go away.

Good idea, let them leave and those who stay will .... get to pay higher taxes for what they want, uh, wait, for ..... humm, maybe a smaller population with no decrease in State expenditures is not such a good idea. The ones who leave have more money for vacations, etc and the ones who stay have ...... hey you can still ski and surf in the same day ........ Well in some areas.