|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 179
Campfire Member
|
OP
Campfire Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 179 |
If someone is dumb enough to ship me primers without haz mat permits at his end, is there any risk to me (other than the primers not arriving)? Everything I read is about regulations for the shipper, but I don't know what the deal is for the receiver.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,514
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,514 |
That's a darn good question and appropriately phrased. I don't know the answer but am interested in what those that do have to say.
Rex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 11,322
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 11,322 |
I would think it would be on the shipper not on you, but I don't know that.
I may not be smart but I can lift heavy objects
I have a shotgun so I have no need for a 30-06.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,262
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,262 |
I am very sure it is on the shipper.. I asked the post office about someone shipping ammo, and was told it is up to the shipped to make sure it was shipped legally..(I was shipped loaded ammo through the post office many years ago) I never bought anymore from that seller.. I don't have his address anymore so don't bother reporting me , it was over 40 years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,885
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,885 |
I would think if you knowingly receive illegally shipped items from someone you have some exposure.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,514
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,514 |
I would think if you knowingly receive illegally shipped items from someone you have some exposure. But to "knowingly receive" primers shipped to you could simply mean the primers you ordered showed up at your door with no HAZMAT markings. At that point, you open the box, see they are the primers you ordered, and note there was no HAZMAT protocols followed. What then?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 42,730
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 42,730 |
So all someone has to do is ship some using someone else's name and address, and Postal Inspectors will be showing up on their door step instead...
maybe something to do to the democRAT up the street?
Asking for a friend of course...
"Minus the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the Country" Marion Barry, Mayor of Wash DC
“Owning guns is not a right. If it were a right, it would be in the Constitution.” ~Alexandria Ocasio Cortez
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,232
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,232 |
I would think if you knowingly receive illegally shipped items from someone you have some exposure. But to "knowingly receive" primers shipped to you could simply mean the primers you ordered showed up at your door with no HAZMAT markings. At that point, you open the box, see they are the primers you ordered, and note there was no HAZMAT protocols followed. What then? Start reloading.
Its all right to be white!!
Stupidity left unattended will run rampant
Don't argue with stupid people, They will drag you down to their level and then win by experience
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,435
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,435 |
The receiver has no control over what the shipper does. None. Therefore, the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper.
All he need say for a defense is, "The shipper told me he was going to ship it Hazmat. How could I know he was lying?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 3,002
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 3,002 |
The receiver has no control over what the shipper does. None. Therefore, the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper.
All he need say for a defense is, "The shipper told me he was going to ship it Hazmat. How could I know he was lying?" Actually, he doesn't have to say anything in his defense. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. His innocence is presumed, until proven otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,435
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,435 |
The receiver has no control over what the shipper does. None. Therefore, the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper.
All he need say for a defense is, "The shipper told me he was going to ship it Hazmat. How could I know he was lying?" Actually, he doesn't have to say anything in his defense. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. His innocence is presumed, until proven otherwise. Obviously, in a court of law, the receiver doesn't have to say anything in his own defense. I was simply illustrating how the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 3,002
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 3,002 |
The receiver has no control over what the shipper does. None. Therefore, the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper.
All he need say for a defense is, "The shipper told me he was going to ship it Hazmat. How could I know he was lying?" Actually, he doesn't have to say anything in his defense. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. His innocence is presumed, until proven otherwise. Obviously, in a court of law, the receiver doesn't have to say anything in his own defense. I was simply illustrating how the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper. 10-4. I agree. Just wanted to remind folks that the investigating officer is not the one you need to convince, The jury is. Investigators are looking to make arrests. Perhaps especially now in a gun related issue. One might want to keep his yap shut, as what you say will most definitely be " used against you".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749 |
Who knows what is in the box? The shipper has to make that disclosure. Are you thinking that the carrier might open your box along the way. I don't think so. Once it arrives at your door, the door is shut as far as I am concerned - no pun itended.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749 |
The receiver has no control over what the shipper does. None. Therefore, the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper.
All he need say for a defense is, "The shipper told me he was going to ship it Hazmat. How could I know he was lying?" Actually, he doesn't have to say anything in his defense. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. His innocence is presumed, until proven otherwise. Obviously, in a court of law, the receiver doesn't have to say anything in his own defense. I was simply illustrating how the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper. 10-4. I agree. Just wanted to remind folks that the investigating officer is not the one you need to convince, The jury is. Investigators are looking to make arrests. Perhaps especially now in a gun related issue. One might want to keep his yap shut, as what you say will most definitely be " used against you". An arrest for what exactly?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,154
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,154 |
Do most of you guys have a cop sitting at your house watching you open the mail?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,350
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,350 |
It happened to me once, I just kept my mouth shut and nothing came about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 3,002
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 3,002 |
The receiver has no control over what the shipper does. None. Therefore, the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper.
All he need say for a defense is, "The shipper told me he was going to ship it Hazmat. How could I know he was lying?" Actually, he doesn't have to say anything in his defense. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. His innocence is presumed, until proven otherwise. Obviously, in a court of law, the receiver doesn't have to say anything in his own defense. I was simply illustrating how the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper. 10-4. I agree. Just wanted to remind folks that the investigating officer is not the one you need to convince, The jury is. Investigators are looking to make arrests. Perhaps especially now in a gun related issue. One might want to keep his yap shut, as what you say will most definitely be " used against you". An arrest for what exactly? Nothing, in this case. Just meant as a general rule in interactions with LEO. Was a general reference, not referring to this case. I can see why it might look otherwise. Sorry if I mislead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,507
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,507 |
Do most of you guys have a cop sitting at your house watching you open the mail? For 38 years and two children, now.
"Live like you'll die tomorrow, but manage your grass like you'll live forever."
-S. M. Stirling
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,071
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,071 |
Do most of you guys have a cop sitting at your house watching you open the mail? For 38 years and two children, now.  DF
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,749 |
The receiver has no control over what the shipper does. None. Therefore, the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper.
All he need say for a defense is, "The shipper told me he was going to ship it Hazmat. How could I know he was lying?" Actually, he doesn't have to say anything in his defense. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. His innocence is presumed, until proven otherwise. Obviously, in a court of law, the receiver doesn't have to say anything in his own defense. I was simply illustrating how the receiver cannot be held legally liable for the actions of the shipper. 10-4. I agree. Just wanted to remind folks that the investigating officer is not the one you need to convince, The jury is. Investigators are looking to make arrests. Perhaps especially now in a gun related issue. One might want to keep his yap shut, as what you say will most definitely be " used against you". An arrest for what exactly? Nothing, in this case. Just meant as a general rule in interactions with LEO. Was a general reference, not referring to this case. I can see why it might look otherwise. Sorry if I mislead. I savvy. Have a good one. GB
|
|
|
|
|
694 members (12344mag, 1234, 10Glocks, 10ring1, 01Foreman400, 10gaugemag, 73 invisible),
3,022
guests, and
1,245
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,267
Posts18,467,209
Members73,925
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
