On 11/17/2011 1:44 PM, flipper wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 23:23:40 -0800, John
wrote:

On 11/16/2011 7:24 PM, flipper wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 19:59:32 -0500, Kevin Alfred Strom
wrote:

On 11/16/2011 4:45 PM, D. Peter Maus wrote:
[...]

But the language of the bill is sufficiently broad to allow
interpretation beyond commercial interests alone, to include persons
conducting flea markets, garage sales, or one on one transactions.
To the degree that it's had a chilling effect on flea markets on the
local level, in areas where economic distress has made flea markets
a significant segment of the shopping culture.





What we need is a whole new culture of privacy.

A climate in which not only can corporations, banks, and governments
not restrict or tax or control our private transactions in any way
-- but a climate in which it is universally acknowledged that they
also have _no_ right to even _know_ what those transactions are.

They are here to serve us, not the other way round. They are the
peons, and we are the rulers -- not the reverse. They have no right
to know ANYTHING about our transactions.

We, on the other hand, have the absolute right to know everything
about theirs, and restrict them if we so choose.

A whole new mindset, of unalterable and immovable steel and will, is
needed.

I doubt, however, that a generation of cowed and bowed dependents
and yes-men can produce such a thing.



With every good wish,



Kevin Alfred Strom.

You might have a different opinion if you were burglarized and all
your stuff was sold by 'private transactions' through a second hand
dealer front man.

Btw, the information only becomes available to the police in the event
of a criminal investigation and it's only that transaction. There is
no routine 'reporting to the government'.

Isn't that the reason we initially hired "cops" for?

What is the 'reason' you are mysteriously alluding to?

I mean, I realize
they are no longer doing a job for the people, the citizens -- and are
mostly revenue generators for the town, city, county, state, feds, etc.

Just how does a murder, burglary, theft, etc. investigation 'generate
revenue'?

But, really, watching every dollar trade hands is NOT what we have
public servants and authorities for,

And the bill doesn't do that, even for the limited group "secondhand
dealers" it addresses. It requires them to keep their own records,
which is no more information to no more people than the persons
involved in the transaction.

The only occasion for government to even know a transaction took place
is in the event of a criminal investigation.

we don't have them to "punish" us

Depends on who 'us' is. 'Punishment' is pretty much the whole concept
behind a prison system.

... we simply need to remind them to do the original job they were
created for

You mean like search and seizure police powers?

Of course, if you're a criminal the best thing is to not keep any
records they can search and seize, isn't it?

On the other hand, knowing who you're dealing with is pretty much SOP
for legitimate business even if for no other reason than they don't
want to be screwed by some fly by night huckster.

and the things you mention are already taken care of ...

And just how is it "already taken care of" when a criminal front man
doesn't 'know who' he bought the stolen goods from and paid cash so
it's untraceable?

I suppose we could go back to the bright light and rubber hose
methods.

let's just get the public servants and cops to do the job for the people.

I don't know what 'job' you have in mind since criminal theft rings
seem to be off your radar screen.

But let's get one thing clear. I never said this particular law was
well worded, 'ideal', or even adequate. All I said is that Internet
and media hysterics misrepresent both the intent and functioning of it
and your "watching every dollar trade hands" is an example.

But, to the point that started this sub thread, there is nothing
whatsoever in that law which requires any seller, secondhand or not,
to get the 'identity' of a --buyer-- (of a radio or anything else).

Btw, it isn't just the poor schmuck who got robbed that's screwed
because, no matter how much 'good faith' you had in buying, if the
'used' radio you bought from the "secondhand dealer" was stolen it
isn't yours. It goes back to the rightful owner and you're out
whatever you paid for it so Mr. "Don't know who and paid cash" is
screwing you too.

Regards,
JS

Gee, just when we thought we had enough, another complete imbecile ...
how special ...

Regards,
JS