Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/20 21:38:40
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/18/targeted-gun-sellers-say-high-risk-label-from-feds/?page=all#pagebreak
Gun retailers say the Obama administration is trying to put them out of business with regulations and investigations that bypass Congress and choke off their lines of credit, freeze their assets and prohibit online sales.
Since 2011, regulators have increased scrutiny on banks’ customers. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. in 2011 urged banks to better manage the risks of their merchant customers who employ payment processors, such as PayPal, for credit card transactions. The FDIC listed gun retailers as “high risk” along with porn stores and drug paraphernalia shops.
PHOTOS: Best concealed carry handguns
Meanwhile, the Justice Department has launched Operation Choke Point, a credit card fraud probe focusing on banks and payment processors. The threat of enforcement has prompted some banks to cut ties with online gun retailers, even if those companies have valid licenses and good credit histories.
“This administration has very clearly told the banking industry which customers they feel represent ‘reputational risk’ to do business with,” said Peter Weinstock, a lawyer at Hunton & Williams LLP. “So financial institutions are reacting to this extraordinary enforcement arsenal by being ultra-conservative in who they do business with: Any companies that engage in any margin of risk as defined by this administration are being dropped.”
A Justice Department representative said the agency is conducting several investigations that aim to hold accountable banks “who are knowingly assisting fraudulent merchants who harm consumers.”
“We’re committed to ensuring that our efforts to combat fraud do not discourage or inhibit the lawful conduct of these honest merchants,” the Justice Department said in a May 7 blog post.
But gun retailers say their businesses are being targeted in the executive branch’s efforts:
• T.R. Liberti, owner and operator of Top Gun Firearms Training & Supply in Miami, has felt the sting firsthand. Last month, his local bank, BankUnited N.A., dumped his online business from its service. An explanatory email from the bank said: “This letter in no way reflects any derogatory reasons for such action on your behalf. But rather one of industry. Unfortunately your company’s line of business is not commensurate with the industries we work with.”
• Black Rifle Armory in Henderson, Nevada, had its bank accounts frozen this month as the bank tried to determine whether any of Black Rifle’s online transactions were suspicious.
• In 2012, Bank of America suddenly dropped the 12-year account of McMillan Group International, a gun manufacturer in Phoenix, even though the company had a good credit history, the owner said. Gun parts maker American Spirit Arms in Scottsdale, Arizona, received similar treatment by Bank of America, the country’s largest banking institution.
“This seems to be happening with greater frequency and to many more dealers,” said Joe Sirochman, owner of American Spirit Arms. “At first, it was the bigger guys — gun parts manufacturers or high-profile retailers. Now the smaller mom-and-pop shops are being choked out, and they need their cash to buy inventory. Freezing their assets will put them out of business.”
Choking off access to banks
After McMillan Group owner Kelly McMillan publicized Bank of America’s action on his Facebook account, he found that thousands of small gun-shop owners across the country were in the same situation. Banks were either dropping them, freezing their accounts or refusing to process their online sales, so he opened a credit card processing company for the gun industry called McMillan Merchant Solutions.
“Four generations of my family have been in this industry. This is my way to give back,” said Mr. McMillan, adding that many of his customers were denied banking access because of the nature of their business. “This is an attempt by the federal government to keep people from buying guns and a way for them to combat the Second Amendment rights we have. It’s a covert way for them to control our right to manufacture guns and individuals to buy guns.”
BankUnited N.A., which dropped Top Gun Firearms Training & Supply in Miami from its customer list, declined to comment.
In a statement to The Washington Times, Bank of America said: “We would not deny banking services to an organization solely on the basis of its industry.”
The banking giant blamed a misunderstanding with the Arizona gun manufacturers McMillan Group International and American Spirit Arms.
However, the American Banking Association, the industry’s advocacy group in Washington, said businesses deemed “risky” will be frozen out of the financial system if the Justice Department continues Operation Choke Point because the regulatory burden and risk of investigation will be too great for less-specialized banks to bear.
“We’re being threatened with a regulatory regime that attempts to foist on us the obligation to monitor all types of transactions,” Richard Riese, a senior vice president at the American Bankers Association, said in the April 28 issue of American Banker. “All of this is predicated on a notion that the banks are a choke point for all businesses.”
In an interview with The Times, Mr. Riese said the cost of doing business with gun retailers outweighs the benefits for some banks, given that regulators deem the industry as “risky,” state laws vary on the sale of guns and ammunition, and the Justice Department’s enforcement.
The Independent Community Bankers of America, an association for small banks, said enforcement actions from the Justice Department are too broad and overly aggressive.
“While preventing fraud is a top concern for community banks, it needs to be balanced with ensuring that businesses and consumers that operate in accordance with applicable laws can still access payment systems,” bankers association President Camden Fine told the Justice Department in an April 7 letter. “ICBA requests that the DOJ suspend Operation Choke Point immediately and focus its resources directly on businesses that may be violating the law, rather than targeting banks providing payment services.”
Justice’s operation threatens to “close access to the financial system to law-abiding businesses, because the mere prospect of an enforcement action is sufficient to cause financial institutions to restrict access to their payment systems to only established companies that present low risks,” the organization said.
‘No statutory authority’
Regulations on the financial industry have increased over the past few years, said Thomas P. Vartanian, chairman of Dechert LLP, a global law firm specializing in regulatory and financial matters.
He noted the chilling effect of overregulation by the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force, an interagency behemoth that includes the departments of Commerce, Justice, Labor, Education, Homeland Security and Justice along with the Internal Revenue Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Secret Service, the FBI, the Social Security Administration and the Federal Trade Commission.
“The key to effective regulation is the balancing between too little and too much regulation,” Mr. Vartanian said. “The problem here is that there are now so many regulators, including the Department of Justice, with their fingers on the scales on that balancing act.”
Congressional Republicans say the Obama administration is using its regulatory powers to shutter industries it doesn’t like. Last year, 31 Republicans accused the Justice Department and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. of intimidating banks and payment processors to “terminate business relationships with lawful lenders.”
In a March hearing before the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs subcommittee on consumer protection, Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican, complained that several payday lenders — another industry labeled “risky” by the administration — were being dropped by their banks in his home state.
“There is a determined effort from [the Justice Department] to the regulators to cut off credit and use other tactics to force [payday lenders] out of business,” Mr. Vitter said. “I find that deeply troubling because it has no statutory basis, no statutory authority.”
In a House hearing in April, FDIC acting General Counsel Richard Osterman defended his agency’s definition of what constitutes a “risky” business — subject to money laundering or other criminal behavior — but made it clear that no bank is outright prohibited from serving any such companies.
“We have actually put out a policy statement on this issue to make it very clear from the very top that as long as financial institutions are properly managing their relationships and the risks, they’re neither prohibited nor discouraged from providing these services,” Mr. Osterman said.
“Basically, what we’re saying is, these types of programs can be, can involve high-risk activities that could create litigation risk and reputation risk for financial institutions,” he said. “So, they need to do due diligence to ensure that the folks who they’re banking are acting in a safe and sound manner.”
But the cost of that due diligence, coupled with the threat of a lawsuit for doing business with a customer in an industry the government has defined as risky, is having a chilling effect on legitimate companies such as gun dealers, said Mr. Weinstock, the Hunton & Williams lawyer.
“We are one of the most heavily regulated industries in America,” said Mr. Sirochman of American Spirit Arms. “We have to ship our guns to another federal licensed dealers for pickup. The people that are picking up the rifles have to go through a background check to make sure they don’t have any felonies. You can’t own a gun or pass the background check if you do.
“All this is, is an assault on our Second Amendment rights.”
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/18/targeted-gun-sellers-say-high-risk-label-from-feds/#ixzz32IIS93Cb
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
|
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/20 21:44:03
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
I have read many articles about this, but it was pornography - it's very difficult for a porn star to have a bank account, it seems. It feels like bs puritan nonsense to me but I guess eh, that's the free market right?
|
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/20 21:44:07
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Can't get the people to help you undermine the Second Amendment then better cut off any financial support.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/20 21:52:13
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot
WA
|
Article wrote:“We are one of the most heavily regulated industries in America,” said Mr. Sirochman of American Spirit Arms. “We have to ship our guns to another federal licensed dealers for pickup. The people that are picking up the rifles have to go through a background check to make sure they don’t have any felonies. You can’t own a gun or pass the background check if you do."
Unless the government also sucks ass at those
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/591574.page
http://www.king5.com/news/crime/Gun-checks-miss-millions-of-fugitives-256347741.html
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/20 21:53:19
"So, do please come along when we're promoting something new and need photos for the facebook page or to send to our regional manager, do please engage in our gaming when we're pushing something specific hard and need to get the little kiddies drifting past to want to come in an see what all the fuss is about. But otherwise, stay the feth out, you smelly, antisocial bastards, because we're scared you are going to say something that goes against our mantra of absolute devotion to the corporate motherland and we actually perceive any of you who've been gaming more than a year to be a hostile entity as you've been exposed to the internet and 'dangerous ideas'. " - MeanGreenStompa
"Then someone mentions Infinity and everyone ignores it because no one really plays it." - nkelsch
FREEDOM!!! - d-usa |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 02:56:16
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
Law abiding citizens will actually wait for background checks to go through. Or simply not take advantage of loopholes(or bother to look for them)
This is why further regulation will do almost nothing to stop criminals. They'll buy from strawman dealers, or just buy guns already in circulation.
Criminals don't need to go to a gunshop to pick up a gun. Throw a rock down a backalley in Chicago and you'll hit a half dozen AKs and 20 or so pistols, and that's in a city with tough gun laws.
Better enforcement of existing laws and elimination of unnecessary laws is all that needs to happen.
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 03:48:14
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
Grey Templar wrote:Criminals don't need to go to a gunshop to pick up a gun. Throw a rock down a backalley in Chicago and you'll hit a half dozen AKs and 20 or so pistols, and that's in a city with tough gun laws.
Better enforcement of existing laws and elimination of unnecessary laws is all that needs to happen.
Well, technically, instead of buying one in a seedy back alley in Chicago, our hypothetical felon could also go to a gun show in most states, no background check required.
|
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 03:54:15
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Sniping Reverend Moira
|
Ouze wrote: Grey Templar wrote:Criminals don't need to go to a gunshop to pick up a gun. Throw a rock down a backalley in Chicago and you'll hit a half dozen AKs and 20 or so pistols, and that's in a city with tough gun laws.
Better enforcement of existing laws and elimination of unnecessary laws is all that needs to happen.
Well, technically, instead of buying one in a seedy back alley in Chicago, our hypothetical felon could also go to a gun show in most states, no background check required.
That's really not as true as people would lead you to believe.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 03:54:42
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
And is still very much illegal.
And lots of gunshows do do background checks.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/21 03:55:03
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 04:08:02
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
cincydooley wrote:That's really not as true as people would lead you to believe.
Grey Templar wrote:And is still very much illegal.
And lots of gunshows do do background checks.
My example is absolutely true in 33 states in this country.
But now I suppose we are drifting offtopic.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/21 04:08:49
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 04:09:44
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
Again, still very much illegal. Just as illegal as a back alley gun sale infact.
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 05:39:17
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak
|
Umm, gun shops sell a product that criminals do really rather like to get their hands on. Claiming that they shouldn't be designated as high risk just makes no sense.
Now, there's plenty of good reasons to talk about the issues with Operation Chokepoint. Using just industry types to identify banks basically amount to a guilt by association approach which is more than a little problematic, especially when it is likely to lead banks to just stop bothering offering services to those industries. And that might even end up counter-productive, as if those industries return to dealing in cash they become more prone to criminal behaviour, not less.
But the fact that this piece of legislation only gets talked about when it impacts guns, and then gets talked about in an "OMG they're trying to take our guns in this sneaky, tricky way" context really just says a lot about dakka's very weird fixation on guns.
|
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 05:45:50
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Sniping Reverend Moira
|
We haven't seen any real issue when it comes to gun shops regarding this legislation.
What has become much more interesting is the marijuana purveyors in the states where it's legalized. The activity were seeing now in our colorado and Washington branches has forced us to take a "none at all" policy--for now--because there are many instances with them that would previously have been signifiers for money laundering.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 06:04:29
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Sounds like the problem is not just a case of "oooh, guns, high risk", but actually the use of things like PayPal in connection with them.
Now PayPal does make it quite a bit easier to shuffle money around, and hacked accounts could be used to buy stuff criminals like (guns, drugs, porn). But using an easily abused source of money should be the focus then, not what it is used on.
If you use "high risk" business as a trigger for suspicious activity in relation to certain payment methods, then the trigger should cause focus on the buyer.
Of course the cynical person in me also wants to turn the argument usually used by people that are pissed off now and say "you have no constitutional right to credit and banking, enjoy your cash business".
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 08:49:32
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Jovial Junkatrukk Driver
|
Not a wery nice move from the banks imo, freezing bank accounts of people simply based on what industry they are in.
|
motyak wrote:[...] Yes, the mods are illuminati, and yakface, lego and dakka dakka itself are the 3 points of the triangle. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 13:34:07
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
d-usa wrote:Sounds like the problem is not just a case of "oooh, guns, high risk", but actually the use of things like PayPal in connection with them. .
No - well, not only. There are some elements of the banking industry as a whole (not just Paypal) that have essentially decided to stay away from anything they consider to be a vice. Here is one of many articles on it. It's safe for work.
|
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 13:46:27
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
cincydooley wrote: Ouze wrote: Grey Templar wrote:Criminals don't need to go to a gunshop to pick up a gun. Throw a rock down a backalley in Chicago and you'll hit a half dozen AKs and 20 or so pistols, and that's in a city with tough gun laws.
Better enforcement of existing laws and elimination of unnecessary laws is all that needs to happen.
Well, technically, instead of buying one in a seedy back alley in Chicago, our hypothetical felon could also go to a gun show in most states, no background check required.
That's really not as true as people would lead you to believe.
<--- Has been to multiple Gun Shows in Houston.
It really is as true as people would lead you to believe. Walk in, pay money, walk out with rifle and/or shotgun.
Pistols are another animal, for whatever reason.
|
DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 14:03:34
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Oklahoma City PD always hangs out at our gun shows and watch known felons pick up weapons without any checks. They pick then up in the parking lot, but the seller doesn't care.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 14:16:55
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
Ouze wrote: d-usa wrote:Sounds like the problem is not just a case of "oooh, guns, high risk", but actually the use of things like PayPal in connection with them. .
No - well, not only. There are some elements of the banking industry as a whole (not just Paypal) that have essentially decided to stay away from anything they consider to be a vice. Here is one of many articles on it. It's safe for work.
This is true. I have to step carefully here as this is my field. Generally (and with public knowledge) banks and finanicla institutions prefer to steer clear of businesses that present social or suitability risks for the business. That may or may not include gun manufacturers or retailers, depending on each bank's appetite.
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 14:16:55
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Fate-Controlling Farseer
|
At a gun show, private citizens are allowed to sell their firearms without conducting a check. It's no different then when they sell them online, adds in a newspaper, etc... their just at a venue where there are people who wish to buy them. 18 states do require that private sellers at gun shows conduct checks, the rest do not.
Actual dealers, ie the folks this OP was referencing, are STILL required to conduct background checks on every firearm they sell at gun shows. The law is very clear that if you hold an FFL, any firearm that you sell, no matter the venue, you are required to conduct a check on that person.
|
Full Frontal Nerdity |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 14:38:35
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
The last two posts dovetail nicely into "things that I think are a problem, but that any possible solution would be a bigger problem". I don't think you should be able to buy a handgun without a background check, but I also think that essentially disallowing private sales of firearms is terrible; and that banks shouldn't have veto power over legitimate businesses, but that it's essentially a free market problem.
|
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 14:41:15
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Ouze wrote:The last two posts dovetail nicely into "things that I think are a problem, but that any possible solution would be a bigger problem". I don't think you should be able to buy a handgun without a background check, but I also think that essentially disallowing private sales of firearms is terrible; and that banks shouldn't have veto power over legitimate businesses, but that it's essentially a free market problem.
Agreed.
But let's analyse the consequences. Take for example the Pot industry in Colorado. It's a cash only business that most banks won't accept.
Can you image that amount of hard currency onhand in those business? It ought to be public safety issue, because that's a awfully enticing target.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 14:46:45
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
Ouze wrote:The last two posts dovetail nicely into "things that I think are a problem, but that any possible solution would be a bigger problem". I don't think you should be able to buy a handgun without a background check, but I also think that essentially disallowing private sales of firearms is terrible; and that banks shouldn't have veto power over legitimate businesses, but that it's essentially a free market problem.
My posts about banks is not related to this me thinks.
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 14:46:53
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
whembly wrote: Ouze wrote:The last two posts dovetail nicely into "things that I think are a problem, but that any possible solution would be a bigger problem". I don't think you should be able to buy a handgun without a background check, but I also think that essentially disallowing private sales of firearms is terrible; and that banks shouldn't have veto power over legitimate businesses, but that it's essentially a free market problem.
Agreed.
But let's analyse the consequences. Take for example the Pot industry in Colorado. It's a cash only business that most banks won't accept.
Can you image that amount of hard currency onhand in those business? It ought to be public safety issue, because that's a awfully enticing target.
Step 1: Go to Gunshow for "supplies".
Step 2: Go to Bass Pro Shop for ski masks and kick-ass holsters.
Step 3: Google map to Pot Shops in Colorado.
Step 4: Mo Money. Mo Money.
|
DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 14:48:05
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
Sounds like a plan to me.
|
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 16:02:59
Subject: Re:‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot
WA
|
sebster wrote:Umm, gun shops sell a product that criminals do really rather like to get their hands on. Claiming that they shouldn't be designated as high risk just makes no sense.
Well thank goodness they're looking out for us
|
"So, do please come along when we're promoting something new and need photos for the facebook page or to send to our regional manager, do please engage in our gaming when we're pushing something specific hard and need to get the little kiddies drifting past to want to come in an see what all the fuss is about. But otherwise, stay the feth out, you smelly, antisocial bastards, because we're scared you are going to say something that goes against our mantra of absolute devotion to the corporate motherland and we actually perceive any of you who've been gaming more than a year to be a hostile entity as you've been exposed to the internet and 'dangerous ideas'. " - MeanGreenStompa
"Then someone mentions Infinity and everyone ignores it because no one really plays it." - nkelsch
FREEDOM!!! - d-usa |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 16:08:17
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
The thing that doesn't make sense to me is, why would banks want to do something to potentially harm their largest cashflow customers?
I forget the source I saw it on... but the Adult film industry makes something like 5 times the money that Hollywood as a whole does per year. As a bank is trying to make their money, why WOULDN'T they want in on that?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 16:13:23
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Ensis Ferrae wrote:The thing that doesn't make sense to me is, why would banks want to do something to potentially harm their largest cashflow customers?
I forget the source I saw it on... but the Adult film industry makes something like 5 times the money that Hollywood as a whole does per year. As a bank is trying to make their money, why WOULDN'T they want in on that?
If I'm not mistaken... it's because they fear that the Feds could confiscate the money.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 16:14:55
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
whembly wrote: Ensis Ferrae wrote:The thing that doesn't make sense to me is, why would banks want to do something to potentially harm their largest cashflow customers?
I forget the source I saw it on... but the Adult film industry makes something like 5 times the money that Hollywood as a whole does per year. As a bank is trying to make their money, why WOULDN'T they want in on that?
If I'm not mistaken... it's because they fear that the Feds could confiscate the money.
But why would the Feds necessarily just confiscate the money, when it came from a legal product?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 16:15:39
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
whembly wrote: Ensis Ferrae wrote:The thing that doesn't make sense to me is, why would banks want to do something to potentially harm their largest cashflow customers?
I forget the source I saw it on... but the Adult film industry makes something like 5 times the money that Hollywood as a whole does per year. As a bank is trying to make their money, why WOULDN'T they want in on that?
If I'm not mistaken... it's because they fear that the Feds could confiscate the money.
Yup, risk of accounts being tied to prostitution/drugs and organized crime in general. Same problem with ''legal'' pot.
Its not worth the risk to them.
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/21 16:19:29
Subject: ‘High risk’ label from feds puts gun sellers in banks’ crosshairs, hurts business
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Ensis Ferrae wrote: whembly wrote: Ensis Ferrae wrote:The thing that doesn't make sense to me is, why would banks want to do something to potentially harm their largest cashflow customers?
I forget the source I saw it on... but the Adult film industry makes something like 5 times the money that Hollywood as a whole does per year. As a bank is trying to make their money, why WOULDN'T they want in on that?
If I'm not mistaken... it's because they fear that the Feds could confiscate the money.
But why would the Feds necessarily just confiscate the money, when it came from a legal product?
Legal in Colorado. State Law.
Pot is still a controlled substance, federally speaking.
|
DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
|
|
 |
 |
|