Article: Gun violence protection via Financial Intelligence Act

Seems like a pretty clear cut violation of the 4th Amendment to me.
 
No banks are going to do that crap - we don't have enough storage as it is now. And retention of non-necessary consumer data is super touchy subject now after the Wells scandal
 
WTF they don't even have an operating definition of 'suspicious' yet? HTF does something like the make it to congress? This is not rhetorical question, I'm dead serious. A high school student who proposed this as a project would get graded a D for failing to meet and logical validity or soundness, have no operating definitions and supported with no evidence. In college it would be a failure, and in any other real world job it would be an embarrassment and given a 'need to see better performance'. Seriously, its an otherwise fleeting idea, a childish-level conception that was just regurgitated out and then somehow perceived to be at a level worthy of national implementation. I would laugh, but its just sad.

Think about how many fleeting ideas get typed onto this forum that are regretted, realized they were unmeasured and silly postings. This is fu&*ng congress. Dangerous times we live in.
 
Seems like a pretty clear cut violation of the 4th Amendment to me.

Seems like a clear cut violation of a 4th grade exercise in 'developing a clear, systematic process that can accomplish a task', much less our fridge constitution. Its mind numbingly bad. They dont even know how they will define SUSPICIOUS, which the entire bill is predicated on. its insane.
 
Agree with the 4th amendment violations comments above. IMO and some would have good reasons to disagree, make it a habit to only pay cash for firearms purchases and shooting range payments...Yes, a bit challenging to use cash if buying online but workable through an LGS and paying a little extra.
 
Back
Top Bottom