Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
The Library => The SGA => Topic started by: Token on October 20, 2011, 12:15:57 PM
-
http://www.klfy.com/story/15717759/second-hand-dealer-law
Law Bans Cash for Second Hand Transactions
Cold hard cash. It's good everywhere you go, right? You can use it to pay for anything.
But that's not the case here in Louisiana now. It's a law that was passed during this year's busy legislative session.
House bill 195 basically says those who buy and sell second hand goods cannot use cash to make those transactions, and it flew so far under the radar most businesses don't even know about it.
"We're gonna lose a lot of business," says Danny Guidry, who owns the Pioneer Trading Post in Lafayette. He deals in buying and selling unique second hand items.
"We don't want this cash transaction to be taken away from us. It's an everyday transaction," Guidry explains.
Guidry says, "I think everyone in this business once they find out about it. They're will definitely be a lot of uproar."
The law states those who buy or sell second hand goods are prohibited from using cash. State representative Rickey Hardy co-authored the bill.
Hardy says, "they give a check or a cashiers money order, or electronic one of those three mechanisms is used."
Hardy says the bill is targeted at criminals who steal anything from copper to televisions, and sell them for a quick buck. Having a paper trail will make it easier for law enforcement.
"It's a mechanism to be used so the police department has something to go on and have a lead," explains Hardy.
Guidry feels his store shouldn't have to change it's ways of doing business, because he may possibly buy or sell stolen goods. Something he says has happened once in his eight years.
"We are being targeted for something we shouldn't be."
Besides non-profit resellers like Goodwill, and garage sales, the language of the bill encompasses stores like the Pioneer Trading Post and flea markets.
Lawyer Thad Ackel Jr. feels the passage of this bill begins a slippery slope for economic freedom in the state.
"The government is placing a significant restriction on individuals transacting in their own private property," says Ackel.
Pawn shops have been forced to keep records of their clients for years. However under this bill they are still allowed to deal in cash.
Not sure how I feel about this law. It's not Alabama so it doesn't affect me, but if it were it would make my job a lot easier. With that said, as much as it would help me, it just doesn't look like a good law to me.
-
Based on the article, it looks like the law is targeting all cash transactions for second hand items. Criminals usually don't pawn stolen items at trading posts, flea markets, antique stores, etc., yet this law will affect those types of businesses.
If the law should exist at all, then I think it should be narrowly tailored so as to effect those merchants which most often receive stolen goods, such as pawn shops.
But, even then, there are less restrictive and generally better means of reaching their goal. Why not make merchants keep logs of items bought/sold via cash? These logs could include the buyer's/seller's contact information so that if any wrongdoing is found or otherwise assumed to exist, then the person is easy to find. You can have a paper trail without restricting the types of payment accepted.
I don't see how requiring the use of money orders and cashier's checks will achieve their desired goal. Money orders don't indicate who the payment is from, and you can put any name for the payer on a cashier's check; these forms of payment could be just as virtually untraceable as cash.
-
If the government does not want me to use cash to buy things, then quit making cash.
Cash deals have been around since the beginning of time. It is the basis of our economy. If we cannot buy and sell our property at will without tracking, then we may as well get implanted with chips that keep up with our transactions.
Bad law.
-
I'd say this is pretty damn stupid. It's sort of like banning guns in a particular area because <0.001% of all gun owners use them to commit violent crime. Nevermind the 99+% of folks who are not breaking any laws.
-
Typical myopic, progressive lawmaking. I'm not surprised at this lunatic attempt at solving a problem but causing bigger problems in the process.
-
Based on the article, it looks like the law is targeting all cash transactions for second hand items. Criminals usually don't pawn stolen items at trading posts, flea markets, antique stores, etc., yet this law will affect those types of businesses.
If the law should exist at all, then I think it should be narrowly tailored so as to effect those merchants which most often receive stolen goods, such as pawn shops.
But, even then, there are less restrictive and generally better means of reaching their goal. Why not make merchants keep logs of items bought/sold via cash? These logs could include the buyer's/seller's contact information so that if any wrongdoing is found or otherwise assumed to exist, then the person is easy to find. You can have a paper trail without restricting the types of payment accepted.
I don't see how requiring the use of money orders and cashier's checks will achieve their desired goal. Money orders don't indicate who the payment is from, and you can put any name for the payer on a cashier's check; these forms of payment could be just as virtually untraceable as cash.
I would agree. The real reason for this law, in my opinion, is to make it harder for small business owners to cook their tax books. Take away the cash purchase and you take away the ability (90% of it anyway) to make a transaction without a paper trail.
-
So they can't use money in it's purest form to buy things? Got it.
Dumb fucks.
-
One more state that will not allow me to find out the "cash price" while horse trading.
Fuck'em!
Course the other side of this is how in God's green Earth do they actually expect to enforce this?
-
One more state that will not allow me to find out the "cash price" while horse trading.
Fuck'em!
Course the other side of this is how in God's green Earth do they actually expect to enforce this?
Was thinking the same thing. What they are saying is they want to be able to trace it. Which in itself is untraceable. Again....dumb fucks.