• Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you think about it, do you really want a history of federal crimes recorded on your bank account…?

    • marmo7ade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yes. Context matters. I’m not scared of the words “federal crime” like you clearly are. I care which crimes were committed.

      If I found out a business was harmed for selling cannabis I would be MORE LIKELY to support them. Not less.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What if dozens/hundreds of individuals were prosecuted for possession of a controlled substance because the DEA a) subpoenas the suppliers to get a list of transactions and B) subpoenas the credit card processors to get info on customers?

        Because that’s the fear

        This is extremely unlikely under the current admin, but we may very well have a far more hostile admin in just under 18 months

      • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t live in the US… but if at a certain time the federal government decides to go backwards and wants to charge cannabis purchasers with federal crimes then you’re ready to be served up on a platter by your bank.

        The context here is payment method, not your willingness to support legal cannabis dispensers.

        • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          That would be a pretty big list of people at this point. I don’t think it would even be possible to charge all of them. It’s just unrealistic especially since it’s legal in the state. Possible but unlikely.

          • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You say that, but historically cannabis related charges in particular have been used to target specific parts of the population and individuals. It’s the sort of thing that could be exploited nefariously at a convenient moment. Perhaps I’m reading too much in to it.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            It could be used to target-prosecute political enemies and “unpopular elements” like police/climate protestors.

            Really we just need federal legalization.

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I disagree. The federal government has shown every willingness to go after all of us. Imagine a 1000 dollar fine for every pot transaction. You can fight it if you want but that would risk criminal charges. So you take the plea deal.

          • blockhouse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Agree. Which is why if the federal government decides to put a clamp down on cannabis use, they’re not going to prosecute thousands of users. Prosecuting three or four card payment processing companies and the banks they do business with would have an icy cold chilling effect and bring the industry’s cash flows to a dead stop.

    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’d make sure to register your company financially in a way that doesn’t specify the business right?

      • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Is obfuscating what your officially registered business fundamentally really possible? Not going to pass muster legally.

        • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Don’t lots of adult goods companies already do this to avoid it saying “big dildos.com” or the like on people’s statements?

          • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Right, but that’s for your personal privacy, not your legal protection. If a weed company calls itself Cheshire Garden Supplies instead of Weed Weedersons Weed Emporium then that doesn’t stop the fact that you bought stuff from a weed dispensary from being a federal crime if push comes to shove. All I’m saying is that cash seems the naturally more sensible option either way.