3 ms·
> If you take $5, walk across the mexican border, and then buy an antibiotic labeled for use in humnans -- is that a violation of US law because the Mexican pha
by giantrobot 5y ago
> If you take $5, walk across the mexican border, and then buy an antibiotic labeled for use in humnans -- is that a violation of US law because the Mexican pharmacy sold something that a US person could possibly access?
That's not how the law actually works though. The store in Mexico can't be accessed by someone in the jurisdiction of the US at the time of the transaction. There's no legal avenue for the US to pursue the Mexican store except negotiate with the Mexican government to extradite them.
Additionally most US laws have "knowingly" clauses. While you can be charged for committing a crime it's up to the state your actions met every clause of the laws. So even if on the off chance the US was able to extradite your Mexican shop owner they would need to prove the shop owner knowingly committed the act.
- quantumBerry 5y agoAnd the mixer can't be accessed by dollars currently in the US, only by crypto that has been transmitted overseas via propagation of the blockchain. The mixer isn't sending dollars across the border to the US, and for blockchain based crypto that requires the blockchain to be propagated across the border, likely by a completely unknowing 3rd party even if the mixer operator doesn't wish for persons on US soil to have access to the blockchain. Furthermore Tornado never responded to the e-mail so it's not clear they were aware the undercover claimed they had criminal intent. It's quite possible the e-mail was never read. Desiring privacy isn't a crime, and that's a very legitimate use of mixers. Not to mention if you have cash in your wallet you're mixing and trading them all of the time, and most certainly you are at some time unwittingly laundering formerly dirty cash. So your statement really just emboldens the insanity of the claims of the DOJ.