3 ms·

> I can't think of a single person I would be happy to welcome in my home/business with high explosives or a firearm, but would refuse to take $20 from in my or

> I can't think of a single person I would be happy to welcome in my home/business with high explosives or a firearm, but would refuse to take $20 from in my ordinary course of business offered to the general public. A person feeling safe around another person does not satisfy the government ID requirements for anything. Does it work when you show up at the DMV asking for a license? Are you upset that it doesn't? Opening a bank account is not a trivial matter. A bank account has the potential to do a lot more damage to society than a single firearm. > you are not part of the audience which I expect to benefit from my comment. What is the benefit of your comment? In my opinion false equivalencies and over-the-top rhetoric are rarely beneficial.

notch656a 4y ago
Yes I am upset the ID requirement for a bank account is higher than the ID requirement to bring firearms into the bank. IMO even those without proof of address and other KYC deficiencies, which commonly disproportionately limit access to poor and vulnerable populations, should be permitted banking access. >A bank account has the potential to do a lot more damage to society than a single firearm. I think there is a strong argument there is a lot more day to day damage from not having a bank account than not having a gun. When we use your damage-based approach I think we may find KYC creates more damages than it prevents.
- Eisenstein 4y ago
  > I think there is a strong argument there is a lot more day to day damage from not having a bank account than not having a gun. When we use your damage-based approach I think we may find KYC creates more damages than it prevents. Are you advocating for removing KYC completely, or for making it on par with getting a concealed weapon, or that having a concealed weapons permit should qualify as KYC? This is the problem with using the kind of rhetoric that appeals to emotion -- it doesn't actually get your point across, it just gets people upset about something.
- davidgay 4y ago
  > Yes I am upset the ID requirement for a bank account is higher than the ID requirement to bring firearms into the bank. It's fairly clear to me that the problem is with the latter's weakness and not with the former's strength.
  - notch656a 4y ago
    I appreciate at least you can have an opinion on this matter without pretending like somehow my point cannot be understood, even if you disagree with it. Your rebuttal shows you understand what was written and even are able to make counterpoints building on that understanding. Thank you for that basic respect, which sadly is not shown by the other counterparty.

notch656a 4y ago

Yes I am upset the ID requirement for a bank account is higher than the ID requirement to bring firearms into the bank. IMO even those without proof of address and other KYC deficiencies, which commonly disproportionately limit access to poor and vulnerable populations, should be permitted banking access. >A bank account has the potential to do a lot more damage to society than a single firearm. I think there is a strong argument there is a lot more day to day damage from not having a bank account than not having a gun. When we use your damage-based approach I think we may find KYC creates more damages than it prevents.

Eisenstein 4y ago
> I think there is a strong argument there is a lot more day to day damage from not having a bank account than not having a gun. When we use your damage-based approach I think we may find KYC creates more damages than it prevents. Are you advocating for removing KYC completely, or for making it on par with getting a concealed weapon, or that having a concealed weapons permit should qualify as KYC? This is the problem with using the kind of rhetoric that appeals to emotion -- it doesn't actually get your point across, it just gets people upset about something.
davidgay 4y ago
> Yes I am upset the ID requirement for a bank account is higher than the ID requirement to bring firearms into the bank. It's fairly clear to me that the problem is with the latter's weakness and not with the former's strength.
- notch656a 4y ago
  I appreciate at least you can have an opinion on this matter without pretending like somehow my point cannot be understood, even if you disagree with it. Your rebuttal shows you understand what was written and even are able to make counterpoints building on that understanding. Thank you for that basic respect, which sadly is not shown by the other counterparty.