Quote from: oOoOo on February 08, 2014, 05:30:42 PM

Quote from: leopard2 on February 08, 2014, 05:11:51 PM

Quote from: BCB on February 08, 2014, 04:34:51 PM

Quote from: Trance on February 08, 2014, 04:28:38 PM

Just because the undercover said " I want to use the BTCitcoins to purchase stolen credit cards" the seller of the BTCitcoin did not care and still sold the coins.

Makes them complicit in the illegal activity of "money laundering."

That is correct. But what if the cop would not have asked this? Just bought 1 BTC and $30K the next day? Does anyone here seriously think that would have been it?

Even if the guy would have said, $30K is above the $10K money laundering limit, that would not have helped, these cops were looking for an easy success instead of doing some real police work, catching some real scammers.

It is easy to reject a buyer who openly says he is doing something illegal; actually that would get you in trouble in almost every country. The $10K money laundering limit is also not the problem.

The really nasty part about this case is that, obviously, everyone who sells anything for more than $300 in Florida for cash, commits a felony? Was that law copied from North Korea? Is that not against the constitution, to prohibit private citizens from selling their personal property (such as gold, silver, foreign currency that may be left over from a vacation, or BTC) for legal tender?

If Adolf had won the war, it couldn't be worse.

At this point in history it is basically impossible for the average person to keep up with all these random "money-laundering" laws, especially if they can be changed arbitrarily at any legislators whim. These so called "laws" are specifically designed to crush small business and individual entrepreneurs who can not afford an expensive law-team.

Also notice, how this was an entirely fabricated "crime". If it wasn't for the "law enforcement" officers, no "crime" would have ever happened. The officers apparently told those guys that they were intending to buy stolen credit cards, which was a lie - they weren't.
So who overstepped the moral boundaries here?

What I find particularly scary though is how here, in this very forum, people seem to fail to understand the crass immorality of these events, and are actually trying to justify the despicable behavior of the "law enforcement". You know, there also used to be people who tried to justify the nazis... just sayin....

.

Absolutely. So-called "money laundering" is not a real crime. There is no victim. It's just an attempt by the state to punish SOMEONE for the alleged crimes of the "guilty" who "violated" some other state edict which also probably does not have a real victim. It creates out of thin air a so-called conspiracy between provably innocent people and faceless nameless supposed criminals somewhere down the line of murky trade connections where an actual crime against person or property may or may not have occurred.

This is a perfect example of lawn enforcement creating a "crime" where none exists just to bully and intimidate people and create some sort of ridiculous justification for their existence. This is obviously not a real crime because there is no one to bring charges who can legitimately claim an injury or loss from this transaction. It's just a voluntary exchange of value. Period.

It's telling how they introduce the prospect of credit card fraud to make all of this seem like the seller willingly engaged in a conspiracy to defraud an actual person. The "money laundering" charge hangs on absolutely nothing but an edict from the state which takes away our right to freely engage in trade, so they always have to come up with some supposed real crime to insinuate into the mix even though no such crime has actually occurred. This makes the innocent seller, whose only interest is in selling bitcoins for dollars, an "accomplice" to non-existent crime against a non-existent person! The state makes it sound as if the orificer's lie establishes a real victim and a real crime. They also seem to insinuate that we are all personally responsible for the possible actions of people we trade with where there is absolutely no other connection to us, our actions, or our intentions. This is just guilt by association. It's a trick used every day in smearing and attacking people verbally. They use it in state propaganda, and now it has become entrenched in state law. The state has almost completely taken over every aspect of trade. If everything you do with your property and money is not fully controlled right now, then it is tracked and traced and noted and filed to the extent currently possible, and ready to be called up at any time to be used against you for any reason at any time. This is the real crime here - the state creating a situation where the innocent are made out of be guilty, where it's a "crime" to engage in voluntary exchange without the state's permission and without fully submitting to their demand to control your life.

It's one thing to comment on how to avoid becoming a victim of the state's absurd aggressions and their vague entrapping edicts and "regulations," but don't for one minute think you can justify the state's actions in any of these cases, or say that "these people had it coming". This and other cases such as the Bitinstant guy, the seizing of Mt. Gox's accounts in the US, and many others, are all completely bogus and have no merit whatsoever. They are clearly cases of state persecution. Anyone who doesn't make this clear in their comments is only contributing to the power of the police state.

They want us all thinking we're all guilty and that we deserve punishment. We all need to fight against this incessant and insanely creepy propaganda in our comments. Don't give these people any more power than they already have. We need to tear down their arguments and justifications for all the violence they commit, not mindlessly support it by blaming the people who get caught in their web.