Cash not allowed by LAW?

[jporter12]

http://www.klfy.com/story/15717759/second-hand-dealer-law

How ridiculous!

LA can fall off into the ocean along with CA, as far as I'm concerned!

[Bad324]

i wonder if this applies regarding the strippers and hookers on Bourbon Street too

[Kyle Hunter]

Wow . . From a state rep. that co-authored the bill "they give a check or a cashiers money order, or electronic one of those three mechanisms is used."

I do believe this guy's grammar is actually worse than mine.

[idodishez]

And yet there are still those who claim we aren't losing our freedoms

NoBama 2012

[Disclaimer]

Republican majority in LA and a Republican governor that signed this.

Yea, those Republicans are really towing that small business line by taking away economic freedom to use our own paper currency to conduct transactions.

This bill was basically made to put flea marketers out of business.

[Joey614]

Craigslist ?

[buildit]

Simple, like an arcade or casino you pay for credits with cash then use the credits (Chips) to pay for your item. Since the chips are not second hand and barter is still legal the loop hole is formed.

People who wanna cheat the system will always find a way.

[imprez55]

"THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE" That is on every single dollar. How can a state law bypass a federal one; I don't even think this is legal.

[chevysoldier]

"THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE" That is on every single dollar. How can a state law bypass a federal one; I don't even think this is legal.

EXACTLY!!! REPPED.

This is such BS.

[dorifto240]

"THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE" That is on every single dollar. How can a state law bypass a federal one; I don't even think this is legal.

Actually I think that a State's laws do supersede Federal laws. The actual power that the Federal government has over states is (legally and constitutionally) fairly small. For example, Federal lawyers had to use the Interstate Commerce Act to enforce legal action against Southern companies who wouldn't hire blacks. They also use grant money with specific requirements to get states to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act. If a state builds disability friendly sidewalks and other improvements, they get Federal money for schools.

If this law stands up as Constitutional, which I doubt, don't be surprised if Louisiana starts to lose Federal funding and grant monies.

[Kyle Hunter]

Simple, like an arcade or casino you pay for credits with cash then use the credits (Chips) to pay for your item. Since the chips are not second hand and barter is still legal the loop hole is formed.

People who wanna cheat the system will always find a way.

Should be gold/silver . . in which case who gives a rats ass about government debt paper?

Actually I think that a State's laws do supersede Federal laws. The actual power that the Federal government has over states is (legally and constitutionally) fairly small. For example, Federal lawyers had to use the Interstate Commerce Act to enforce legal action against Southern companies who wouldn't hire blacks. They also use grant money with specific requirements to get states to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act. If a state builds disability friendly sidewalks and other improvements, they get Federal money for schools.

If this law stands up as Constitutional, which I doubt, don't be surprised if Louisiana starts to lose Federal funding and grant monies.

State law should supersede federal . . I only hope that it is not too late to remember this.

[imprez55]

Actually I think that a State's laws do supersede Federal laws. The actual power that the Federal government has over states is (legally and constitutionally) fairly small. For example, Federal lawyers had to use the Interstate Commerce Act to enforce legal action against Southern companies who wouldn't hire blacks. They also use grant money with specific requirements to get states to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act. If a state builds disability friendly sidewalks and other improvements, they get Federal money for schools.

If this law stands up as Constitutional, which I doubt, don't be surprised if Louisiana starts to lose Federal funding and grant monies.

This prompted me to do a little digging which I ended up here. In the first paragraph it states that "Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise." Intent is always hard to discern, however, the State law exemption seems to be there to allow States to prohibit private businesses from enacting their own policies. I think LA is taking advantage of this and saying that the State law is then defining their own policy for private businesses to follow, which is certainly not a power allowed to them. the legalese behind the real law might be different, but that is all I decided to delve into it. I should not be forced to pay fees for a credit/debit card or be forced to have my money in a bank where it could be lost.

[ReconRat]

lol, Louisiana IS second hand goods...

soo, theft is legal there, if cash is refused when selling stolen items? Locking the barn door after the horse is gone, me thinks. Ignoring the actual crime. Or simply giving up on enforcing it.

[Steve Butters]

Actually I think that a State's laws do supersede Federal laws. The actual power that the Federal government has over states is (legally and constitutionally) fairly small. For example, Federal lawyers had to use the Interstate Commerce Act to enforce legal action against Southern companies who wouldn't hire blacks. They also use grant money with specific requirements to get states to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act. If a state builds disability friendly sidewalks and other improvements, they get Federal money for schools.

If this law stands up as Constitutional, which I doubt, don't be surprised if Louisiana starts to lose Federal funding and grant monies.

federal law takes priority over state.

thats why states cant set their own drinking ages, age to purchase firearms, etc

a state cant pass a law that goes against federal law....so this law talking about not being able to use cash is going against federal law and it would get overturned in about 2 seconds in an appeals court

[chevysoldier]

federal law takes priority over state.

thats why states cant set their own drinking ages, age to purchase firearms, etc

a state cant pass a law that goes against federal law....so this law talking about not being able to use cash is going against federal law and it would get overturned in about 2 seconds in an appeals court

States CAN set their own drinking age. The Feds just told them that if they don't make the age 21, they will deny the states funding. Blackmail.

[Steve Butters]

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

also

The "supremacy clause" is the most important guarantor of national union. It assures that the Constitution and federal laws and treaties take precedence over state law and binds all judges to adhere to that principle in their courts.

http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm

Edited October 25, 2011 by Steve Butters

[chevysoldier]

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Drinking_Age_Act

The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 (23 U.S.C. § 158) was passed on July 17, 1984 by the United States Congress as a mechanism whereby all states would become thereafter required to legislate the age of 21 years as a minimum age for purchasing and publicly possessing alcoholic beverages. Under the Federal Aid Highway Act, a state with a minimum age below 21 would be subjected to a ten percent decrease in its annual federal highway apportionment.[1]

[Steve Butters]

right in your quote bud

"The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 (23 U.S.C. § 158) was passed on July 17, 1984 by the United States Congress as a mechanism whereby all states would become thereafter required to legislate the age of 21 years as a minimum age for purchasing and publicly possessing alcoholic beverages."

emphasis on required.

[chevysoldier]

right in your quote bud

"The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 (23 U.S.C. § 158) was passed on July 17, 1984 by the United States Congress as a mechanism whereby all states would become thereafter required to legislate the age of 21 years as a minimum age for purchasing and publicly possessing alcoholic beverages."

emphasis on required.

Yes. the feds said, you will mandate an age of 21 or else we will withhold federal funding. The feds forced the states to mandate that age. Before that law, states had other ages, many of which were 18.

Also quoted in there:

. Under the Federal Aid Highway Act, a state with a minimum age below 21 would be subjected to a ten percent decrease in its annual federal highway apportionment

[Steve Butters]

and call it whatever you want - but you will never convince me that state laws take priority over federal.

and that highway act is from the 50s

[Steve Butters]

chevy - show me where in the constitution it says that state law takes precedence over federal law.

[Steve Butters]

Actually I think that a State's laws do supersede Federal laws.

State law should supersede federal . . I only hope that it is not too late to remember this.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

heres my entire argument - and theres nothing else to be said really...its right there in black and white

[chevysoldier]

While this act did not outlaw the consumption of alcoholic beverages by those under 21 years of age, seven states and Washington D.C. extended its provisions into an outright ban. These states are: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Vermont. The minimum drinking age is a state law. However, most states still permit "underage" consumption of alcohol in some circumstances. In some states, no restriction on private consumption is made, while in others, consumption is only allowed in specific locations,

South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987)

The United States Congress passed legislation, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, designed to discourage states from lowering the legal drinking age in 1984. It did so by withholding 5% of federal highway funding from states that did not comply. In 1988, that amount changed to 10%. South Dakota, which had allowed 19-year-olds to purchase beer containing up to 3.2% alcohol, sued to challenge the law, naming Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole as the defendant because her office was responsible for enforcing the legislation.

The Supreme Court decided that Congress applying its taxing and spending clauses was not in violation of the 21st Amendment. It is subject to four covenants:

1.The condition must be unambiguous;

2.The condition must promote "the general welfare";

3.The condition should relate "to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs"; and

4.Other constitutional provisions may provide an independent bar to the conditional grant of federal funds.

The first three restrictions, Rehnquist noted, are uncontested. This leaves the fourth restriction. The Tenth Amendment bars federal regulation of the States, and it has been suggested that the Twenty-First Amendment might prohibit federal regulation of the drinking age. Nevertheless, the Congressional condition of highway funds is merely a "pressure" on the State to comply, not a "compulsion" to do so, because the State's failure to meet the condition deprives it of only 5%[1] of the highway funds it may obtain. Therefore, Congress has not run afoul of the Tenth or Twenty-First Amendments.

[alienpi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggWBEX0Fnpc

[Steve Butters]

ok chevy - 1 down, now prove to me the rest of them... firearm laws, driving laws, voting laws, etc etc...since state law is the law of the land it should be easy to prove right? forget the constitution. maybe ohio should make its own currency since the dollar is going down the drain