• Hello, please SIGN-UP FOR A FREE account and become a member of our community!
    You will then be able to start threads, post comments and send messages to other members. Thanks!
  • 💪IronMag Labs® 30% Off Easter Sale👉www.ironmaglabs.com Coupon code: EASTER30🐰

The Designer steroid Control act has passed Congress- Ban is coming soon

I disagree. Payment methods...they have deniability. how bout western union. ? They profit daily and the Feds know this. They KNOW how sources do things. Don't think they don't. Never once in taking down a source then western union. You would have to prove in criminal court that they had knowledge of the illegal transaction regardless of the "profit" or not
 
Oh and no where was I referring to suing Paypal or Visa in civil court. If you look at my comments you'll see I am referring to bringing a class action suit against the government over the ban. And also recourse suits for any small businesses prosecuted while larger businesses are given a pass.

Ah ok.
 
I disagree. Payment methods...they have deniability. how bout western union. ? They profit daily and the Feds know this. They KNOW how sources do things. Don't think they don't. Never once in taking down a source then western union. You would have to prove in criminal court that they had knowledge of the illegal transaction regardless of the "profit" or not


It doesn't matter. The fed know lots of things and see lots of things they don't prosecute. That doesn't make them not actionable in court if they choose to. The govt often turns a blind eye to illegal activity if its reasonable, and there are extenuating circumstances or they just aren't that interested.

The govt is like any other enterprise. They have limited resources and manpower, so they don't go after everything. They need agents, lawyers, personnel, etc to handle a single investigation of this nature. So they don't go after all of them. They have to fight the fights they think are worth fighting, the ones they think they can win and that's often based on political priorities at the time in question.

But no, you would not have to "prove in criminal court that they had knowledge of the illegal transaction".

As you correctly stated earlier, ignorance of the law is not an excuse and won't get you a pass. Visa has more attorney's working for it than the govt. Visa has more internet and web connections than you or I. The information is not hidden, or secret but published right on the websites where VISA and Paypal are processing the transactions. In fact, it says on your receipt from Paypal what you purchased, right down to the number of bottles, etc.

So a federal prosecutor would NOT have to prove they have knowledge. That proof is already demonstrated by the fact the items they are processing are clearly marked by the manufacturer and clearly advertised by the Merchants selling them.

So claiming ignorance of what they were selling is just not an option for them.

IF PH's merchants were selling them and calling hiding the labels, hiding the ingredients, calling it Beef Gravy or something...then sure. They could claim ignorance.

But there is no option for that in this case. The information is provided freely by the merchants on every website where they are soled.
 
It doesn't matter. The fed know lots of things and see lots of things they don't prosecute. That doesn't make them not actionable in court if they choose to. The govt often turns a blind eye to illegal activity if its reasonable, and there are extenuating circumstances or they just aren't that interested.

The govt is like any other enterprise. They have limited resources and manpower, so they don't go after everything. They need agents, lawyers, personnel, etc to handle a single investigation of this nature. So they don't go after all of them. They have to fight the fights they think are worth fighting, the ones they think they can win and that's often based on political priorities at the time in question.

But no, you would not have to "prove in criminal court that they had knowledge of the illegal transaction".

As you correctly stated earlier, ignorance of the law is not an excuse and won't get you a pass. Visa has more attorney's working for it than the govt. Visa has more internet and web connections than you or I. The information is not hidden, or secret but published right on the websites where VISA and Paypal are processing the transactions. In fact, it says on your receipt from Paypal what you purchased, right down to the number of bottles, etc.

So a federal prosecutor would NOT have to prove they have knowledge. That proof is already demonstrated by the fact the items they are processing are clearly marked by the manufacturer and clearly advertised by the Merchants selling them.

So claiming ignorance of what they were selling is just not an option for them.

IF PH's merchants were selling them and calling hiding the labels, hiding the ingredients, calling it Beef Gravy or something...then sure. They could claim ignorance.

But there is no option for that in this case. The information is provided freely by the merchants on every website where they are soled.

Lol dude .. I disagree. That's not true at all. All head pay method providers would be criminals in this line of thinking. You would have to prove if you were going to charge them criminally. Let me ask you this...under what charge are you speaking of. What a pile be the criminal charge
 
Right now Pot sales are legal in Colorado and Washington state.

But that doesn't mean the Fed can't go in tomorrow, and start mass arrests, and prosecuting businesses under RICO statutes that handled transactions, provided facilities for the transactions, (like the strip malls renting to the pot shops) or any other peripheral business that got involved with one of these pot merchants, and in some way provided assistance to help facilitate the sale thereof.


All are liable under RICO, which is why Bank of America, Chase, etc opted out of handling the processing of funds from these transactions.

Their lawyers, came out publicly citing RICO statutes as their reason for abstinence, acknowledging openly that they'd be liable under RICO, should they proceed.
 
And ur speaking of racketeering under the organized crime control act? Dude ur way of. These are simply methods of payment brother. I'd love to see the charge hat you would think he government would be chargin these companies with. Certainly not RICO cuz that's not an official charge...
 
Lol dude .. I disagree. That's not true at all. All head pay method providers would be criminals in this line of thinking. You would have to prove if you were going to charge them criminally. Let me ask you this...under what charge are you speaking of. What a pile be the criminal charge


That's right. Technically they are all criminals under the law.


And what criminal charge am I speaking of?

I've been citing it for the last hour. RICO.

RICO was designed to prosecute ANY business that handles, profits or facilitates an illegal enterprise. It was originally designed to break the Mob and was used by the govt to do just that with the Gotti crime family. But they use it all the time.

RICO is what the criminal charges would be. Its called "CONSPIRACY", and its got great teeth.

The government uses it all the time. The fact the govt hasn't used it yet to prosecute on that level, doesn't change how the laws written, or their legality in doing so should they choose to.
 
And ur speaking of racketeering under the organized crime control act? Dude ur way of. These are simply methods of payment brother. I'd love to see the charge hat you would think he government would be chargin these companies with. Certainly not RICO cuz that's not an official charge...


Wrong. That's exactly what RICO is designed to go after.

These aren't just "payment methods".

Visa, Paypal, Mastercard all make profits off each sale.

RICO statutes target ANY enterprise that facilitates or profits from an illegal transaction.

That the govt gives Visa a pass usually, doesn't' mean they have to.
 
That's right. Technically they are all criminals under the law.


And what criminal charge am I speaking of?

I've been citing it for the last hour. RICO.

RICO was designed to prosecute ANY business that handles, profits or facilitates an illegal enterprise. It was originally designed to break the Mob and was used by the govt to do just that with the Gotti crime family. But they use it all the time.

RICO is what the criminal charges would be. Its called "CONSPIRACY", and its got great teeth.

The government uses it all the time. The fact the govt hasn't used it yet to prosecute on that level, doesn't change how the laws written, or their legality in doing so should they choose to.

Ah yes there it is. Conspiracy...to conspire. Not this in this case. PayPal and visa would have to be proven to have Knowledge of handling funds of an illegal transaction. U have to have knowledge to conspire. Yes they make profit, maybe the gov. Would confiscate the fees they collected but criminally charged...? Rico act is NOT a charged . U might be barged with racketeering UNDER the Rico act if that's what ur trying to say or conspiracy UNDER the Rico act but what I'm trying to ask is... Which charge are you speaking of?
 
Anyway you're free to disagree but I know a little about this, and the RICO umbrella does cover any business profiting from an illegal activity.

Anyway I'm just offering an idea on how to approach the ban.

Civil suits tend to be powerful when brought against the federal govt. And I know that half the cops and DEA agents out there tasked to enforce this sort of thing are most likely using PH's themselves. They're not steroids. They're similar to them, but they're not going to turn you into Dorian Yates.

They just help you recover better so you can train more. Don't train they don't do anything. Cops train hard in the gym, and they tend to like stuff like this to help them. So it seems the law would not be a high priority, and a law suit could prompt the government to rethink it.

Just my two cents worth.

That's all I got.
 
Ah yes there it is. Conspiracy...to conspire. Not this in this case. PayPal and visa would have to be proven to have Knowledge of handling funds of an illegal transaction. U have to have knowledge to conspire. Yes they make profit, maybe the gov. Would confiscate the fees they collected but criminally charged...? Rico act is NOT a charged . U might be barged with racketeering UNDER the Rico act if that's what ur trying to say or conspiracy UNDER the Rico act but what I'm trying to ask is... Which charge are you speaking of?


Wrong.

The government would not have to prove they knew about it, because the ingredients are publicly listed.

So Visa and Paypal couldn't claim they didn't know.

You can't claim you don't know something that is publicly advertised and printed on the receipts your business is printing.

So no, they'd not have to prove anything in regards to foreknowledge. In court, their awareness of what they were selling, is already demonstrated by their own receipts.
 
Anyway you're free to disagree but I know a little about this, and the RICO umbrella does cover any business profiting from an illegal activity.

Anyway I'm just offering an idea on how to approach the ban.

Civil suits tend to be powerful when brought against the federal govt. And I know that half the cops and DEA agents out there tasked to enforce this sort of thing are most likely using PH's themselves. They're not steroids. They're similar to them, but they're not going to turn you into Dorian Yates.

They just help you recover better so you can train more. Don't train they don't do anything. Cops train hard in the gym, and they tend to like stuff like this to help them. So it seems the law would not be a high priority, and a law suit could prompt the government to rethink it.

Just my two cents worth.

That's all I got.

This is all I'll say...what it implying or actually saying is that any other business or enterprise that profits from an illegal act or business conducting illegal crimes could dragged into a criminal offense just from profiting from a crime..in this case ph sales. So...the truck drivers, visa, postal services, pay pay, packaging companies, companies that makes te bottles, labels and they all profited from the sale. That's a very big umbrella Rico is holding. It's ridiculous. Can't charge visa slash PayPal. This was to fight organized crime and racketeering using business's ...never mind. It's common sense and I understand the law very well. But to each his own
 
This is all I'll say...what it implying or actually saying is that any other business or enterprise that profits from an illegal act or business conducting illegal crimes could dragged into a criminal offense just from profiting from a crime..in this case ph sales. So...the truck drivers, visa, postal services, pay pay, packaging companies, companies that makes te bottles, labels and they all profited from the sale. That's a very big umbrella Rico is holding. It's ridiculous. Can't charge visa slash PayPal. This was to fight organized crime and racketeering using business's ...never mind. It's common sense and I understand the law very well. But to each his own


I can tell you do have knowledge of law, but RICO is a big umbrella. That's the whole intent of RICO and why there was so much hubbub over its broad applicability when the statutes came out. But it is really designed for financiers, and transport companies would not see on the box what the ingredients were anyway so unless they researched the company they carried for which is not the "norm" then they'd not likely be aware of what they're transporting. So they'd almost always get a pass.

Of course if the govt prosecutor wanted to be a prick, they could still charge them if the company maintains a public website showing what it is they sell, but it wouldn't carry weight as again, its not the "norm" for a carrier to investigate a customer prior to carrying for them.

It IS however, the norm for financiers to investigate businesses to whom they extend credit and process financial transactions for.

In fact, it is a requirement. A federal requirement in fact. One of the first things a financier does prior to extending any sort of credit or financial terms is look at what the business applying for those terms does in addition to verifying credit. So its impossible for any financial institution processing payments to claim they weren't aware of what the business did. Because its the "norm" to do a full credit background and examine a business and even its assets, prior to providing any sort of financial or credit arrangements. So the options just not there.


Anyway its moot because no ones doing that. But what someone "could" do, someone who makes PH's for example is get together with lots of other similar someones, and file a class action lawsuit challenging the ban, as it unfairly targets businesses to favor other ones (like Optimum Nutrition for example) without the govt producing any solid evidence that the product is any more or less dangerous than the ones sold by the other nutrition manufacturers.

And the other thing I was suggesting, is were some business prosecuted, like a small Mom and Pop shop, they could leverage unfair enforcement practices to file suit for damages against the federal govt for unfairly targeting small business.

Anyway again just some thoughts.
 
I can't ..sorry bud I can't do this anymore. I strongly disagree with you as far as visa pay pal or any other method of payment being criminally charged with conspiracy or racketeering under the Rico act. They are payment methods and assume no responsibility as what the customer purchases. Like if I go in a mom and pop store and write a check I used that check from my credit union. To say that they could be held criminally accountable is absurd. I'm sure ur a cool guy so I'm just going to leave it here
 
Last edited:
No, its not even remotely the same as you writing funds out from your own account, to handling financial transactions for another person.

There are specific laws, RICO is just part of the area that can be leveraged, that expressly prohibit the profiting from illegal transactions. And also that strictly regulate financiers, financial institutions and anyone handling the exchange of funds and taking a portion of those profits for gain and can hold them accountable for facilitating a criminal enterprise.

You can't claim ignorance when you're the one setting up the deal in the first place. Party 1 has the product. Party 2 has the money to buy the product. Party 3 offers to facilitate the deal in exchange for a cut.


Party 3 is guilty of conspiracy.
 
And yea, I'm a cool guy. Anal when I know what I'm talking about, but yea, I'm cool.


I was born before Fonzie even. :)

But you're a big guy, so I don't want to piss you off, so I'm gonna leave it here.

Peace brother.
 
And yea, I'm a cool guy. Anal when I know what I'm talking about, but yea, I'm cool.


I was born before Fonzie even. :)

But you're a big guy, so I don't want to piss you off, so I'm gonna leave it here.

Peace brother.

No doubt.
 
Common guys Jesus,I have a damn headache from reading all this,learned a few things,but really none if it means shit unless ya get caught
 
Soo... How will I go about selling my stash without getting pinched..?


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

Because I've bought an sold tons of illegal designers on there,as long as your not a online business,they buy it,ya ship it,it's done
 
Nice. Maybe I'll do that then


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

just don't say on the listing it's a ph or designer,an your good,if it's a hot item it will sell right away...depending what you have an how much you want for it,if it's an old school designer go reasonable an it will be gone
 
Back
Top