Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;NorthKorea, post: 1729837, member: 29643&quot;]You conveniently missed that his gripe on 1900 man hours was driven by his getting fined $1000 for not doing the job (which he writes as &quot;their job&quot;) right. Also, I&#039;m assuming he&#039;s not paying $15/hr the data entry. He said he has staff law enforcement officers. That sounds like grandiose phrasing for security guards. They&#039;re usually paid minimum wage. In Illinois, the minimum wage is $8.25.</p><p><br /></p><p>On top of that, the bill, insofar as I can tell, died in session. The House amended it several times, and the Senate ended session. So, essentially, he&#039;s claiming he had to pay a $1000 fine as a result of this &quot;law&quot; (which was never enacted). That&#039;s simply not possible. He can&#039;t be fined for non-compliance with a law that doesn&#039;t exist.</p><p><br /></p><p>As I said, if I saw that sign on the door of a shop, I would never do business with that owner again. It&#039;s clear that he&#039;s blaming the government for his misunderstanding (or misapplication) of existing laws. Otherwise, he wouldn&#039;t have been fined. The &quot;1900 man hours&quot; (which really seems like an exaggeration) was likely the result of the owner being asked to provide proof of acquisition of the stolen goods.</p><p><br /></p><p>Also, for the &quot;proof of ownership&quot; requirement in the proposed Act, included is the &quot;affidavit of ownership&quot; clause. That basically means that the buyer needs a written statement from the individual selling the item (whose identification has been collected in the form of a scan/copy of the driver&#039;s license) that they are the owner of the item. Additional allowances are receipts of sale. Usually an individual will keep receipts or similar paperwork for insurance purposes.</p><p><br /></p><p>Again, the legislation was intended for regulation of the purchase/sale of precious metals. Essentially, the legislation would apply to businesses not accountable to the pawnbroker laws of Illinois. I&#039;m actually surprised that a coin store wasn&#039;t already subject to pawnbroker laws, but I&#039;m admittedly not versed in Illinois commerce law.</p><p><br /></p><p>Also, I think the biggest contention with the law is the $250 cap on cash purchase. This might make it difficult for the store owner to convince people to sell coins to them, since they can only pay up to $250 in cash for any items containing a precious metal. That said, the law doesn&#039;t seem to apply to non-precious metal coins, so the LCS could still buy base metal coins for thousands of dollars in cash. I&#039;d assume that would be a point of contention for someone voting on the legislation who actually collects coins or understands numismatics.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in