Comments on: Is The Department of Justice Behind The Chase Account Closures. https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/ The institute for the advance study of insensitivity and pornography Thu, 06 Jul 2023 14:54:19 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.2 By: BT https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20397 Thu, 01 May 2014 17:45:19 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20397 LurkingReader – we are in agreement. Banks refuse to do business with people all the time, for all kinds of reasons. They can’t discriminate against protected classes – they can’t refuse to do business with Blacks, Hispanics, Women, or Muslims because they don’t like Blacks, Hispanics, Women or a particular religious group. But, they can choose not to do business with them if they deem that their occupation puts the bank at risk – either the bank’s capital is at risk; the bank’s reputation is at risk; or it’s at risk for an audit or fines. And, given that the number of accounts being dumped for cause is going up by 20% a year, porn really isn’t being singled out here.

Kink.com is a great example. No idea whether they’re banking relationship has been severed, but even if the bank decides that it wants to be in bed with a guy who films what Kink films, you still have an owner whose place has been raided because of weapons and coke. That’s reason enough for a financial institution to say ….. I don’t think so.

]]>
By: LurkingReader https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20394 Thu, 01 May 2014 16:02:13 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20394 In reply to BT.

@BT

Free Speech is one thing the commerce (business) to make a buck off it is another thing entirely. Funny you should mention pot…

Check out Colorado House Bill 1398 to create Pot co-ops because they can’t get bank accounts despite pot being legal. Glanced at some guidance on old banking haunts the other day and most of it was about getting data to the government about how much cash is being handled legally so they can try and estimate how much cash pot contributes to the underground economy.

This type guidance isn’t reassuring Banks that they won’t run against the regs so they are skittish. The bill would create Co-ops that offer traditional banking services IG checking and offer credit but can’t be called a bank or credit union.

]]>
By: BT https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20390 Thu, 01 May 2014 11:43:28 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20390 In reply to Lacey Blake.

Banks refusing to do business with people – and not just industries – isn’t all that uncommon. MarketWatch says the number of bank accounts closed “for cause” is rising by 20% a year. A bank can refuse to do business with you if you have a.) a bad credit rating, b.) a history of bouncing checks, c.) if they suspect that you’re involved in fraudulent activity or d.) suspect that you’re involved in illegal activity – which means that they would be abetting money laundering. Although its changing, banks were refusing to do business with the legal weed business in Colorado as well as legal medical marijuana businesses in other states.

So …… if a porn star escorts on the side, he or she is engaged in an illegal activity; if he or she can’t balance a checkbook and bounces checks or has chronic overdrafts or a bad credit history, the bank can refuse to do business with them; and if the industry blatantly refuses to get permits, ignore OSHA or refuses to use condoms – and is public about it – its more or less saying: Screw the law, we’ll do what we want. Which is great. But that doesn’t mean the banking system has to give you credit or banking services.

Porn continues to confuse protected speech with its business practices. The fact that the First Amendment permits you to express yourself in a certain way – get naked and do the deed on camera – doesn’t mean that you have protection to violate the law or flout regulations when you conduct your business. And it doesn’t mean the bank has to finance your speech. The speech is protected, but that doesn’t mean the people within the industry are a protected class.

]]>
By: Lacey Blake https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20389 Thu, 01 May 2014 03:29:40 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20389 In reply to rawalex.

I’ll make sure to call the local filming permit office and the local OSHA office to get guidelines and permits to film my next porno in New Orleans. Then I’ll give the IRS a call to determine the tax implications relating to the filming of pornographic material within the state and maybe go to the bank and open up a bank account for my new company “I eat cum by the gallon” productions.
Hahaha…

Although I’m just joking around here… I hope they don’t laugh too hard… because I am totally going to do that shit just for fun now!!! I’ve got connections at the bank, IRS and OSHA. I could probably call the guy who usually issues mainstream permits and get his advice on obtaining permits for pornographic films? I wonder if they’ll even give me an answer or think I’m fucking joking?

This could get interesting…. I’m excited.

]]>
By: rawalex https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20378 Wed, 30 Apr 2014 09:13:58 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20378 In reply to Lacey Blake.

Lacey, basic rule of law, you can’t “sue” the government into court on a criminal matter. You need someone to get charged and then you fight from there. All of the obscenity cases made in the last decade have pretty much been slam dunks (Max Hardcore with girls puking after getting throat fucked is a great example). The feds get to decide when and where they will pull the trigger on prosecutions, and they are loath to take any case that will establish porn as nationally legal without limits.

Lurking Reader also touched on another subject: 2257. Just like taxation, nothing creates legality for a industry like government regulation. The 2257 rules are a direct admission that porn exists, and is legal, but must be documented. If porn was illegal, why would you have record keeping laws? 2257 pretty much defines legal porn:

“(b) Any person to whom subsection (a) applies shall, with respect to every performer portrayed in a visual depiction of actual sexually explicit conduct—
(1) ascertain, by examination of an identification document containing such information, the performer’s name and date of birth, and require the performer to provide such other indicia of his or her identity as may be prescribed by regulations;”

Key words “actual sexual activity”. Legal admission that porn exists, and that it is regulated under 2257. You cannot mandate record keeping on an illegal act.

So the only risk is having to defend yourself in court if an over zealous prosecutor tries to over ride the feds. His or her only actionable cause would be obscenity and that would be a pretty tough case to make on “boy meets girl, boy fucks girl” videos.

]]>
By: LurkingReader https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20368 Tue, 29 Apr 2014 20:31:49 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20368 In reply to LurkingReader.

Oops California…brain not operating on all cells yet 🙂

]]>
By: LurkingReader https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20367 Tue, 29 Apr 2014 20:31:17 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20367 In reply to Lacey Blake.

It isn’t risky for the industry to try and legalize porn in other states, it’s a philosophy that says the government doesn’t exist beyond the ways they way the government to exist. Aka they want their cake after they eat it.

Prosecutors aren’t going after porn productions in other states because they see it as a losing case. If prosecutors saw adult film as a winning case I can bet NYC would have used it when they cleaned up Times Square but they didn’t.

]]>
By: LurkingReader https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20366 Tue, 29 Apr 2014 20:25:05 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20366 In reply to Lacey Blake.

@Lacey

This is the crux of my issue with the industry and FSC in particular…in 25 years they haven’t fought to legalize porn production outside Florida yet have spent vast amounts of time and cash to fight 2257 in many states and on the federal level.

There were over 6000 convictions in 2013 for child porn and they are raising the argument that a home that is used for commerce needs to be treated as a private domain.

I get and agree with no warrant criminal search, however they aren’t trying nor have they tried to eliminate just this overbroad section of 2257. It is however the only place they have made any in roads in over 25 years.

]]>
By: Lacey Blake https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20365 Tue, 29 Apr 2014 20:14:37 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20365 In reply to rawalex.

Understood. My point is that if it’s truly that easy to win than the “industry” should be fighting for legalization across the country so these stupid “consequences” of unknown legality wouldn’t continue and would make the “porn industry” a legitimate industry in mainstream instead of fighting battles within one state.

I don’t see OSHA releasing specific regulations in other states relating to pornographic sex workers? The biggest question is “why not?”
(The “industry” isn’t even legally recognized. .. that’s why.)

We’re not talking about an individual’s right to free speech. We’re discussing professions which are part of a larger “industry.”
Strippers/legal brothel workers have regulations in place without limiting freedom of speech. I don’t see everyone bitching about their freedom of speech being taken away because they have regulations to abide by?

Your looking at it from the government perspective.
I’m looking at it from the industry perspective.
If the porn industry is that confident that their content is protected free speech then fucking fight for it to make the industry legitimate across the country…
They have very little political power. Why not fight and get the full protection afforded by the government including not being thrown in with illegal activity.

It’s risky. That’s why neither side does shit other than make generalized statements for/against/maybe/I guess/I think/probable arguments while throwing in “freedom of speech” tirades.

]]>
By: rawalex https://mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/is-the-department-of-justice-behind-the-chase-account-closures-10386/#comment-20357 Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:13:26 +0000 http://www.mikesouth.com/?p=10386#comment-20357 In reply to Lacey Blake.

Lacey, we can parade the same lawyers through here that always seem to appear in these debates, and they will tell you the same thing:

The feds (and even local) are not going to try to prosecute obscenity if they think they are going to lose, because they do not want to establish once and for all that straight porn is legal and fine. They cannot make the case so they don’t. It’s why you even have one of the largest online adult companies based in North Carolina.

There are adult clubs from coast to coast, and girls are routinely paid to get naked in them. Adult webcams are operated from every community and every town in America, or just about. Quite simply, the DOJ knows that any attempt to go against straight, mainstream porn is like to lead to it being declared legal, so they don’t do it.

I don’t need a ruling to say I can speak in public. The first amendment grants that. Protected speech is protected speech, even if you don’t like the speech.

]]>