All I said was that this Act, as applied in some cases, is a violation of the 4th Amendment. Is it in all cases, no.
Can you give one example where it would be a violation of the 4th Amendment?
Will it ever effect me, no. Is that a reason to allow the Government to write sloppy laws that do not follow the Constitutional prohibitions? I don't think so. If you can give me one example I may agree with you. But so far you haven't made your case.
If you can give me one example I may agree with you.
JUST ONE? --- How about this. I am an Artist, I paint and make scuptures. I have a local storefront where I sell my wares. A local patron comes into my stores and wishes to buy my Art for $15,000 in cash. I am engaged in a business, but it is local only. I have no catalog, no advertisment, and no website furthering or advertising my Art outside my local community.
Being forced to report this transaction, other than legally reporting the income, is a violation of the 4th Amendment. Your thoughts?
The purpose of the 4th is to insure unreasonable searches and seizures. Let me start with this...
"...no warrants shall issue, BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, supported by oath or affirmation, a nd particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The purpose of the 4th is to prevent the govt from searching me without probable cause. IOW, it must have a SPECIFIC cause and swear so before a magistrate before it may search me. This requirement does NOT state a specific probable cause to examine my private transactions.
IMHO, this activity is no different than an LEO coming into my home and looking through my checkbook.