Especially since you're required to notify the IRS of how much crypto you have.
I must confess, I'm starting to come around to the slightly-paranoid-American view that registering a thing is generally a prelude to seizing the thing.
It's not paranoid, it's precisely why the government wasn't supposed to have the power to do it at all.
In the UK, they don't have a national ID system (at least they don't yet, the "conservatives" are trying to introduce one). The point that the English make is that "If I didn't violate the law, the government doesn't need to know who I am" which is actually a properly Liberal take. It's a "minarchist" kind of position.
The government is a weapon. Never point your weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot. Registering your shit gives the government the right to aim carefully at you and your shit.
Now you might say, "but this stuff makes it much more easy to enforce laws if we know where everything is and what everybody has". Yes, that's true. It's also the problem. If you believe the legal scope of the government has gone well beyond it's jurisdiction and is enforcing laws that it shouldn't even have the ability to enforce (interstate commerce clause anyone), then you don't want enforcement of those laws. It's a hard line on the government's jurisdiction even in the event that the government gave itself the right to enforce new laws outside of it's jurisdiction.
Hell, let's put it in the example of rival government agencies. Imagine if the Sheriff's Office give a full inventory of it's gear and equipment to some nearby city police force. What the fuck would they even need that information for? They might say: "to promote the inter-departmental sharing of scarce resources!" Of course, why don't they just fucking ask for it first. You don't need an active registry to be perpetually updated. The Sheriff's Office shouldn't just report to a city police department, they have totally different missions and jurisdictions.
At least they don't, right up until the state suddenly mandates that if a city police department makes a request for gear, all nearby LE organizations need to provide a listing of their equipment. They can check to make sure the Sheriff's Office isn't "breaking the law" by withholding gear that the city desperately needs thanks to all these lovely mandatory updates and registries. Now the Sheriff's office is a subordinate vassal organization that exists at the behest of the city police. There is no jurisdictional boundaries between the two, if one is a vassal of the other. Subordinate organizations don't have separate jurisdictions.
If you want something of someone else's, you ask for that. You don't have them regularly update you so that you can order it. Yes, Walmart does this, because Walmart is a retail store that is selling you shit. It exists to sell you shit. The Sheriff's Office doesn't exist to supply the city police with gear. The people don't exist to supply the state with crypto coins free of charge. Same with firearms.
I must confess, I'm starting to come around to the slightly-paranoid-American view that registering a thing is generally a prelude to seizing the thing.
It's not paranoid, it's precisely why the government wasn't supposed to have the power to do it at all.
In the UK, they don't have a national ID system (at least they don't yet, the "conservatives" are trying to introduce one). The point that the English make is that "If I didn't violate the law, the government doesn't need to know who I am" which is actually a properly Liberal take. It's a "minarchist" kind of position.
The government is a weapon. Never point your weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot. Registering your shit gives the government the right to aim carefully at you and your shit.
Now you might say, "but this stuff makes it much more easy to enforce laws if we know where everything is and what everybody has". Yes, that's true. It's also the problem. If you believe the legal scope of the government has gone well beyond it's jurisdiction and is enforcing laws that it shouldn't even have the ability to enforce (interstate commerce clause anyone), then you don't want enforcement of those laws. It's a hard line on the government's jurisdiction even in the event that the government gave itself the right to enforce new laws outside of it's jurisdiction.
Hell, let's put it in the example of rival government agencies. Imagine if the Sheriff's Office give a full inventory of it's gear and equipment to some nearby city police force. What the fuck would they even need that information for? They might say: "to promote the inter-departmental sharing of scarce resources!" Of course, why don't they just fucking ask for it first. You don't need an active registry to be perpetually updated. The Sheriff's Office shouldn't just report to a city police department, they have totally different missions and jurisdictions.
At least they don't, right up until the state suddenly mandates that if a city police department makes a request for gear, all nearby LE organizations need to provide a listing of their equipment. They can check to make sure the Sheriff's Office isn't "breaking the law" by withholding gear that the city desperately needs thanks to all these lovely mandatory updates and registries. Now the Sheriff's office is a subordinate vassal organization that exists at the behest of the city police. There is no jurisdictional boundaries between the two, if one is a vassal of the other. Subordinate organizations don't have separate jurisdictions.
If you want something of someone else's, you ask for that. You don't have them regularly update you so that you can order it. Yes, Walmart does this, because Walmart is a retail store that is selling you shit. It exists to sell you shit. The Sheriff's Office doesn't exist to supply the city police with gear. The people don't exist to supply the state with crypto coins free of charge. Same with firearms.
If you want shit, you ask for it.