this is a really screwed up trend. people should be able to use phone infrastructure completely anonymously. KYC in telecommunications, finance, gun purchases, etc. is always a morally wrong option for "fighting crime".
I envision "real KYC" as the old timey nostalgic small town narrative, where (the agents of) the service provider you're dealing with actually do know you on a personal basis, and can therefore make sensible compliance judgements based on context. "Bob never comes in here asking for exactly $4999 in crisp twenties and sweating profusely, this smells wrong even if it technically threads the needle of standard compliance rules", but also "Bob has spent the last six months talking about renting a place in Montreal for the summer, so he's probably not money laundering when he tries to make an international transfer to a landlord."
The problem is that it's fundamentally a human-relationship thing, and nobody knows how to do that at scale, nor do they want to because that costs money.
p.s. what country is this instance taking place in? Looks like it's in the Philippines.
just principally i'm opposed to putting additional requirements on how ordinary people operate because a tiny minority might do something wrong. and something about requiring an entity to retain information for potential seizure by the government just rubs my sense of due process the wrong way i guess.
I also don't want to get into a gun debate on the Internet, because I'm unclear on what combination of words might persuade you to reconsider your position.
What I do know for certain is the world needs much more love and empathy, fewer guns, and fewer self-centered assholes.
Do you genuinely believe that firearms legislation/availability/capability is the root cause of the "ongoing wave of school and community shootings", and that a further erosion of a constitutionally enumerated right would serve to halt what is "plaguing the United States"? I mean genuinely - root cause. Or, do you suspect that there is a more difficult to address cause - but feel there is nothing to lose, due to a previously arrived at low valuation of the Second Amendment? Here is a hint: it isn't the guns causing the violence, and their removal will at best result in an "ongoing wave" of stabbings and acid attacks. If you actually want to address the problem then actually identifying the cause would be a far more productive use of your time... but again, that is the more difficult option - as is the case with most correct decisions.
I would prefer stabbings and acid to mass shootings. It's way too easy to get a gun, both legally and illegally in the US.
> I would prefer stabbings and acid to mass shootings.
So the elimination of a constitutionally enumerated right to no end... I see that I was right in guessing that you had no interest in actually protecting the children after all, they are simply being used as a pretext. Little wonder why you avoid "debate", the position you've established here is indefensible.
'Wouldn't it be a shame if you were audited for criminal money laundering due to your association with person X' is enough of a threat itself that it gets banks to unperson real humans, and that threat does not require a judge or a jury or even a law.