You may laugh but it is a scenario that has occurred. And how do you prove that they are not for a bomb? You're not being investigated making a bomb, but the suspicion that you could.I can see your point. But honestly, I would laugh my *** off if the government came to me about terrorism (despite my CJ background) and told me that the items I bought recently could be made to make a bomb. Again, I can see your point.
I think the only thing that saved our rear ends that night was that the officer knew who we were and that we were not stupid enough to make pipe bombs. He let us go and they found the idiots doing it the next night.
No, they do not have to prove it was for a bomb because the crime is not intent to make a bomb, but suspicion that you could make a bomb. You can't prove that you are unable to make a bomb because you clearly have the supplies. Your intent is unimportant. This is the only way to get the preemptive safety you desire.
They still have to prove it was for a bomb. I understand where you're coming from. I just don't allow that fear to run my decision making facilities. I have decided that I see no harm in companies/US government collecting data on me. Trust me. I am no wild spender and I am no hoarder. If I have something then I have a good/provable reason to have it.
Except for one time when I was 17... Some friends and I were out driving on some back country roads around here heading to one of our houses. We had two cases of beer (hence using backroads only) and we get pulled over. The officer got us all out of the car (5 people in a 1990 Mustang), lined us up in front of the car and asked to search the car. It was my freinds car and after several attempts to get him to actually speak to the officer (remember the beer?) the officer finally said "Let me tell you what I am looking for. Someone has been blowing up mailboxes with pipe bombs and they are driving a wine colored mustang like this." The relief that swept over us was palpable. We were not the idiots doing that so my friend gave permission to search the vehicle. The officer found the beer and just said"I'll pretend I didn't see that. (Small town here) However, when he got to the hatch and opened the back he found two lengths of pipe. You could almost hear everyone's butt cinch up all at once.
They wouldn't have to pass that information along. They would know by how much Disney is purchasing.. Rest assured they might say it's selling well, but, that is all they have to do. Who Disney has individually sold to is of absolutely no importance to them. They may do some foolish things, but, they didn't get where they are by giving away information or even selling it if it jeopardizes their own business. And business partners are part an parcel of the Disney Company. They wouldn't have the incentive to need to know, it gives them nothing. Knowing that I, personally, bought a t-shirt is useless information and tells them nothing that they don't already know. Any other information they might want is connected to my credit cards and about a billion other sources not only currently available, but, has been mined and known for a long time before anyone ever heard of a magic band. It just silliness. Now it they start asking how many guns I own, my address and whether or not I lock my doors, then worry.
Target? You mean that Disney might share with them what particular Disney item sells well so that Disney can share in the profit from the sales of a item sold to them for resale? Throw them in jail, that seems like an awful thing to do. Wait, now that I think about it that doesn't seem like anything other a normal course of business. It's like McDonalds telling their franchise owners what items sell the best and, in some cases, insisting that they carry that item. They even know who bought it if we used anything other then cash. Does that mean that they have shared any information that is in anyway harmful or invading my privacy. Or perhaps the fact that I often purchase McD's Sausage Burrito that if there is an uprising in Mexico I am a prime suspect for being a supporter of whatever the cause is. Awful glad that I seldom dine in a Taco Bell.
It's not opinion. Such laws already exist.
The unrelated essays don't hide that you have no relevant point. You wanted to know an entity that would be interested in purchasing Disney's data and you've said nothing to refute why Target would not be interested.
And you have said absolutely nothing to tell me why they would be interested in the detailed information that you are implying. So let's call it a draw, you aren't saying why and I did, but, I just added one last thing to it... Who gives a damn!
Target's data collection is well known and publicized.
