On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 10:31:33 -0700, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
Usafretcol wrote:

It's not for your protection that the merchant violates the agreement
they signed. It is for their protection as fraudulent use of a card
does not cost the legitimate holder a dime.

Agree that they do it for their own protection, but in the process
they're covering my ass too. And why would I care that someone I do
business with wants to protect himself from fraud? Someone upthread was
sniveling about that for no good reason that I can see.

The counter argument is that the clerk now has more information about you
(address, DoB, DL#), making it easier for him to steal your identity.