Financial Institutions to 'Flag' Firearms Purchases?

[GSW10]

So, this is particularly relevant to recent events that HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED, or ARE HAPPENING. Not to beat a dead horse, but some vendors have ALREADY lost support of financial institutions, such as e-commerce payment processors, possibly doors closed to them at banks for business accounts... Fortunately, a good one, 80P Builder, managed to get back on their feet after some hosting assistance from Zaffiri Precision, sadly another fine vendor is being lost, Rockey Brass. While I don't want to tread on the toes of the Posts that discussed these issues already and I certainly DON'T want to re-hash anything there either, I feel they are relevant and timely to what Mr Noir brings up here:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0neV2yD85k

This is one of the many attacks formulated by the anti-gun lobby to strike out at our so-called 'gun culture', pushing firearms discussion into the uncomfortable realm of socially unacceptable topics that have people looking over their shoulders, even when they have done nothing wrong. And now, they want this 'conversation' brought into the light of OUR banks, OUR credit-card issuers, OUR wallets... For what purpose, another social shout-down and shaming? Or something worse? When we 'aren't supposed to even talk about it', how are we supposed to stay United?

Creating enough hurdles to make firearm ownership unpleasant, too expensive, difficult to exercise, or hard to source, will turn MANY people away from owning a gun, and MANY of those middle-of-the-road people will turn anti-gun, deciding that if they don't have one, YOU shouldn't have one either. Would the landscape of our Country's 2A culture look the way it does now if you could still drive down to your local K-Mart and buy a Remington 700 for a few hundred bucks, and walk out with the box under your arm fifteen minutes later? How has 'de-normalizing' gun ownership influenced how open we are about this particular interest? Would anti-gunners have much political pull if responsible gun ownership was the 'gold-standard' of political rhetoric, instead of 'gun BANS'? Look what happened to Australia with their 'gun ban', look how close to the precipice we are sitting right now, and answer honestly if this insidious 'financial institution' back-door tracking makes you feel safer, or less secure. I am pretty sure I know how MOST of us here feel about it...

 

[Racer88]

From what I've read, there are now MORE guns in Australia than there were before the ban.

As for the social or cultural pressure against guns.... I TRULY could not care less. Rather than push me into the shadows or feel shame... It has the OPPOSITE effect on me. That is exactly what pushed me into building my first P80. I bought the frame 3 years ago with no real plans to build it. I bought it "just because." But, the recent caterwauling (there's a word!) about "Casper guns" is what compelled me to dig that frame out of my closet and build it. And down the rabbit hole I went! Then I built a freakin' forum dedicated to spreading the word of Freedom. Go figure.

As for the financial institution thing.... I think that's going to eventually backfire. We will see the emergence of merchant services DEDICATED to the firearms industry.

 

[GSW10]

From what I've read, there are now MORE guns in Australia than there were before the ban.

As for the social or cultural pressure against guns.... I TRULY could not care less. Rather than push me into the shadows or feel shame... It has the OPPOSITE effect on me. That is exactly what pushed me into building my first P80. I bought the frame 3 years ago with no real plans to build it. I bought it "just because." But, the recent caterwauling (there's a word!) about "Casper guns" is what compelled me to dig that frame out of my closet and build it. And down the rabbit hole I went! Then I built a freakin' forum dedicated to spreading the word of Freedom. Go figure.

As for the financial institution thing.... I think that's going to eventually backfire. We will see the emergence of merchant services DEDICATED to the firearms industry.

I would be interested in seeing some of your sources regarding Australia re-arming. I suspect the numbers are misleading. More guns now than before? Possibly, probably almost all are bolt-action, breach-loaders, or lever-guns, if we are talking rifles. There may just be a surge in hand-gun ownership? I don't recall what they did in their ban regarding hand-guns. Remember their shotguns were largely taken away too. "Allowing" your citizenry to have truckloads of muskets is NOT allowing them to 'bear arms' in any effective measure. I further suspect (though admit I haven't seen any actual data myself) the numbers may reflect 'new gun purchases', which of course would go up since thousands of firearms were confiscated (ahem, excuse me, 'bought back') and destroyed -the people would want to replace some of those with the plinkers they were now 'allowed' to have... But that doesn't mean the actual number of firearms in citizens' hands has increased.

I agree with your view regarding social pressure -but the effect won't be in those of us already well into the 'culture', it WILL prevent a great number of the 'people in the middle' from edging over towards gun acceptance, and WILL push them towards gun avoidance, or farther. Another polarizing action...

As for eventually generating our own dedicated merchant services, yes, probably -the pendulum always swings back -eventually. But damage will be done, you know that. They know that. It is one of their many strategies and tactics, not their full game. I play chess, and I know you have to pay attention to what the Pawns are doing, not just focus on the Bishops or the Queen.

 

[Racer88]

I would be interested in seeing some of your sources regarding Australia re-arming. I suspect the numbers are misleading. More guns now than before?

So, a quick search reveals some seemingly contradictory data. But, when I combine the information in the two reports... It seems the number of gun OWNERS has gone down. But, the number of guns OWNED by the remaining gun owners has gone up.

<<<Alarmingly, the number of firearms reported in Australia in 2017 (3.6 million) is now higher than pre-Port Arthur levels, prior to the 1996 National Firearms Agreement (3.2 million firearms)>>>

Australia: More Guns Now Than Before Port Arthur - The Australia Institute

New research from the Australia Institute finds that there are more guns in Australia now than there were before the Port Arthur massacre and introduction of strict gun controls. The Australia Institute report, commissioned by Gun Control Australia, comes off the back of research which finds the...

australiainstitute.org.au

New gun ownership figures revealed 25 years on from Port Arthur

www.sydney.edu.au

 

[Callducks7]

The Aussie laws eliminate "repeating long guns" including shotguns. So lots of twice barrel shotguns have been sold to hunters.
This most likely accounting for the increase in total number of guns. This has been known for quite some time in time shotgun sports community.

 

[Callducks7]

Nothing like a non rehashing rehash. Slick, close down a thread you don't like and reopen the subject elsewhere.
Perks of being the site owner.
Do I have your permission to non rehash my points?

 

[Racer88]

Nothing like a non rehashing rehash. Slick, close down a thread you don't like and reopen the subject elsewhere.
Perks of being the site owner.
Do I have your permission to non rehash my points?

No idea what you're talking about. But, go on.

Ah... the thread where it got personal with name-calling? Yeah... it was time to shut that one down.

 

[Callducks7]

Right!

 

[GSW10]

Nothing like a non rehashing rehash. Slick, close down a thread you don't like and reopen the subject elsewhere.
Perks of being the site owner.
Do I have your permission to non rehash my points?

To be clear, @Racer88 shut down the other Thread. I started this one, because there was new information that was relevant to the original discussion that I couldn't Post there, because the topic got derailed and sent in a bad direction. Not sure why that comes back as @Racer88 's "fault", or if you didn't mean it to come out like that? Either way, please move on from that, it gets very tiresome when good topics and discussions are shut down because of reasons like that one, which is exactly why I excused myself from the other Thread once it got out of hand...

Back on topic...
So it seems that you, me, and Racer have slightly different viewpoints on "financial institutions" being used to subvert the Free Market principles of 'consumers can buy what [legal] products they want and can afford'. If you watch Mr Noir's video, what are your takes on it? I actually found some of his arguments to be a little weaker than his usually are, and a little less focused too, but still some good points and new info. Your thoughts on it?

 

[Callducks7]

Dear GSW10 and Racer.
You must have loved Butt Head Biden's speech last night.
Pot calling the kettle black. You attack anyone with an opposing view and depend on hyperbole for arguments.
I hate to see small businesses crushed as do you, but your reasoning is seriously flawed because of your strong anti-government views.
Why did Walmart do it for decades. It had nothing to do with the Government... Just Business!
Unfortunately this causes you to dismiss any other plausible explanations for large Corporate decisions. Very Cultish behavior!
Have a good day deepening your hated.

 

[Racer88]

Dear GSW10 and Racer.
You must have loved Butt Head Biden's speech last night.
Pot calling the kettle black. You attack anyone with an opposing view and depend on hyperbole for arguments.
I hate to see small businesses crushed as do you, but your reasoning is seriously flawed because of your strong anti-government views.
Why did Walmart do it for decades. It had nothing to do with the Government... Just Business!
Unfortunately this causes you to dismiss any other plausible explanations for large Corporate decisions. Very Cultish behavior!
Have a good day deepening your hated.

I didn't see his speech. Didn't even know he gave one. I don't watch the TV news. I quit watching TV news after being addicted to it for 35 years. I quit in August 2017, as the "news" became 100% propaganda.

Your accusations of us "attacking" you are perplexing. It was you who engaged in ad hominem in the form of name-calling, and that comment was deleted accordingly. And that's why the thread was shut down.

We simply disagree with your speculation that the business closed because they were "worried about how they were perceived by the public." Financial institutions closing accounts with businesses related to firearms as part of a political agenda is documented fact. It's not even recent news at this point. It's happened so many times. This was just the most recent case.

 

[Callducks7]

Disagree all you want but large Corporations are concerned about one thing..... profits. They bend very quickly to the wishes/needs of customers and shareholders. They don't mind small legal skirmishes. They has large staffs that deal with those issues.
Much more than than Government.
Large Corporations manage Government by managing politicians, they don't fear them.
I was a Large Business Marketing Manager and my Father was a Lobbyist for what now the worlds largest communication company. Both for decades.

 

[GSW10]

Dear GSW10 and Racer.
You must have loved Butt Head Biden's speech last night.
Pot calling the kettle black. You attack anyone with an opposing view and depend on hyperbole for arguments.
I hate to see small businesses crushed as do you, but your reasoning is seriously flawed because of your strong anti-government views.
Why did Walmart do it for decades. It had nothing to do with the Government... Just Business!
Unfortunately this causes you to dismiss any other plausible explanations for large Corporate decisions. Very Cultish behavior!
Have a good day deepening your hated.

I really can't understand where the attitude comes from, @Callducks7 . I invited you back into this discussion as an equal contributor, exactly how I see you on the Forum, I hoped you would share your view, instead you go right back to being an ass for no reason. If you have nothing positive to contribute, please don't contribute.

No, I didn't listen to bidet's speech either -I also don't bother with TV "news", @Racer88 and I agree on that. I don't think I am "anti-government", I am anti cancel-culture and disagree with "for profit" businesses veiling their political activism agendas as 'business practice'. It is why I don't like "paypal", it is why I avoid "amazon" when I reasonably can... My point then, and now, is that it ISN'T profitable for a payment processor to cease operation with a paying vendor because they sell 2A merch, so the reason they do it is 'activism', NOT capitalism. The public 'view' or perception of the processing company isn't relevant to their business model -they don't work with the public, they work with businesses. We could continue the discussion from there, I see the next step in the conversation, but if you don't want to be a part of THIS discussion, then please don't. If you want to 'rehash your hash' or whatever, please go BACK to the "Locked" topic, and stare at it, okay? Don't get this one "Locked" too.

 

[Callducks7]

OK, time to close this thread. GSW10 called me an Ass for trying to impart a little " actual knowledge " into this conversation. Of course you guys don't watch the news, you are content in your own little cultish echo chamber.
I know you won't treat GSW10 the same as me, because I have a different perspective than you. I do watch news, business news, National news, Fox news. I try to look at the world from many perspectives and form my own opinions. That's way I was raised and that's the way will remain.
So let's see if this a fair and impartial forum, or a clique of favorites.
No Politics indeed!

 

[Racer88]

You're entitled to your opinion. As are we. But, yes... you can be quite cantankerous, and this isn't the first time. You can also be very helpful. But you have not imparted any knowledge in this thread. You've only expressed your opinion and speculation as to why this company folded. It isn't even remotely factual... unless you actually work for the company and have inside knowledge.

 

[Callducks7]

I have not mentioned (this company)? in this thread at all I am not discussing any particular company at all. All of my points have addressed how major Corporations react to various outside influences. Something I actually know a lot about. I have imparted a lot of good information but your ears appear to be permanently closed.
So are you going to close this thread for the reason you closed the previous thread. Or will you play favorites.
P. S. I think I know the answer.

 

[Racer88]

So are you going to close this thread for the reason you closed the previous thread. Or will you play favorites.
P. S. I think I know the answer.

Seriously? Do you REALLY want to go there?

Settle down.