2A Activist Files Class Action Suit Against PayPal

Tucker301

Groundskeeper
Banned !
Feb 13, 2015
9,494
23,366
Southern VA
I love that the liberal assholes taught us all of their tactics for the past 8 years, and now they're being turned against them.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/23/f...-against-paypal-and-other-payment-processors/

Blair Gladwin, owner of the California based Gladwin Guns and Ammo, filed three class action lawsuits last week against online payment processors PayPal, Stripe, and Square for singling out him and other firearms businesses.

The payment companies required Gladwin and the other owners to reveal the nature of their dealings — after which the payment companies refused to work with them.

Gladwin claims this type of discrimination is a violation of California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act Sections 51, 52(a) and 52(c), a law that protects federally-licensed gun stores from such refusals of business transactions.

The class action lawsuits, according to a press statement, are on behalf of himself and all federal firearms dealers who were barred from starting an account or had an account terminated by a payment processor because of the type of business they ran.

The lawsuits follow legislation recently introduced on Capitol Hill intended to roll back Obama era regulation known as “Operation Chokepoint” that pressured large banking institutions to terminate or refuse to do business with merchants that fell out of political favor with the Obama administration.

Lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee met with various businesses deleteriously affected by that regulation Thursday.

Gladwin’s attorney William McGrane told The Daily Caller Friday that, “the very large non-bank defendants in these cases are allowing their private sense of political correctness to extend so far as to ban even persons who hold valid federal firearms licenses from accepting Electronic Funds Transfers, all in defiance of the Second Amendment to the federal Constitution and the California Unruh Civil Rights Act of 1978.”

“The net effect of what they are doing is making the legitimate business of selling firearms operate as a cash business only, all in a misguided effort to effectively ban the sale of firearms and related products from the marketplace.”

Gladwin requested the court for a public injunction requiring PayPal, Stripe, and Square to stop violating the Unruh Act and to begin allowing firearms merchants to use their payment processors to enable the legal buying and selling of firearms — “a total award to class members of no less than $5 million (per company/class action lawsuit), and attorney fees.”

PayPal, founded and once owned by staunch libertarian Peter Thiel, prohibits all account holders from buying or selling any type of firearm and certain firearm parts and ammunition.

When asked by The Daily Caller last year about his thoughts on his former company’s policy, Thiel responded, “They wouldn’t be doing that if I was still running it.”
 
Well I am torn. Between freedom and equality. Personally all the law suits over stupid shit get old. I actually can't believe that the gun industry hasn't started a finance branch. Especially with the huge growth Ruger and S&W saw in the Obama years. Would have been a good way to diversify, since they were riding a bubble. Much like Ford, GM, Toyota financing.

I Generally believe in a free market. But if a gay couple gets their panties in a bunch over some cake maker not wanting to make a cake for their wedding. Filing a law suit instead of just finding another cake maker well then yea PayPal and others should be forced to treat everyone equal also.

I probably dont need to say this, but who cares. I am not opposed to the gay couple, but the fact they make such mountain out of a mole hill and waste time/resourses. Tell the cake maker to fuck off, and move on.
 
I don't use Paypal solely because of their anti 2A stance.

I have always been able to buy what I want regardless of such obstinately deliberate stupidity.

Such dealings have led me to only use Amazon when I can't get what I want from Midway, and there's damned little regarding firearms ownership which I want that I can't get from Midway.

No, nobody can force Amazon to carry any particular product. But when they remove a product for arbitrary reasons, they should be held to a standard of good business practices as a justifiable reason for doing it. Anything else demonstrates bias, and when that bias has a persoanl political basis, they should have to pay dearly for such choices.

All anyone can guarantee by limiting their pay method to Paypal is that I won't be buying from them.

When enough gun owners demonstrate that Paypal's practices are an arbitrary and irrational hindrance to free trade, then they might feel the pinch. The only motivations that will curtail such policies are the ones that impact the pockets of the offenders These days, my gaze goes crooked when I see a firearms product purveyor who offers Paypal as a payment means. It's conflicted.

The Paypals and Aamzns think they can get by without us. Maybe they're right. Let's find out.

I think that as long as we have to tolerate their bias about some gun related stuff, we should apply our own bias in return and not buy any of the firearms related goods that pass their skewed and arbitrary scrutiny. We choose what we buy and where we buy it, not them.

Boycotts don't work. But neither does arbitrary corporate bias, Amazon's worth is primarily is subject to the good will of its investors, and their stock price is the basis of Mt. J.B.'s 27B personal worth,=. But that personal wealth is not outside the reach of others. Such institutional investors depend on individual investors, and those investors can swap out their institutions. Maybe they should be made aware of such possibilities.

When the lawsuits are won, and immense punitive damages result; then the message will get home that personal political bias have no place in free commerce because with their inclusion, it's not free commerce.

These policies do not exist within a vacuum. They represent a tacit agreement between those who would deliberately deny the free exercise of firearms ownership freedoms. Whatever else it may be, it's clearly organization in restraint of trade, and that violates long established federal antitrust laws.

Technically, that's the duty of the US Attorney General's office to enforce, and Loretta's probably got some 'splainin' to do about that too, not to mention Holder. Following the buck, that's a presidential High Crime and Misdemeanor, and if Sessions won't enforce it, Trump's butt becomes liable. I keep hearing that Trump's beholding to the American gun owners for his presidency, but so far I see nothing to show for it.

Citizens need not be required to initiate litigation in this regard, it is the duty of the Attorney General to do so, just as it was to litigate in favor of Civil Rights legislation. The sword of justice bears two edges because it swings both ways.

This crap's always been illegal, and it's high time somebody in government made it go away according to standing law.

Greg
 
Last edited:
I am TOTALLY GLAD that someone took it upon himself to file the class action suits. If nothing, it may open a few eyes and cause a shift in policy.

I use PP all the time and have never been prevented buying any gun related merchandise including firearms from private citizens and ammo...It is convenient and still requires going through an FFL.

I could give a rat's ass what their beliefs are. If I only bought from like minded businesses; I wouldn't be able to buy most things. Most people and companies are totally anti-2A.
 
It seems that the article tries to drag Peter Theil into the fray as "PayPal, founded and once owned by staunch libertarian Peter Thiel, prohibits all account holders from buying or selling any type of firearm and certain firearm parts and ammunition."

Far as I know Theil is not involved in operations but why waste the chance to kick his bag in seeing how important his voice was in November.

Im guessing if Theil is a "staunch libertarian" he supports the right of self defense.


Edit/add - Paypal as a corporation should be able to do as it chooses as long as its not getting public money.

Screw the lawsuit, let the market decide. Ive never required anyone to use it but Ive been required to if I want something and 99% of the time the person requiring it is selling something gun related.

We need to look in the mirror to see the problem.
 
Last edited:
The civil suit should be against Obama and Holder personally for Operation Choke Point.

Of course they wouldn't be liable and when the US is found guilty it will be the taxpayer getting screwed again.
 
It seems that the article tries to drag Peter Theil into the fray as "PayPal, founded and once owned by staunch libertarian Peter Thiel, prohibits all account holders from buying or selling any type of firearm and certain firearm parts and ammunition."

Far as I know Theil is not involved in operations but why waste the chance to kick his bag in seeing how important his voice was in November.

Im guessing if Theil is a "staunch libertarian" he supports the right of self defense.


Edit/add - Paypal as a corporation should be able to do as it chooses as long as its not getting public money.

Screw the lawsuit, let the market decide. Ive never required anyone to use it but Ive been required to if I want something and 99% of the time the person requiring it is selling something gun related.

We need to look in the mirror to see the problem.

Edit/Add II - Read it with my brain this time and noticed Theils comment.....good man.