New York Times attacks access to financial services by the gun industry
This is not an action aimed at stopping mass shootings. You don't need to spend thousands on credit cards buying guns; you only need one gun, and $100 in ammunition is a lot more victims than most mass shootings add up to. The New York Times is pushing for this because they don't like ordinary people being able to buy guns, and they are trying to use the financial industry -- mostly based in New York and subject to their notoriously anti-gun jurisdiction -- to implement their anti-gun policies and prevent ordinary people from being able to buy guns with credit cards. Since many firearms are a significant purchase, that would have a big impact.
It is likely it would also affect the ability of gun-related companies to process credit cards, access loans for expansion or startup costs, and generally interfere with the ability of those companies to operate like normal businesses.
In other words, it is exactly the sort of financial harm that the New York Times claims to oppose when applied to racial minorities or those in non-traditional gender roles... except the New York Times would impose those financial harms through government regulation across an entire industry rather than allowing individual conscience to dictate individual choices in a free market.
The Times claims to oppose Jim Crow, but they are all for Gun Crow.
This entry was published Sun Jan 06 07:47:30 CST 2019 by TriggerFinger
and last updated 2018-12-26 06:51:42.0.