New York Times: Monitor All Credit Cards for Gun Rights

By Larry Keane published on in News

The New York Times’ Andrew Ross Sorkin figured it out! Criminal misuse of firearms is the fault of none other than credit card companies. This idea would be laughable if it weren’t for the absurd assumptions Sorkin makes to achieve this radical agenda. The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF)  wasn’t the only one who thought so. Several news organizations and think tanks quickly jumped in and called it an effort “to kill the Bill of Rights.”

Credit card with two bullet holes and revolver

Sorkin Actually believes that if credit card companies would just ban sales with their cards or at least commit to tracking gun purchases, it could mean the end of horrific murders that shake us all.

Sorkin ran the column in the Old Gray Lady on Christmas Eve, which raises its’ own suspicions of how much faith the newspaper had in this column. After all, it’s Sorkin’s second attempt to force financial institutions to do the work of law enforcement and lawmakers. He wrote a similar column nearly a year ago. Since he didn’t get the attention he wanted then, he made a second attempt—on a holiday, when people should rightly be paying more attention to their faith and family, instead of championing progressive ideals.

Problematic Reasoning

Sorkin believes that if credit card companies would just ban sales with their cards or at least commit to tracking gun purchases, it could mean the end of horrific murders that shake us all. Here’s the problem. The credit card companies have no interest in doing this. Daily Caller pointed out that Visa and MasterCard both held that monitoring and arbitrating the private purchases of their customers “sets a dangerous precedent.” Wells Fargo, according to Sorkin’s own reporting, stated gun regulation is the responsibility of the government, not corporations.

All of this might be a bridge too far, even for progressive government proponents. The oft-praised ACLU, which doesn’t come close to a gun-rights proponent organization, said the prospect of monitoring is an “enormously intrusive role in American life.”

Even Single Purchases Suspect

Sorkin’s not just talking multiple gun purchases to create a blip on the monitoring radar. Breitbart reporter AWR Hawkins picked up on that one too. He pointed out that one murderer highlighted by Sorkin purchased a single handgun with a credit card. That, he argues, should raise a red flag.

FrontPage’s Daniel Greenfield, an investigative journalist and Shillman Journalism Fellow at the think tank Freedom Center, points out that if Sorkin’s idea has merit, what’s to stop corporations from monitoring alcohol purchases to fight drunk driving or soda to tamp down obesity? Don’t worry, Greenfield doesn’t support it. In fact, he labels the entire scheme “a Bloombergian dystopian dream.”

National Review’s Kevin D. Williamson points out that under Sorkin’s strategy, which would call for the monitoring of the exercise of constitutionally-protected rights, even political speech could be monitored. “There is a sneaky totalitarian tendency among progressives, who look for vulnerable pressure points to exploit for political ends,” he wrote. He added that disagreements, even with corporate entities, are treated as “fraud” and if the rights can’t be eradicated, then the means by which those rights are achieved must be regulated away.

If Not Banks, Then Who?

What Sorkin ignores is that in many of these instances of these tragic crimes, there were family members who were pleading with law enforcement and government agencies to intervene. The murderer in Parkland, Fla., was reported to federal, county, and school authorities multiple times through tipsters. The Air Force failed on several instances to enforce the law that would have prevented the Sutherland Springs murderer from purchasing firearms. The murderer at the Pulse nightclub was monitored by the FBI under the terror watchlist, but maybe Sorkin missed that report published by his own newspaper.

Here’s what Sorkin wants. He’d rather institute progressive policies that subvert the actual rule of law by delegating accountability and the functions of those policies to nameless and faceless corporate entities. These corporations, of course, are unaccountable to voters or the American public. Additionally, it can’t be done legislatively because of the pesky Bill of Rights and lawmakers who respect the rule of law. Therefore, Sorkin wants it done through corporate advocacy—privacy be damned.

What shouldn’t be lost in all of this is that Sorkin likens the purchase of firearms to fraud or any other criminal activity. You are automatically suspect and must be reported and monitored if you dare to exercise your right to firearm ownership. The real goal isn’t to bar or regulate gun purchases by credit cards. It’s to ban gun sales—period.

What do you think of Sorkins assertion that monitoring credit card purchases is going to prevent future horrific murders? Share your answer in the comment section.

Tags: , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

The mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, "The Shooter's Log," is to provide information-not opinions-to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (24)

  • Patrick Rex

    |

    Nice Blog,
    Emma custom rifles deals in new & used air rifles in UK.

    Reply

  • james memmingway

    |

    @ illanoyed

    Really??? Here is the Proof so be quiet and pay attention instead of calling people names and making false allegations!!!

    H.R. 17735 (1968 Gun Control Act)
    representative Emmanuel CELLER

    Senate Bill 1523 (1988)
    senator Howard METZENBAUM

    Senate Bill 2180 (1988)
    senator Howard METZENBAUM

    “Senate Bill 2070 “Gun Free School Zone Act of 1990″ – (1990)
    senator Herbert KOHL

    Senate Bill 653 (1993)
    senator Howard METZENBAUM

    Brady Law (February 1994)
    senator Howard METZENBAUN
    senator Charles SCHUMMER

    Senate Bill 1878 Brady Bill 2 (1994)
    senator Howard METZENBAUM

    H.R. 1321(1994)
    sponsored by senator Charles SCHUMMER

    “The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994″ – (1994)
    senator Dianne FEINSTEIN
    representative Charles SCHUMMER

    “Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995″ – (1995)
    senator Herbert KOHL
    senator Arlen SPECTER
    senator Dianne FEINSTEIN
    senator Frank LAUTENBERG

    “Lautenberg Domestic-Violence Confiscation Provision” (1996)
    senator Frank LAUTENBERG

    Senate Bill 54 (1997)
    senator Dianne FEINSTEIN

    Senate Bill 193 (January 1999)
    senator Barbara BOXER – real name “LEVY”

    Senate Bill 149 (January 1999)
    senator Herbert KOHL

    Senate Bill 407 (February 1999)
    senator Frank LAUTENBERG

    Senate Bill 443 (February 1999)
    senator rank LAUTENBERG

    Senate Bill 560 (March 1999)
    senator Frank LAUTENBERG

    Senate Bill 594 (March 1999)
    senator Dianne FEINSTEIN

    Senate Bill 2515 (May 2000)
    senator Dianne FEINSTEIN
    senator Barbara BOXER – real name LEVY
    senator Frank LAUTENBERG
    senator Charles SCHUMMER

    Senate Bill 25 (January 2001)
    senator Dianne FEINSTEIN
    senator Charles SCHUMMER
    senator Barbara BOXER – real name LEVY

    Reintroduced Legislation that would Reauthorize the 1994 Federal Ban (May 2003)

    senator Dianne FEINSTEIN
    senator Charles SCHUMMER
    senator Barbara BOXER – real name LEVY

    Senate Bill 1774 (October 2003)
    senator Dianne FEINSTEIN
    senator frank LAUTENBERG
    senator Carl LEVIN
    senator Charles SCHUMMER

    Senate Bill 645 (March 2005)
    senator Frank LAUTENBERG

    Senate Bill 620 (March 2005)
    senator Dianne FEINSTEIN

    Reply

  • karl

    |

    just one more reason to not use any of them

    Reply

  • Chris Endres

    |

    Tugs, Crooks and bad guys generally have bad credit. So they don’t even have credit cards. Not to mention Criminals that sell firearms to felons/criminals out of there trunks probably DON’T ACCEPT CREDIT CARDS. Come on people. GUNS don’t kill people, people kill people.

    Reply

  • Gene

    |

    These elected idiots have never lived in the real world.They were raised by their mother that wouldn’t let them outside with out supervision until they were 25.They don’t like guns because they are heavier than what they are use to.That is why they have armed security.They on see a life fron a book that someone else lived.They are to stupid to see a forest because trees are in the way.

    Reply

  • Mitt Radates

    |

    Wait a minute. Whom among us has not been suspended or even banned by Twitter, Facebook, Quora, etc. for expressing a non-conformist, non-progressive opinion?

    Reply

    • Ludite

      |

      Those of us who don’t participate in Social Media, for one. But yeah, you do have to watch what you say around some people and in some places -too bad in these PC days self-expression is fine, except for talk of personal rights, privacy, or individualism. Respect and tolerance are demanded, unless you don’t agree… :(

      Reply

    • Jim

      |

      Asinine. Firearm sales are already tracked and reported by retailers to the government. His overreaching plan would be ridiculously easy to circumvent. Obviously it couldn’t track cash sales, which is what many gun owners use. You could also use your credit card to get a cash advance, then make an untracked purchase. However, we all know that criminals don’t by guns with credit cards. The few people who might buy a gun this way and later “flip out” or commit crimes would be negligible in the big picture if this plan were enacted. Serious breach of rights…

      Reply

  • Navy PO

    |

    Has New York Times, Andrew Ross Sorkin been drug tested! Only someone on drugs would make that kind of statement!

    Reply

    • Misc

      |

      I don’t know what kind of drug would lead to that faulty logic. Meth heads make more sense, even when they try to vacuum their lawn to get rid of all the dirt.

      Reply

  • Joe

    |

    Maybe he should go live in a garden spot like China, Russia, or North Korea.
    Remember he’s only echoing what the ‘progressive repressive’ club has been stating.

    Reply

  • Mike Nowell

    |

    NYT… All the News that’s fit to fabricate.

    I’ve already cancelled several credit cards for their stands on the second amendment during my 70 years on the planet. Suggest you research and do the same.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.

%d bloggers like this: