Gun control groups are pulling back the curtain to reveal that their plan to add a firearm and ammunition-specific merchant category code (MCC) for gun retailers isn’t about tracking guns. It’s about tracking you.
Andrew Ross Sorkin, a New York Times columnist who proposed this idea years ago, penned a column outlining the “next steps.” That revealed that the pressure campaign by federal lawmakers, state attorneys general, state lawmakers, and activist banks on the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) to create a unique MCC for gun retailers was just the beginning. It was never about gathering data to aid law enforcement. It is, and always has been, a concerted effort to pressure credit card companies to deny lawful firearms purchases and put every single gun purchaser on a watchlist.
Since the federal government is forbidden by law from creating and maintaining a searchable database of gun owners, this task is being outsourced to private industry.
An international body of unelected bureaucrats, not accountable to the American public, is setting the conditions to allow credit card companies to track, categorize and report “suspicious” purchases to law enforcement. This is the definition of an Orwellian society.
How We Got Here
Sorkin proposed cutting off gun purchases by throttling the use of credit cards in 2018 when he published a column titled, “How Banks Could Control Gun Sales If Washington Won’t.” NSSF warned them of the dangerousness of this proposal. Sorkin’s idea is that credit card giants could apply enough financial pressure to deny lawful gun sales. Swipe, insert the chip, or tap simply wouldn’t work for those attempting to purchase firearms or ammunition legally.
This idea was backed by gun control front-woman Shannon Watts. Antigun politicians like U.S. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and U.S. Rep. Jennifer Wexton (D-Va.) introduced legislation that would require the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCen) to give guidance to banks so they can report “suspicious financial activity.”
The bill is fraught with civil liberty violations and not just those freedoms protected by the Second Amendment. Privacy rights – specifically those related to finances – would go by the wayside.