Refuses Business to Gun Sellers Refuses Business to Gun Sellers
by Alina C., which is a subsidiary of Visa, cited “the sale of firearms or any similar product” as the reason for ceasing its business relationship with Hyatt Gun Shop of North Carolina.

Hyatt Gun Shop is the nation’s largest gun seller. However, when they signed a service agreement with FOUR years ago, the folks over at had some sort of brain malfunction, causing them to not realize the name and type of business they were entering into a contract with.

Until now. sent the following:

Dear Hyatt Gun Shop Inc,

Authorize.Net LLC (“Authorize.Net”) has determined that the nature of your business constitutes a violation of Section 2.xiv of the Authorize.Net Acceptable Use Guidelines and Sections 3.3 and 11.3 of the Authorize.Net Service Agreement (the “Agreement”). These sections include, but are not limited to, the sale of firearms or any similar product. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 4 of the Acceptable Use Guidelines, your ability to access and use the Authorize.Net Services will be terminated on September 30, 2013.

Seeing as how this is in their “acceptable use” policy, one can conclude that this is across the board for all gun sellers.

I’m not one to call for boycotts. Everyone has the option of doing business with places that use, so that’s for you, the individual, to decide.

I’m a capitalist, so I like when good people make a profit. I’m all about BUYcotts. If you’re in the NC area (or even if you’re not, as they have a “shop online” link), visit They’ve since switched to a gun-friendly service provider that offers all the same security features expected when doing card transactions.

As far as go, I just have this to say:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Molon. Labe.


5 thoughts on “ Refuses Business to Gun Sellers

  1. So is it okay for a company like to decided that they do not want to do business with folks that sell guns? Is that capitalism at work or a form of discrimination? I ask because, on the surface, this looks like a company engaging in the free market and because it is not a gun-friendly business decision, some folks are taking offense. I guess where I got lost was with the inclusion of the line from the Second Amendment since this has nothing to do with the government. Granted the whole line between a business’ right to refuse service and discrimination can be a muddy one.

  2. I think the point of the article was to call attention to the company that has ceased activities with a gun seller. Since most of the people that visit this site are conservative or libertarian in nature, they probably do not support gun control and maybe this article is a way of pointing out this company for those folks so that they can choose whether or not to conduct business with them.

    Course, I’m not the author of this piece so I’m really just assuming here.

  3. Steve is correct. The reason I included the text of the 2nd amendment is because lately companies vilify gun-owners, gun rights activists, etc. They’ve been very vocal about it.

    While this isn’t “political”, per se, it’s my understanding that this company was a donor for the Obama campaign. This, on some level, makes it a bit political, because they are supporting candidates who support and are hellbent on infringing on our gun rights.

    The reason I don’t call for a boycott, and usually don’t, is because of the point you mentioned. It’s a company making the decision to refuse business to a particular type of customer. It’s up to the consumer, the individual, to say whether they want to support this company or not. Personally, I’d rather use vendors that don’t make life harder for companies like Hyatt Gun Shop.

    Now, the other reason I wanted to make this public, is because unlike companies like Chick-fil-A, for example, who made their stance on traditional marriage public, while NOT refusing service to same-sex couples, this company is flat-out refusing service to a company doing nothing wrong, simply because “guns are scary”… or whatever the newest narrative is.

    It’s just pathetic, and I want people that support the 2nd amendment to see this and spread the word, since apparently some companies feel that exercising a constitutional right warrants refusal of service.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s