Comments on: PayPal does not like Guns, Soldiers or Soldier’s Angels

By: kitchendispatch

kitchendispatch — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 04:49:23 +0000

Adam, no it wasn’t directed at you.
It did seem rather unbusinesslike for them to pull the plug on the operation mid-stream, especially since they’ve done business w/ SA for awhile. I wonder if they sent SA a note saying …uhmm…no, you can’t do that, here is the reason in the contract you signed, please take it down. I mean, it’s what they should have done rather than taking away their privileges mid stream.

I think the “no weapons clause” is there because there might be liability issues they don’t want to take on. But on the other hand, they are a business and reserve the right to run it as they see fit.

By: Adam

Adam — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:05:50 +0000

Bouhammer, sure they’re not exactly the same, but the intent of their policy is clearly to prohibit any transactions relating to weapons. In any case, it would have been prudent to check with them first.

Kitchen Dispatch, was that directed to me? If so, I’m not sure what their charitable status has to do with it.

I’ve seen paypalsucks.com before â€“Â a lot of people have genuine complaints about PayPal, but I don’t think they’re specifically “anti-gun” and it’s certainly not fair to say that they don’t like soldiers.
.-= Adam´s last blog ..The Airborne Toxic Event =-.

By: Kitchen Dispatch

Kitchen Dispatch — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:12:04 +0000

Huh? Soldier’s Angels has their 501 c3 status.
Anyway, I have friends in the credit industry. PayPal is rife with issues. Check out paypalsucks.com
.-= Kitchen Dispatch´s last blog ..Thank you, Angry Parsnip! =-.

By: Bouhammer

Bouhammer — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:57:58 +0000

Adam,
Selling and raffling are two different things.

By: Adam

Adam — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:46:34 +0000

www.paypal.com/uk/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=p/gen/ua/use/index_frame-outside

“You may not use the PayPal service for activities that:

2. relate to sales of … (h) ammunition, firearms, or certain firearm parts or accessories, or (i) ,certain weapons or knives regulated under applicable law”

Should’ve read their acceptable use policy. If they don’t want anything to do with the sale of weapons, that’s their choice…it would probably be a nightmare for them to try to regulate that, not to mention their legal liability if someone is hurt by a weapon sold through them.

Nothing “anti-constitution” about it, unless PayPal became part of the US government when I wasn’t looking? (Remembering that the second amendment applies to the government and not to private companies.)
.-= Adam´s last blog ..The Airborne Toxic Event =-.