Square Modifies Its User Agreement to Prohibit Firearms and Weapons Transactions

Square Modifies Its User Agreement to Prohibit Firearms and Weapons Transactions

Americans rely on the Constitution of the United States of America to protect their rights and restrict the powers of the federal government from violating these rights.  The blowback from the vast majority of Americans as our “trusted servants” seek to limit our Second Amendment rights has been tremendous.  

The goal of the progressives is first to register, and then confiscate, the firearms of law abiding citizens.  hey are taking advantage of the pleas to “do something” to stop the horrific crimes we have seen recently in Newtown and Aurora, but it appears, at least for the time being, nothing will be accomplished. The Manchin-Toomey gun amendment failed to pass the Senate, with 54 Senators in favor of the bill and 46 against. The bill required 60 votes to move forward. 

We are too close to the 2014 elections, and no one wants to deal with the blowback from their constituents if they vote to infringe on any of our rights to keep and bear arms.

This past week, vendors using the Square Account mobile phone application, which processes credit and debit card transactions, received an updated user agreement dated May 9th, 2013.  In this agreement, Part One, Section 6, states “By creating a Square Account, you also confirm that you will not accept payments in connection with the following businesses or business activities: [this section has been modified to add item number] “(23) sales of (i) firearms, firearm parts or hardware, and ammunition; or (ii) weapons and other devices designed to cause physical injury.”  

It stands to reason the credit card companies and banks will follow.  How many gun show vendors use Square to process their sales transactions?  How soon will banks and credit card companies follow suit?  Is this merely a conscientious decision by the owners of Square to not accept transactions involving firearms or other weapons, or is this a result of collusion with anti-Second Amendment officials in our government to “infringe” on our Second Amendment rights and circumvent Congressional legislation?