27 ms·

I’ve mentioned this before, but the firearms industry has a similar issue, caused by the same clauses. Local gun stores often pay very high fees for credit card

I’ve mentioned this before, but the firearms industry has a similar issue, caused by the same clauses. Local gun stores often pay very high fees for credit card processing relative to other retail stores - and unlike gambling and pornography, this doesn’t seem to be supported by a higher chargeback rate as best I can tell. They’ve just been “lumped in” because of the regulated nature of some of their products. I say “some of”, because things like magazines and accessories are usually included in the “prohibited goods and services” clauses, even though they are typical subject to no specific regulation at either the state or federal level. It’s honestly kind of weird to me.

Scoundreller 7y ago
I wonder if Walmart pays a higher commission on that portion of their business.
- flyingfences 7y ago
  No, they're a "reputable business", i.e. large enough and well-enough established that they can't be bullied into submission.
  - m-p-3 7y ago
    Yeah, Visa tried to keep their fee high, and I believe Wal-Mart won that fight in Canada (although they won't specifically say). https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/visa-walmart-1.3923039 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/visa-walmart-1.3923039
soapboxrocket 7y ago
What I find so interesting about Vice Ventures is how she has drawn a hard line on the weapons industry.
- flyingfences 7y ago
  It's all politics. This organization is clearly run by a team on the "left wing" - they'll happily support what the "right wing" labels as "degenerate" but toe the line on what they consider "uncivilized". I'm disappointed but not at all surprised.
  - StuffedParrot 7y ago
    What a shallow view of politics. Ladies and gentlemen, the Dunning-Kruger effect.
  - AmericanChopper 7y ago
    Their mission statement is investing in industries "facing funding and/or regulatory challenges because of social disapproval", but the unstated (or perhaps implied) political angle is they are focusing on industries that society doesn't approve of, but they do. Otherwise weapons, fossil fuels and surveillance tech would be on their list too. The obvious response to that is that those industries face disapproval because of a perceived harm to society, but all of the industries they list face disapproval for the exact same reason.
  - jay_kyburz 7y ago
    I think your comment is interesting because it demonstrates how inadequate the left wing - right wing view of the world is. A lot of "left wing" energy is spent trying to kill the gambling and nicotine industry.
    - flyingfences 7y ago
      I guess I mean the "popular left/right" more than the "establishment left/right" especially when it comes to startups and unconventional investing.
    - namewasmypw 7y ago
      Not really. The left tends to oppose government restrictions, as opposed to the center and center-left (liberals).
- jay_kyburz 7y ago
  Yeah, its not that they have no moral compass, its just that it points in a different direction to many people. I don't have a problem with sex tech or esports but want nothing to do with addiction. I wonder if they would also fund email spammers if there was money in it.
  - mtnGoat 7y ago
    Yet sex/porn and esports are both addicting. How does that math add up? Games maybe not so much by nature, but the publishers are trying everything they can to increase your time in game.
    - duskwuff 7y ago
      "Esports" typically refers to professional competitive gaming, not to video games in general -- the focus is on viewership, not participation. There are some related side industries which might fit that description (like esports betting sites), but the industry itself isn't particularly "addictive", at least no more than traditional sports. The classification of sex and pornography as "addictive" has been controversial, and all I'll say about that is that there is no scientific consensus that they should be considered as such.
      - mtnGoat 7y ago
        ok, i can get on board with the esports part. Porn, you can call it anecdotal, but over a decade in that industry taught me, its certainly addictive for some, and is are some very manipulative marketing going on by the smarter companies. But i do see the opposing argument, people get addicted to all kinds of strange things and nothing about porn per se is addicting. it's that ending they are addicted to, not the content.
        rurp 7y ago
        I used the work in the gaming[0] industry and did my best to read up on addiction, both in general terms and related to gambling. One of the main takeaways I found was that the addiction rates are surprisingly similar across different vices. It doesn't matter if the vice is gambling, porn, alcohol, shopping, or whatever -- some low single digit percent of the population is likely to get dangerously addicted, a somewhat larger group will spend way too much money but not otherwise disrupt their life, and the vast majority of people will treat it like just another type of recreation. I really wish our society could take all of the energy that goes into criminalizing and stigmatizing vice industries and instead use it to offer help to people who are dangerously addicted. Just think of how much free therapy, rehab, and drug research could be funded by the tens of billions of dollars that the drug war has cost. [0] Gaming is the industry term for gambling
- curiousgal 7y ago
  If it's sex or drugs or any sort of addiction, the user is victim. With weapons, other people are the victim.
  - ghostpepper 7y ago
    How does buying a vibrator make someone a victim?
  - sdinsn 7y ago
    Unless you use a weapon for self defense.
    - homonculus1 7y ago
      Self-defense doesn't exist according to HN. The SFPD should be good enough for anybody, which means all private guns are just murder waiting to happen.
      - colejohnson66 7y ago
        I think you’ll find that the political diversity here is quite wide. There’s people here against guns and people here who believe people have a right to own them.
  - nokcha 7y ago
    >If it's sex or drugs or any sort of addiction, the user is victim. With weapons, other people are the victim. At least in the US, a majority of deaths by firearm are suicides. And as for potentially addictive drugs (e.g., alcohol), the user can cause great harm to other people, as in drunk driving.
    - im3w1l 7y ago
      At the risk of stating the obvious: there is presently no war on US soil.
    - ummwhat 7y ago
flyingfences 7y ago
Such denials of service are due in part to the politics of the financial bigwigs, but are also due in large point to government programs [1] specifically designed to suppress "undesirable" business. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point
- scarface74 7y ago
  I doubt the current administration is targeting gun dealers.
  - jjeaff 7y ago
    Regulations from previous administrations don't magically disappear at the end of their term.
    - tjr225 7y ago
      They don't magically appear under certain administrations either. I'm not sure I understand your point.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      It’s not about the regulations, it’s about whether the executive branch chooses to enforce them and how much.
      - BubRoss 7y ago
        That's really not true, you can't run a giant public company and start breaking laws because you think 'the current executive branch won't care'.
        scarface74 7y ago
        CounterExamples: (And before anyone gets triggered about me talking about politics, please notice that the examples below are referring to both parties in the same light) 1. Selling marijuana is still illegal federally but there are hundreds of companies selling it out in the open in states where it is legal. Neither Republican or Democratic Presidents seem to have much interest in prosecuting them. Yes I know The former attorney general under Trump wanted to start prosecutions but the Republican Congress at the time basically said he couldn’t use funds for it and it went against what even Trump wanted. 2. How many companies were paying illegal immigrants for farm labor and factory work while both Republican and Democratic lawmakers looked the other way until Trump? I am not making a value judgement either way here. 3. Uber
joe_the_user 7y ago
I think most of the firearms industry serves police and military and I don't think that part has trouble getting finance of whatever sort it might need. Retail gun sales are a somewhat exceptional little piece of the overall arms industry. Many nations that control access to arms for their citizens still maintain and support an arms industry, including small firearms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry
- jack_h 7y ago
  This is true for major manufacturers that have been around for decades or even centuries. Small start-ups have a much harder time finding funding.
  - beat 7y ago
    Small startups doing expensive manufacturing in the face of existing industrial-grade competition will always have a hard time finding funding, because the risk/reward ratio sucks.
    - jack_h 7y ago
      True, and the general consensus is if you want to make a start-up in this industry just don't. It's more likely you'll end up on a future episode of Forgotten Weapons. I can definitely understand not wanting to invest in these sorts of start-ups purely from an ROI perspective.
- ARandomerDude 7y ago
  The "firearms industry" is a subset of the "arms industry." "Firearms" are rifles, pistols, and shotguns. "Arms" include those, plus tanks, fighter jets, artillery, nuclear weapons, etc.
  - nyolfen 7y ago
    there is crossover but you might as well lump together stealth bombers and SUVs. the vast, vast majority of firearms produced by US companies are for civilians.

Scoundreller 7y ago

I wonder if Walmart pays a higher commission on that portion of their business.

flyingfences 7y ago
No, they're a "reputable business", i.e. large enough and well-enough established that they can't be bullied into submission.
- m-p-3 7y ago
  Yeah, Visa tried to keep their fee high, and I believe Wal-Mart won that fight in Canada (although they won't specifically say). https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/visa-walmart-1.3923039 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/visa-walmart-1.3923039

soapboxrocket 7y ago

What I find so interesting about Vice Ventures is how she has drawn a hard line on the weapons industry.

flyingfences 7y ago
It's all politics. This organization is clearly run by a team on the "left wing" - they'll happily support what the "right wing" labels as "degenerate" but toe the line on what they consider "uncivilized". I'm disappointed but not at all surprised.
- StuffedParrot 7y ago
  What a shallow view of politics. Ladies and gentlemen, the Dunning-Kruger effect.
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  Their mission statement is investing in industries "facing funding and/or regulatory challenges because of social disapproval", but the unstated (or perhaps implied) political angle is they are focusing on industries that society doesn't approve of, but they do. Otherwise weapons, fossil fuels and surveillance tech would be on their list too. The obvious response to that is that those industries face disapproval because of a perceived harm to society, but all of the industries they list face disapproval for the exact same reason.
- jay_kyburz 7y ago
  I think your comment is interesting because it demonstrates how inadequate the left wing - right wing view of the world is. A lot of "left wing" energy is spent trying to kill the gambling and nicotine industry.
  - flyingfences 7y ago
    I guess I mean the "popular left/right" more than the "establishment left/right" especially when it comes to startups and unconventional investing.
  - namewasmypw 7y ago
    Not really. The left tends to oppose government restrictions, as opposed to the center and center-left (liberals).
jay_kyburz 7y ago
Yeah, its not that they have no moral compass, its just that it points in a different direction to many people. I don't have a problem with sex tech or esports but want nothing to do with addiction. I wonder if they would also fund email spammers if there was money in it.
- mtnGoat 7y ago
  Yet sex/porn and esports are both addicting. How does that math add up? Games maybe not so much by nature, but the publishers are trying everything they can to increase your time in game.
  - duskwuff 7y ago
    "Esports" typically refers to professional competitive gaming, not to video games in general -- the focus is on viewership, not participation. There are some related side industries which might fit that description (like esports betting sites), but the industry itself isn't particularly "addictive", at least no more than traditional sports. The classification of sex and pornography as "addictive" has been controversial, and all I'll say about that is that there is no scientific consensus that they should be considered as such.
    - mtnGoat 7y ago
      ok, i can get on board with the esports part. Porn, you can call it anecdotal, but over a decade in that industry taught me, its certainly addictive for some, and is are some very manipulative marketing going on by the smarter companies. But i do see the opposing argument, people get addicted to all kinds of strange things and nothing about porn per se is addicting. it's that ending they are addicted to, not the content.
      - rurp 7y ago
        I used the work in the gaming[0] industry and did my best to read up on addiction, both in general terms and related to gambling. One of the main takeaways I found was that the addiction rates are surprisingly similar across different vices. It doesn't matter if the vice is gambling, porn, alcohol, shopping, or whatever -- some low single digit percent of the population is likely to get dangerously addicted, a somewhat larger group will spend way too much money but not otherwise disrupt their life, and the vast majority of people will treat it like just another type of recreation. I really wish our society could take all of the energy that goes into criminalizing and stigmatizing vice industries and instead use it to offer help to people who are dangerously addicted. Just think of how much free therapy, rehab, and drug research could be funded by the tens of billions of dollars that the drug war has cost. [0] Gaming is the industry term for gambling
curiousgal 7y ago
If it's sex or drugs or any sort of addiction, the user is victim. With weapons, other people are the victim.
- ghostpepper 7y ago
  How does buying a vibrator make someone a victim?
- sdinsn 7y ago
  Unless you use a weapon for self defense.
  - homonculus1 7y ago
    Self-defense doesn't exist according to HN. The SFPD should be good enough for anybody, which means all private guns are just murder waiting to happen.
    - colejohnson66 7y ago
      I think you’ll find that the political diversity here is quite wide. There’s people here against guns and people here who believe people have a right to own them.
- nokcha 7y ago
  >If it's sex or drugs or any sort of addiction, the user is victim. With weapons, other people are the victim. At least in the US, a majority of deaths by firearm are suicides. And as for potentially addictive drugs (e.g., alcohol), the user can cause great harm to other people, as in drunk driving.
  - im3w1l 7y ago
    At the risk of stating the obvious: there is presently no war on US soil.
  - ummwhat 7y ago

flyingfences 7y ago

Such denials of service are due in part to the politics of the financial bigwigs, but are also due in large point to government programs [1] specifically designed to suppress "undesirable" business. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point

scarface74 7y ago
I doubt the current administration is targeting gun dealers.
- jjeaff 7y ago
  Regulations from previous administrations don't magically disappear at the end of their term.
  - tjr225 7y ago
    They don't magically appear under certain administrations either. I'm not sure I understand your point.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    It’s not about the regulations, it’s about whether the executive branch chooses to enforce them and how much.
    - BubRoss 7y ago
      That's really not true, you can't run a giant public company and start breaking laws because you think 'the current executive branch won't care'.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        CounterExamples: (And before anyone gets triggered about me talking about politics, please notice that the examples below are referring to both parties in the same light) 1. Selling marijuana is still illegal federally but there are hundreds of companies selling it out in the open in states where it is legal. Neither Republican or Democratic Presidents seem to have much interest in prosecuting them. Yes I know The former attorney general under Trump wanted to start prosecutions but the Republican Congress at the time basically said he couldn’t use funds for it and it went against what even Trump wanted. 2. How many companies were paying illegal immigrants for farm labor and factory work while both Republican and Democratic lawmakers looked the other way until Trump? I am not making a value judgement either way here. 3. Uber

joe_the_user 7y ago

I think most of the firearms industry serves police and military and I don't think that part has trouble getting finance of whatever sort it might need. Retail gun sales are a somewhat exceptional little piece of the overall arms industry. Many nations that control access to arms for their citizens still maintain and support an arms industry, including small firearms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry

jack_h 7y ago
This is true for major manufacturers that have been around for decades or even centuries. Small start-ups have a much harder time finding funding.
- beat 7y ago
  Small startups doing expensive manufacturing in the face of existing industrial-grade competition will always have a hard time finding funding, because the risk/reward ratio sucks.
  - jack_h 7y ago
    True, and the general consensus is if you want to make a start-up in this industry just don't. It's more likely you'll end up on a future episode of Forgotten Weapons. I can definitely understand not wanting to invest in these sorts of start-ups purely from an ROI perspective.
ARandomerDude 7y ago
The "firearms industry" is a subset of the "arms industry." "Firearms" are rifles, pistols, and shotguns. "Arms" include those, plus tanks, fighter jets, artillery, nuclear weapons, etc.
- nyolfen 7y ago
  there is crossover but you might as well lump together stealth bombers and SUVs. the vast, vast majority of firearms produced by US companies are for civilians.