If enacted, HB 564 would amend Chapter 66 of the North Carolina General Statutes, introducing significant limitations on how payment card networks can handle transactions involving firearms. By disallowing the usage of firearms codes, the bill aims to prevent discrimination against firearms merchants and protect the privacy of consumers who engage in lawful purchases of firearms and ammunition. The act also establishes civil liabilities for violations, allowing affected merchants or consumers to seek damages or injunctive relief in court.
Summary
House Bill 564, known as the Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act, seeks to protect the financial privacy of individuals purchasing firearms in North Carolina. The bill prohibits payment card networks from using specific merchant category codes that identify transactions at firearms merchants. This legislation arises in response to concerns about a new code approved by the International Organization for Standardization that could allow tracking and surveillance of lawful gun purchases, which supporters believe could deter individuals from exercising their rights under the Second Amendment and the North Carolina Constitution.
Sentiment
The sentiment around HB 564 appears to be supportive among gun rights advocates who view the bill as a necessary safeguard for personal freedoms and privacy rights. Conversely, there may be concerns from consumer advocacy groups about the implications of restricting transaction data, though these perspectives are less prominently featured. Overall, the sentiment among sponsors and proponents is one of urgency to protect Second Amendment rights and promote lawful commerce without undue surveillance.
Contention
Notable points of contention include discussions surrounding the effectiveness and necessity of the bill, especially in the context of existing privacy protections and whether such measures may inadvertently impact broader consumer rights. There is also a debate about the balance between gun rights advocacy and the need for accountability in the firearms commerce space. Critics may question whether this legislative focus on preventing tracking aligns with adequate measures to ensure responsible firearm sales.