3D Printing

PayPal Makes Nice With Defense Distributed, But DefCad Needs a New Bank

|

Defense Distributed
Defense Distributed

According to Defense Distributed's Cody Wilson, PayPal is once again processing donations for the freedom-through-technological-innovation group. The welcome news comes just days after Wilson announced that the payment processor had suspended service to Defense Distributed, and that JP Morgan Chase had given sister site DefCad, a repository for 3D printer designs, just 30 days to find another bank. DefCad remains in need of a replacement for JP Morgan Chase.

The problem with PayPal, Wilson told me, was that it has a policy against servicing gun sales, and gun components are available through Defense Distributed's shop. The problem is being resolved by removing PayPal from the shop (other payment methods remain) and using it only for donations. Defense Distributed also accepts Bitcoin donations.

3D printable derringer
DefCad

JP Morgan Chase has given Wilson no reason for terminating DefCad's account (and hasn't responded to my inquiries, either), but he suspects it faced political pressure or concerns that caused it to sever the relationship. Wilson is looking for another bank willing to take on DefCad's business. Interestingly, banks apparently require screenshots of Websites during the application process, so DefCad is likely to get a cosmetic overhaul to make it more appealing to bankers with delicate dispositions.

In the meantime, individual developers continue to work on 3D-printable firearms designs. Above is an image of a derringer design uploaded yesterday to DefCad's forums.

NEXT: UK Government Pushes Back on Expensive EU Regulations

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s good the government has grown so large and powerful that its agents can affect the finances of citizens at will.

    1. There’s no evidence of that, FoE! You have no proof that the government has anything to do with this. Maybe JPM Chase is just doing the Right Thing?, or maybe they decided that they have enough money already and don’t need more business accounts to keep track of.

      Stop with all this reckless and unsubstantiated speculation!

      1. No, nothing bad could happen by government doing all of this stuff it shouldn’t be or it’s even illegal for it to do.

  2. The problem with PayPal, Wilson told me, was that it has a policy against servicing gun sales

    Why?

    1. California based company, I think. Don’t want to step in that regulatory quagmire.

  3. But, but, but I was told we live under Rule of Law. That looks more like, well, something else.

    1. The Law of Rule?

    2. That’s a common misconception. It’s Rule of Claw or Rule of Flaw. Sometimes Rule of Maw.

  4. Interestingly, banks apparently require screenshots of Websites during the application process, so DefCad is likely to get a cosmetic overhaul to make it more appealing to bankers with delicate dispositions.

    Wow, we really have come to a point where people say, “We don’t want any of your deutsche markees” and slam the phone down.

  5. OT wrt Amash amendment:

    http://www.politico.com/story/…..94674.html

    Bachmann won’t vote for it b/c:

    the program doesn’t violate Fourth Amendment rights because the businesses own the records being obtained, not the individuals.

    “There is no expectation of privacy,” Bachmann said. “Individuals do not own the records.”

    “I believe we need to win the war on terror, we need to defeat the goals and aims of radical jihadists,” she said.

    She has redefined stupid cunt.

    1. I’m tired of the excuses. Give us back our rights, you sons of bitchs.

      1. And our money.

          1. I definitely want a refund, this isn’t the government that I ordered.

    2. Finally, Bachmann and the Occupy movement finally agree on something.

    3. “I believe we need to win the war on terror, we need to defeat the goals and aims of radical jihadists,” she said.

      So why supporting their goals by advocating a national security state?

      Oh that’s right, she’s really, really stupid.

      1. We need to win the war on drugs also. How’s that working out?

    4. First time I ever heard the woman give a speech, when she was running for POTUS, it was all war mongering rhetoric. So this is no surprise to me.

      She’s just a cuter, female version of Lindsey Graham.

      1. Yeah, but which of them does John McCain jerk off on?

        1. Probably Graham.

    5. “There is no expectation of privacy,” Bachmann said. “Individuals do not own the records.”

      Wait, individuals own the company that owns those records. So why is it ok to force the company to turn over records it owns?

  6. In olden days they called this “suffering the King’s displeasure”.

  7. The problem with PayPal, Wilson told me, was that it has a policy against servicing gun sales

    I happily closed my account yesterday, citing their treatment of Defense Distributed.

    The fact that PayPal took them back for this reason doesn’t change a thing. If they had done it under government pressure, that’s bad enough (why would I trust a company that’s so easily pushed around?), but if they did it because “ooh icky guns”, well, that’s just plain pathetic.

    1. I happily closed my account yesterday, citing their treatment of Defense Distributed

      You many want to consider shopping for some new apparel, soon:

      Stealth Hoodies

      1. Yeah they work so well, except for the 2/3’s of the body they don’t cover, or until they heat up.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.