Major credit card companies are reclassifying purchases at gun stores and ammunition shops — a change that could pull back the curtain on gun purchases.

Visa, American Express, and Mastercard will start implementing the plan, separating gun and ammunition purchases from other kinds of shopping for the first time. They had previously been classified as general merchandise.

The move comes as gun sales keep climbing.

"The sales have definitely increased over the last several years compared to probably the last five," said Vincent Vasquez, a gun store manager in Arizona.

The FBI reports having done 78,571,988 background checks for gun purchases in the last two years. That's more than in any two-year stretch since record-keeping started in 1998.

Cyndi Starr is among the many buying a firearm for the first time.

"I came to that decision after months of going back and forth," Starr said. "I would never want to ever harm anybody, never, but I've been close enough to certain violent or potentially violent situations that I had that split second where it's like, 'What's my backup?'"

Gun violence prevention activists hope the new classification for credit card purchases will help differentiate people like Starr from those intending to use a gun to harm people, helping banks see and report suspicious activity.

But, of course, not everyone's on board.

Over the weekend, the NRA said the move was about creating a "national registry of gun owners."

The policy is intended only to separately categorize purchases at gun and ammunition stores, not specifically what was purchased. It's a simple label change advocates hope will help curb gun violence.

Newsy is the nation’s only free 24/7 national news network. You can find Newsy using your TV’s digital antenna or stream for free. See all the ways you can watch Newsy here.

NEW YORK —

A judge has rejected an effort by New York's attorney general to put the National Rifle Association out of business, but will allow her lawsuit accusing top executives of illegally diverting tens of millions of dollars from the powerful gun advocacy organization to proceed.

Manhattan Judge Joel M. Cohen said allegations of NRA officials misspending on personal trips, no-show contracts and other questionable expenditures can be addressed by other remedies, such as fines and restitution, and do not warrant the “corporate death penalty” that Attorney General Letitia James had sought.

Video above from 2021: New York to press ahead with lawsuit against NRA

James' lawsuit, filed in August 2020, tells “a grim story of greed, self-dealing, and lax financial oversight" at the NRA's highest levels, but it does not allege any financial misconduct benefited the organization or harmed the public, or that the NRA is incapable of “continuing its legitimate activities on behalf of its millions of members,” Cohen wrote in a 42-page decision.

The judge also raised concerns that shutting down the NRA could impinge the free speech and assembly rights of its millions of members. Nevertheless, he said, James' lawsuit can continue against the NRA, its longtime leader Wayne LaPierre, and three men who have served as executives with the organization.

In addition to recouping money that was allegedly misspent, James is seeking to ban LaPierre and the other executives from serving in the leadership of any not-for-profit or charitable organization conducting business in New York, which would effectively remove them from any involvement with the NRA.

The NRA, LaPierre and one other defendant had filed motions to dismiss the case.

NRA President Charles Cotton called Wednesday's ruling a “resounding win for the NRA, its 5 million members, and all who believe in this organization."

“The message is loud and clear," Cotton said in a statement. "The NRA is strong and secure in its mission to protect constitutional freedom.”

James said she was “heartened that the judge rejected the NRA’s attempts to thwart most of the claims in our case,” but disappointed that he ruled against dissolving the organization.

“We are considering our legal options with respect to this ruling," James said in a statement. "We remain committed to enforcing New York law regardless of how powerful any individual or organization may be.”

Messages seeking comment were left with lawyers for the other defendants: LaPierre; the NRA's general counsel John Frazer; its former treasurer Wilson Phillips; and former chief of staff Joshua Powell.

LaPierre, the CEO who has been in charge of the NRA's day-to-day operations since 1991, is accused in the lawsuit of spending millions on private travel and personal security and accepting expensive gifts — such as African safaris and use of a 107-foot (32-meter) yacht — from vendors.

He is also accused of setting himself up with a $17 million contract with the NRA if he were to exit the organization, spending NRA money on travel consultants, luxury car services, and private jet flights for himself and his family — including more than $500,000 on eight trips to the Bahamas over a three-year span.

Some of the NRA’s excess spending was kept secret, the lawsuit said, under an arrangement with the organization’s former advertising agency, Ackerman McQueen. The advertising firm would pick up the tab for expenses for LaPierre and other NRA executives and then send a lump sum bill to the organization for “out-of-pocket expenses,” the lawsuit said.

Though headquartered in Virginia, the NRA was chartered as a nonprofit in New York in 1871 and is incorporated in the state. James is the state’s chief law enforcement officer and has regulatory power over nonprofit organizations incorporated in the state, such as the NRA. In the lawsuit, James' office argued that one way to remedy the alleged misspending at the organization was by closing it down.

In January 2021, the NRA declared bankruptcy and sought to move its state of incorporation from New York to Texas, but a judge blocked the move, saying the NRA’s bankruptcy was not filed in good faith. In the process, the NRA had made clear it sought to escape regulatory oversight in New York, in part because of the lawsuit's threat to its existence.

In a court filing last year, lawyers for the organization called the lawsuit filed by James, a Democrat, “a blatant and malicious retaliation campaign against the NRA and its constituents based on her disagreement with the content of their speech.”

Fifth Third shooting survivor Whitney Austin is pushing for a new "red flag" gun law in Kentucky which would temporarily take firearms out of the hands of those in danger of harming themselves or others.

Kentucky Senate Bill 229 would give courts the power to temporarily confiscate firearms with due process. Similar state laws that do not have due process protections have drawn the ire of national gun rights groups in the past.

Austin said she’s backing the bill because she saw an opportunity to prevent another tragedy. She knows she can't undo what happened to her Sept. 6, 2018, but she’s focusing her efforts to stop future tragedies.

"We need to act now,” she said. “We absolutely need to act now, and this allows for that."

Austin’s foundation, Whitney Strong, is working with Kentucky legislators to make the Crisis Aversion and Rights Retention (CARR) bill a law, and it has bipartisan sponsors in Rep. Paul Hornback (R) and Rep. Morgan McGarvey (D).

"I'm a gun owner," said Hornback. "I believe that it is our constitutional right, and this doesn't violate that. This goes after trying to help people."

The bill would create a legal path for a concerned citizen to temporarily separate someone in crisis from their firearm. The person would contact police with evidence, and if the officer decides it’s credible, they would get an order signed by a judge and a hearing would take place two weeks later. Separation is not permanent or automatic, and the bill would allow for transfer of firearms and ammunition to a responsible party outside the person's household.

"I think we can all think about a situation in which a gun owner is struggling, especially right now in the pandemic with increased rates of anxiety, depression, and there's just not an easy way to be able to help that gun owner right now, especially if you're talking about suicide," she said.

In years past, the National Rifle Association has opposed emergency risk protection orders in other states which they say do not support due process freedoms. WCPO reached out to NRA representatives about Kentucky’s CARR proposal but did not hear back Friday.

“The NRA believes that any effort should be structured to fully protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while preventing truly dangerous individuals from accessing firearms,” the organization says on its website.

So how long is “temporary” if a judge determines there is cause to take someone’s guns? It could be as long as a year, but there is no minimum. The bill would require stringent judicial review so that due process is maintained and the burden of proof is achieved, advocates said.

Austin believes this is the Commonwealth's best opportunity for immediate change.

"As a gun owner, we need to recognize the crisis moments that happen in life, and they happen to gun owners, too," she said.

The National Rifle Association said they are withdrawing its lawsuit against New York Attorney General Letitia James, who alleged the gun lobby of operating unlawfully in the state.

The NRA said they withdrew "because it will ensure that the NRA’s claims against NYAG James will be tried in the same court and by the same jury that will hear her lawsuit seeking to dissolve the NRA," CNN reported.

James responded to the National Rifle Association withdrawing its federal lawsuit against her, saying it "is an implicit admission that their strategy would never prevail."

"The truth is that Wayne LaPierre and his lieutenants used the NRA as a breeding ground for personal gain and a lavish lifestyle. We were victorious against the organization’s attempt to declare bankruptcy, and our fight for transparency and accountability will continue because no one is above the law," James said in a news release.

James sued the NRA last August for allegedly engaging in illegal financial conduct by undercutting their nonprofit organization's charitable mission.

In February, the NRA then countersued.