Bank of America and the 2nd amendment.

[Teachu2]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Help me out here - where does the Second say that firearms manufacturers have a right to bank financing? Or even exist, for that matter? It says that we have the right to keep and bear arms.

This is NOT a Second Amendment issue. It is a corporate decision, based on their collective values. I can use my BofA card and buy a whole lot of guns. If BofA was preventing me from that (while allowing me to buy other items) THEN it might be a 2nd issue.

BofA has decided to not invest in firearms manufacturers. That may or may not reflect a anti-gun stance. It may be that their bean-counters have determined that the risk of increased regulation in the near future makes firearms manufacturers a poor investment choice. It may be some other risk factor entirely. For all we know, they may be getting out of manufacturing financing in part or entirely.

It would be helpful to know if BofA provides financing to gun retailers or distributors.

The 2nd doesn't guarantee financing for anyone.

 

[Bubbles]

BoA has the right to do business with whoever they like. I have the same right. From a purely business standpoint I think it's rather short-sighted of BoA to discriminate against McMillan based on the fact that it's a firearms manufacturer rather than the company's profitability.

 

[armoredman]

I hate using this saying, but this time it's absolutely right...DITTO!

 

[95XL883]

Bojangles, thanks for pointing out I needed to get the name out of my post. Duh!

 

[Curator]

Remember BOA was "too big to fail" according to the Obama administration who receiver 15 million in political donations. They "bought out" Countryside mortgage" another BHO donor with TARP funds. These people are corporate parasites who need to be shunned by any thinging American. Don't do business with them under any circumstances! I have cancelled my BOA credit cards and found a new mortgagor. They can kiss my A$$

 

[Yo Mama]

Help me out here - where does the Second say that firearms manufacturers have a right to bank financing? Or even exist, for that matter? It says that we have the right to keep and bear arms.

I think your confusing the right to keep and bear arms, and the right to put your money in a company that doesn't discriminate against your way of life. Most of us here have firearms in our blood.

It's kinda like someone coming into your home and taking a dump in the master bathroom. It just stinks.

 

[orionengnr]

How would McMillan know if the Visa card number they run was issued through a BoA branch?

First four digits of the debit/credit card...

 

[armoredman]

Help me out here - where does the Second say that firearms manufacturers have a right to bank financing? Or even exist, for that matter?

Let me put it in perspective...

McMillon Publishing, a small publishing company that made its start with such family friendly titles as "Waffles For Breakfast", and "The Pig Said Squeak!", had banked with Bank of America since the beginning. But McMillon had branched out to publishing more authors over the years, and more diverse titles that began to touch on the political, such as "Heather has Two Waffles", and "The Pig Said Socialize!". Mr McMillon was called into see Mr Flax of BofA, who said that the publisher was too controversial to do business with anymore, and the highly successful company closed its accounts with the megabank. McMillon went on to publish more books, such as the bestseller "BofA hates Waffles and Pigs!", while BofA's stock dropped like a rock...the end.

 

[WEJTWO]

I am unable to locate a <Name redacted> (or anything close) in BofA corporate directory. Something about this just a little off for me. I am unaware of any position by firm against small arms or defense manufacturing. Like all Wall Streeters, my outside business interests must be approved by firm. My partners and I have small arms and security training company. I had no trouble obtaining approval for the business. Yet I could not obtain approval for a field servicing venture for the expanding Marcellus Shale fields here where I live.

In addition, I direct funds every month to NRA and Boy Scouts of America and receive matching contributions. Never an issue.

There are many of us at Merrill who are sold out 2A activists, CCW carriers, outdoorsmen, reservists, and veterans (I'm not a vet or reservist). I think we'd sniff this stuff out.

I'll discreetly try to get some information on this issue. Like many posters have remarked, it could be an individual situation and not firm wide policy. However, I'm very curious.

 

[armoredman]

The NRA linked to a new article on FB about it as well.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/20/anti-gun-bank-of-america-tells-gun-company-to-find-another-bank/

 

[Old krow]

This is NOT a Second Amendment issue. It is a corporate decision, based on their collective values. I can use my BofA card and buy a whole lot of guns. If BofA was preventing me from that (while allowing me to buy other items) THEN it might be a 2nd issue.

Correct, except that they took a bail out paid by ME via my elected officials. Once they were paid by MY tax dollars they should not be allowed to refuse ANY civil liberty.

That's a very dangerous stance to have. According to this logic, the Government should be allowed to fund and/or buy any business and then deny any Right that want to without any repercussions other than me simply not purchasing anything from them.

What if the Feds purchase controlling shares of SW just to have a gun registry... does that count as an "infringement?"

 

[snakeman]

I believe that is called discrimination and is no different than racial discrimination. They should be ruined for this move.

 

[armoredman]

No, that doesn't fall under the '64 CRA; they aren't acting against any Protected Class, so it isn't LEGALLY discrimination. Remember, the two people you can legally discriminate against are gun owners and smokers.
Yes, I am told they did take bailout money, so the question there is - who's running the bank, the officials thereof or the new majority stockholders, the current administration?

 

[Teachu2]

Quote:
This is NOT a Second Amendment issue. It is a corporate decision, based on their collective values. I can use my BofA card and buy a whole lot of guns. If BofA was preventing me from that (while allowing me to buy other items) THEN it might be a 2nd issue.

Correct, except that they took a bail out paid by ME via my elected officials. Once they were paid by MY tax dollars they should not be allowed to refuse ANY civil liberty.

CREDIT IS NOT A RIGHT OR CIVIL LIBERTY. BofA is not taking anyone's right away - including McMillan's. Whether or not it's a good business decision, only the market can decide - but it's NOT a Second Amendment issue. Trying to portray it as such wrong.

McMillan, OTOH, is going to refuse to sell to me if I do business with a bank they don't get along with. That MAY be a violation of interstate commerce laws...

I'm not a BofA fan - their customer service stinks. They, however, are a fan of mine, issuing me a high-limit, no-fee credit card that I don't pay interest on and use to buy guns and gun stuff - except from McMillan.

 

[armoredman]

Teach, not arguing with you, but can you scare up a link on the interstate commerce law he might be violating? I'd think his lawyer should have advised him on that, or at least one might think that way.

 

[Jeff F]

If McMillan refuses to accept B of A Visa or Master card they would be in violation of their Visa/Master card terms of service and could be accessed penalty's. We just had a new liquor store open and start charging a .35 cent surcharge on credit/debit card purchases and they got nailed for it

 

[RCArms.com]

Teach, not arguing with you, but can you scare up a link on the interstate commerce law he might be violating? I'd think his lawyer should have advised him on that, or at least one might think that way.

There is nothing to keep him from offering a discount for payment using a NON-BoA credit card or some other similar, above board offer that encourages a customer to use a desired payment method.

 

[mg.mikael]

but it's NOT a Second Amendment issue. Trying to portray it as such wrong.

So Bank of America discriminating against clients that do business directly related to and protected by the Second Amendment is not an issue??

hey, however, are a fan of mine, issuing me a high-limit, no-fee credit card that I don't pay interest on and use to buy guns and gun stuff

So they give you a credit card with a high limit and that makes you instant fanboy of BOA?
You should learn from example, McMillian was a bigger customer then you are and look how they were treated....clearly they won't give a rat's behind about you.

 

[mrvco]

I wouldn't touch BofA with a foot pole begin with, but I guess the firearms industry is "too legit" for them:

Banks Financing Mexico Gangs Admitted in Wells Fargo Deal

 

[Voltia]

Armoredman, it is legal to discriminate against the young, the straight, the white, and the male, in addition to your two.

 

[Hacker15E]

Do any of you seriously think that, at a company with the scope of B of A, a 'boycott' by concerned American firearms owners/purchasers/manufacturers would even dent their business?

That scope of that company's assets, liabilities, etc, is monstrous compared to all of "our" interests combined and multiplied.

Nice idea, and probably makes some folks feel good about their actions, but if you think it has/would impact B of A's policies, you're simply peeing in the wind.

 

[Hacker15E]

So Bank of America discriminating against clients that do business directly related to and protected by the Second Amendment is not an issue??

#1, by the legal definition that comes to mind when making these statements, B of A is not "discriminating".

#2, there is not 2A protection for "business" relating to firearms.

 

[Old krow]

CREDIT IS NOT A RIGHT OR CIVIL LIBERTY. BofA is not taking anyone's right away - including McMillan's. Whether or not it's a good business decision, only the market can decide - but it's NOT a Second Amendment issue.

What market? The "free market?" This hasn't been an issue of "the invisible hand" of the free market since TARP when they took over 45 billion of tax payers dollars to bail out a business that free market chose to die. The market DID decide.

Trying to portray it as such wrong.

NOT seeing the potential danger in this is a gross oversight. If this becomes accepted practice then all that is needed to prevent future gun ownership is for the Feds to bail out the companies that will not do business with firearms companies and let the rest fail.

This isn't about a person opening a coffee shop and deciding not to let someone in, this is about a company that was paid for by the US taxpayers and it should not be allowed to restrict its business based on the involvement of its relationship with a Civil Liberty. You may be okay with funding this, and you may consider me wrong for "portraying" this as a 2nd issue, but I am not okay with paying for a company.... well, I wasn't okay with the bail outs in the first place, but now I am not okay with them discriminating this way.

Bottom line, if they want to make their own decisions on who they do business with and who they do not, they should PAY THEIR OWN BILLS. As long as my money is funding this non-sense I have the right to complain about it.

 

[Robert]

I have to agree with Teach I do not see this being a 2A issue, I do however see a short sighted business move that may come back to haunt them. 2A only applies to the Government placing restrictions on what are our Creator given rights. 2A does not apply to a private company at all. They may choose to not allow carry, concealed or open, on their property and they may choose not to busniess with a firearms company. That is not a violation of 2A.

It is however bad business. There are many thousands of gun owners in this country many of whom are active in pointing out companies like BoA and making sure their practices are brought to light. Don't like how a private company treats you because you are a gun owner? Then don't go there, and tell every other gun owner you know what they are doing. Let your money do the talking. But alas in this case I fear it will make no difference.

This isn't about a person opening a coffee shop and deciding not to let someone in, this is about a company that was paid for by the US taxpayers and it should not be allowed to restrict its business based on the involvement of its relationship with a Civil Liberty.

Without the SAF or NRA taking this to court there is no way to fight that other than by taking our business somewhere else. But you make a good point. When a company takes Federal money does that change the way in which they are allowed to operate, in a legal sense?

 

[JLDickmon]

meh... I've been on the internet too long to not greet this with a certain level of skepticism.

I somehow cannot see BofA waltzing into a client's office and telling them to simply <removed>