Welcome to Gulf Shore Federal Credit Union in Texas City, TX. I'm told by my source that when asked, he was told this requirement was imposed by "the auditors."
Who those auditors are was not determined, but if the excuse given by the CU was true, this represents a whole new and insidious line of attack against the right to keep and bear arms by the financial industry.
7 comments:
Another line of attack are the insurance companies. Will they demand that the insured business post "no firearems" signs in order to have coverage? Charge a premium if the business won't post?
Um,
Is that bi-lingual?
So ... they're are 'welcoming' - to a point.
When my place of employment became no guns, it was because we'd taken on a contract that required insurance and the insurers required it.
The problem seems to be that the lawyers think they see a potential financial liability to the employer, if the employees are allowed to carry.
We've tried, in the past, to impose strict liability on businesses that ban guns. That's never gone far. Too much opposition from business.
But would the opposite work? A bill to free businesses from liability for the actions of law-abiding permit holders, provided that the business does not ban guns?
I will explain the logic and my background, I was at one time a Domino's Pizza Manager and they have a policy of "Don't resist, give them what they want." I thought it was the stupidest thing I ever heard of and one of the risk avoidance explained it to me like this: This policy is to protect the business, not the employee, if we don't do this, the next time a perp gets ventilated by an employee legally carrying, the family of the dead perp will sue the business hoping for the ghetto lottery. But if we have this policy in place, the employee violated our policy thereby we are not libel and the business is protected from a lawsuit from the family." I understood the logic, but I still thought the policy was lame. The same thing is at play here.
Ah! The 'Easy to Rob' signs!
"No one inside can shoot back"
Ma Deuce
We need one group to coordinate the financial backlash against these sob's . Bring right/conservative,biker/trucker/Christian/farmer/pothead/prepper/rancher/etc., and any other , to use the left's words , underserved whiteish types .
Email from Alan Korwin:
Though I've asked in the past when this comes up, I've not seen an insurance contract with such a requirement.
Can you obtain one, and get the author of this in that loop?
"Denial of a civil right under color of law" is a felony. (18 USC §241 et seq.) Conspiracy for such denial is also a felony, and easier to prove. If denial results in death, the death penalty is authorized.
Both strict liability and freedom from liability are viable state legislative or federal actions, what's needed are politicians with backbone.
With only both houses of Congress and the White House, we lack seem to sufficient influence. Go figure.
Alan Korwin, Publisher
Bloomfield Press
"We publish the gun laws."
Post a Comment