Even more than do you have rights as a shareholder, does a corp. have the same rights as an individual? Unfortunately, wrongly in my opinion, SCOTUS said that Corporations are people too.
Agreed. I know a lot of righties were in support of this decision because it allowed corps to support political campaigns, but it was a bad decision for the US. It will be bad on so many levels for decades to come. The unintended consequences shall be many, not few.
The rights of a board of directors DO NOT trump my rights!
Ask yourself this. We pretty much all agree that we have a right to carry in a public building don’t we? One owned by the citizens and they have no right to interfere with that right. Why? because the rights of the individual are NOT trumped by the many (the state). Isn't it the same thing with a corporation who is owned by perhaps thousands or millions of citizens and who open their doors to the general public? How can this corporation require me to leave my rights at the door? There is a BIG difference between private personal property (Mom & Pop) and a publically held corporation. Corporate property that is open to the general public is not the same thing as my personal property rights. If we bestow individual rights on corporations on the same level as the individual, how far are we from bestowing those same rights upon government?
TBG
Good point. I had to think about this. So if I understand your point here, it is to identify a publicly traded corporation (PTC) as something different than a private company, right? So a private company can exercise private property rights, but a
PTC can't because it is publicly traded?
Hmm.. No, I don't think I can accept that. The way I come to this conclusion is to try to find a way to be my own devils advocate. Lets say it is NOT 2a, but instead 1a that someone wants to exercise in the Apple Store. Should they have the right to picket in the showroom? I don't think so. I think (both constitutionally and philosophically) the PTC has the right to trespass them from the property. Can they picket outside, on the sidewalk? You bet. In fact, please do. In fact, exercise your 1a about your 2a outside on the sidewalk.
As for the slippery slope argument of allowing corporations to deny me 2a while on their property turning into the government doing the same, I just don't see the path. Government is us. PTC's are not, although I understand your argument that by being PTC's, they are similar. I get that, but I don't think it is enough to force their hand on something like this. SEC requirements of Open Records? Sure, but that is there to protect investors from scams and such. Not really a constitutional argument, more of a mechanism to keep the whole PTC concept viable.
I think the answer to this (and the CO incident is a good example of this), is Tim's answer. They can choose to not permit firearms, but they do so at their own peril/liability. In other words, if every one of the families and patrons of the theater that night sued the theater for denying them their ability to defend themselves, and making them defenseless victims, failing to provide a safe environment, etc, I think that is the proper approach. Leverage liability. Hell, the reason that they deny OC/CC in the first place is probably a fear of liability. So that just needs to be balanced against an equal liability. If the liability for disarming your patrons is the same as leaving well enough alone, then it's a wash. The crazy part is that I can't see anyone making an argument of liability on the part of the theater if they didn't deny OC/CC. In other words, they don't have to PERMIT it. It's already constitutionally protected. Like Walmart, the right policy is no policy.
Now, I am not naive enough to think that Cinemark would just acquiesce and allow OC/CC. No, they would try to put in metal detectors. But there are multiple problems with that. First, it will reduce ticket sales. Nobody likes going through security. We do it at the airport because we have little choice. But at the theater? **** that. I'll wait for DVD. Also, guns aren't the only hazard that patrons are potentially exposed to. There are plenty of things that would pass through a metal detector. But a gun still has a chance of stopping the assailaint.
I think the message that we need to stick to on this front is this:
1. The best policy is no policy.
2. If you disarm me, I will not do business with you if I can help it.
3. If you disarm me, and I DO choose to do business with you anyway, you are on the hook for my safety.
4. I will actively seek out business that respect my rights, and I will let them know that I chose them, at least in part, based on that.
I am open to the topic, but I am unconvinced as of yet. But you did get me thinking about it in a way I had not previously considered.
