Corporations not companies

Freedom1Man said:

I support what you did for the most part.

The demanding a refund for all purchases was a bit much IMO but that is all it is my opinion.

I am glad that you went to the HQ with your complaint.

__________-
Side topic.

Since corporations exist only with the permission of the state, then the following would not be a property right violation.

Any corporation that prohibits real people from being able to carry the tools used in self defense, should be liable for the safety of the * cough cough* employees while on the clock and traveling to and from the job, and must provide lock boxes for visitors/customers while the aforementioned is visiting plus be liable for any loss/damage of/to the tools while being held.

This would not apply to non-incorporated businesses.

Click to expand...

Primus said:

So the state should mandate the company to do this?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Freedom1Man said:

Did I say company? No, learn to read. I said CORPORATION!

Let's start a new thread if you want to continue.

Click to expand...

Primus said:

Well a corporation is a form of a company right? Meaning a corporation is always a company but a company isn't always a corporation....

I does do reads most just fine.

Not worth a new thread to me. It was your idea not mine. But if you start one I'll meet you there. I'll bring the Jameson you bring the beer.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...b-Membership&p=2088627&viewfull=1#post2088627


This is a thread created so as to not derail another thread. I am going to do my best to not be part of thread derailments anymore.

You can have a corporation without having a company. The point of a corporation is to legalize theft through a protection of debt liability.
Corporations are not real on their own. They only exist with the say so of a state. A business can be exist without the state and without being a corporation. Many businesses are referred to as companies (I have not checked a legal definition of company as it relates to businesses). A business has one or a group of owners. A business cannot steal and get away with it like a corporation. I propose that business owners have rights so long as the owners are of flesh and blood. That those of flesh and blood can create conditions of entry etc etc and according to the principles of non-aggression you can freely choose to do business with someone or not.

I propose that corporations are state entities and often can gain government sponsored monopolies which would force you to do business with them for a unique service/product that you would not be able/allowed to self provide. I also propose that flesh and blood people have rights and that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Given these two proposals, I would have to say that a corporation cannot have anymore authority to restrict your rights than they states have in the first place. Since the states were created to protect your rights then corporations would have to be responsible for your well being if it is decided to forbid tools of self defense (weapons) while visiting that they must be liable for any an all harm that may happen to you while visiting/working within the set limited boundaries.

In short if, for example, a mall is a unarmed victim zone and you while visiting get mugged, shot, etc and this could have been deterred by you being armed, then that corporation would have to pay you 2x (more maybe?) damages that you had suffered due to the policy being in place.

I am writing this in a hurry so I do not have all my thoughts straightened out but I wanted to share without derailing another thread.

Please keep the responses constructive.