imported post
deepdiver wrote:
I was not speaking abouttheir right to prohibit you to go in armed.
I wanted to addressed a valid reason a privately owned bank may not want armed customers there.
I know that when I go to the bank and have cash.... I want to be armed.
If you want my cash.... cash thatwas oncebacked by gold until the federal reserve took over....you could get my cash thatis backed with lead.
Obviously relinquishing lead would require some type of deadly force to be necessary and not just because I am getting robbed.
deepdiver wrote:
Superlite27 wrote:Ahahahha :lol: Hilarious!He must assume that you went to gov't school
According to him, this would make you a federal agent, correct?
LEO229, noone is debating the bank's right to prohibit carry or the reasons they may do so. We are laughing at the COO making a federal property claim because of FDIC and simply stating our desire to do business with businesses that recognize our right to carry. I do a lot of business with a lot of banks for my business. Most are not posted. A few are. Because my business relies on their business, I do not refuse to work with them because of it. However, my operating accounts and personal banking is all done at banks that do not prohibit firearms.
I was not speaking abouttheir right to prohibit you to go in armed.
I wanted to addressed a valid reason a privately owned bank may not want armed customers there.
I know that when I go to the bank and have cash.... I want to be armed.
If you want my cash.... cash thatwas oncebacked by gold until the federal reserve took over....you could get my cash thatis backed with lead.
Obviously relinquishing lead would require some type of deadly force to be necessary and not just because I am getting robbed.