• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Banks & Feds

tricityguy

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
189
Location
, ,
imported post

Doubt it. I don't think the feds are actually getting an ownership interest in the banks, are they?
 

bluer1

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
160
Location
, ,
imported post

I think that's a valid question that need to be addressed. They are taking partial ownership. 49% in some cases. Very pointed observation!
 

thewise1

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
383
Location
Moscow, ID
imported post

Since the government is buying stock in banks, they will definitely have partial ownership. I don't know what this means in terms of where we can carry though.
 

heresolong

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,318
Location
Blaine, WA, ,
imported post

thewise1 wrote:
Since the government is buying stock in banks, they will definitely have partial ownership. I don't know what this means in terms of where we can carry though.
Owning stocks is not the same as owning a property. It is merely an interest in the companies business. For example, the Green Bay Packers are a publicly held corporation. Although buying a share of Packer stock gives me an ownership interest in the team I still don't have a right to walk in and take a seat in the stadium during a game or wander around the facility. The Green Bay Packers still own and control the property.
 

tricityguy

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
189
Location
, ,
imported post

Owning stocks is not the same as owning a property.
Right, that's exactly what I was getting at. It's still private property owned by the banks. The law should only come into play if the physical property itself were seized and placed under control of the federal government, making it effectively the same as a federal building or post office. I doubt that is happening.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

Ownership of stock (Non-Voting stock at that) makes the Government as much an owner of the Bank and it's Property as you are an owner of a Boeing Factory just because you own Boeing Stock.

Stock ownership merely means you own a piece of the company's profits which are paid in the form of Dividends (if any).
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

This and several other posts have caught me by surprise... In my Virginia CCW class earlier this summer, the instructor specifically said that one could not carry on Federal property, which extended to federally insured institutions, which would include FDIC and NCSIF insured banks and credit unions.

It would appear that this is not correct... Needless to say, it is somewhat disappointing to discover that such material learned in my class is incorrect.

Any comments/confirmations/denials? :)

TFred

P.S. Ooops, just realized this was in the Washington State forum! Indiscriminate use of the SEARCH command is not always good! I suppose the question still stands, however...
 

adamsesq

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
367
Location
, Oregon, USA
imported post

TFred wrote:
In my Virginia CCW class earlier this summer, the instructor specifically said...
In my experience this usually means that there is a 50% chance of it being right. It's right up there with the letter that often comes with CCW permits from the local leo (which is maybe 50% right,) again, in my experience.

This is a great place to START getting information but it is up to every carrier (open or concealed) to have satisfied themselves that they know the law in their jurisdiction(s) and "My CCW instructor told me" "The LEO I talked to said..." and "Some guy said it on the internet" are not exactly the best sources.

-adamsesq
 

heresolong

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,318
Location
Blaine, WA, ,
imported post

TFred wrote:
This and several other posts have caught me by surprise... In my Virginia CCW class earlier this summer, the instructor specifically said that one could not carry on Federal property, which extended to federally insured institutions, which would include FDIC and NCSIF insured banks and credit unions.
I have never seen this in any law that I have read or in any bulletin or website regarding federal firearms laws. Rather than try to prove a negative, however, I suggest you contact the company that put on the CCW class you took and ask them to provide a source for their claim. This is probably an easier way to find the answer. Either they have a source (which no one else has ever heard of) or they are wrong and they should acknowledge that fact. (And change their class)
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

TFred wrote:
This and several other posts have caught me by surprise... In my Virginia CCW class earlier this summer, the instructor specifically said that one could not carry on Federal property, which extended to federally insured institutions, which would include FDIC and NCSIF insured banks and credit unions.
Just because the Fedsinsure banks, don't mean they own it. If thatwere the case, your car is not yours but the insurance companies. It is amazing the crap instructors out there still sellingto their students. Ask for a cite of what law says this. He will be SOL as there isn't one.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:
It is amazing the crap instructors out there still sellingto their students.

They do it because there is no "Standard" for instruction in the field of Firearms Training and they continue because nobody has sued their shorts off for providing faulty information.

Most instructors teach what they "feel" is the law rather than taking time to learn what it actually is. I ask "Just how many instructors that are currently teaching in Washington State know that Open Carry is legal. I know of three that actually tell their students it is illegal and falls under RCW 9.41.270.

As for Banks, one might use a little judgement if they choose to open carry. Maybe only do so where you are KNOWN as a customer and make sure that none of your actions can be misunderstood.
 

sv_libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
3,201
Location
Olympia, WA, ,
imported post

Be nice to come up with a standardized curiculum and market that to firearms instructors. Of course the ones who "know better" will keep teaching the same garbage.
 

Richard6218

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
649
Location
LaConner, Washington, USA
imported post

amlevin wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote:
It is amazing the crap instructors out there still sellingto their students.

They do it because there is no "Standard" for instruction in the field of Firearms Training and they continue because nobody has sued their shorts off for providing faulty information.

Most instructors teach what they "feel" is the law rather than taking time to learn what it actually is. I ask "Just how many instructors that are currently teaching in Washington State know that Open Carry is legal. I know of three that actually tell their students it is illegal and falls under RCW 9.41.270.

As for Banks, one might use a little judgement if they choose to open carry. Maybe only do so where you are KNOWN as a customer and make sure that none of your actions can be misunderstood.

A bit by way of a different direction here: About the end of last June I had an encounter with local management of the Ferndale branch of Key Bank. The Assistant Manager tried to claim banks were on the no-firearms list under the law. I presented them with a print-out of the RCW and they ran it up to corporate security, and the answer a few days later was that OC is OK in their branches. (Cf the discussion:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/3630-10.html

I never followed up on this and I never got it in writing, but I think Key Bank should be put on the Good Guys list. Would I need to get something in writing on this?
 
Top