Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 70

Thread: Corporate Policies

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    Corporate Policies

    Barnes & Noble

    Original Message From: "Mary Ausman" <MJAusman@bn.com>

    To: XXXXXXXXXXX
    Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 1:42 PM
    Subject: Barnes & Noble

    Thank you for your email.

    While we are unable to discuss customer situations with an uninvolved third part, to answer your question, Barnes & Noble complies with the law and, except where prohibited by law, does not prohibit its customers from carrying handguns or other firearms in a Barnes & Noble store in accordance with the laws of the state in which a store is located.
    Sincerely, Mary Ausman
    Supervisor, Customer Retention
    Barnes & Noble, Inc. 122 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10011
    tel: (800) 422-7717 fax: (212)352.3660 http://www.barnesandnobleinc.com


    Bass Pro Shops

    [/b]OpenCarry.org (OCDO) is pleased to announce that Bass Pro Inc. advised OCDO co-founder Mike Stollenwerk by telephone today that open carry of holstered handguns is as welcome as concealed carry provided all federal and state laws are followed.


    After being contacted by OpenCarry.org (and apparently some of our almost 20,000 some thousand members) about sporadic inconsistent treatment of open carriers at some Bass Pro shops, Bass Pro’s Manager of Communications Larry L. Whiteley asked OCDO co-founder Mike Stollenwerk for more background information and some time to straighten things out.

    Stollenwerk advised Whitely two weeks ago that open carry is legal in most states, usually without a permit, and that Sportsmens’ Warehouse and Cabelas have adopted clear corporate policies welcoming open carriers in their stores just as they do concealed carriers. Further Stollenwerk noted, it’s better to adopt one clear corporate policy than allow individual employees make up store rules or give legal advice to customers, i.e., the proverbial but well meaning, “psst, hey, you gotta cover that up, it’s the law” kind of thing, which can get gun owners in trouble for breaking the law and unlawfully concealing (e.g., in Wisconsin where no permit to conceal is even issued).

    Well today Mr. Whiteley called and confirmed that Bass Pro’s policy is and “always was” to be to respect lawful customer gun carry, concealed or open, and that steps the following steps are being taken to ensure this policy is understood by all managers and employees, including production and distribution of training videos as well re-drafting of signage pertaining to guns.

    OpenCarry.org is pleased that Bass Pro. joins both Sportsmens’ Warehouse and Cabelas in clarifying to OpenCarry.org that open carry is welcome in their stores as a matter of corporate policy.



    Best Buy

    from Customer Contact <CustomerContact@bestbuy.com>
    to XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    date Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 7:31 PM
    subject Best Buy Gun policy - XXXXXXXX
    mailed-by
    bestbuy.com

    Best Buy strives to comply with all applicable law and statues. Best Buy also strives to provide a safe and comfortable shopping environment for all our customers. Best Buy does not ban guns at our retail locations. As a general rule, Best Buy does not post “no guns allowed” signs in our stores and we are not aware of any individual stores that might have posted such a sign.


    Bob Evans


    From:Garrett_Hajes@bobevans.com
    Bob Evans - Reference # 536155

    We certainly appreciate you taking the time to e-mail regarding our Bob Evans Restaurants. Bob Evans follows all local, state, and federal laws pertaining to firearms. Please contact your local Bob Evans restaurants for the specific regulations. Again, Mr. Spice, we appreciate your comments. We value your patronage and appreciate your interest in Bob Evans Farms Inc.


    Cabelas

    Policy is to follow the law of the state the store located.

    Thank you for the recent email. I am very sorry for the confusion that took place at our retail location.
    Our corporate office has taken action in regards to the below mentioned issue and here is what has been decided.
    We have made the decision to comply with state laws in regards to open carry. We do not ask customers to check concealed or open carry weapons where the state has laws governing this situation. Our signs refer to firearms that are being returned or sold to Cabela's.

    If you are still having problems please feel free to let us know

    Thanks again

    Becky
    Lead Associate
    Cabela's Retail Information
    1-800-905-2731
    retail.contactgroup<AT>
    cabelas.com

    Dicks Sporting Goods

    Mr. XXXX,

    Thank you for contacting Dick's Sporting Goods.

    Our stores comply with state laws and, in some cases, where we are a tenant as an anchor store, those mall restrictions if any exists.

    Jean Taggart,Manager of Customer Engagement



    Home Depot

    Policy is to follow the law of the state the store located.
    http://www.tennesseefirearms.com/law...s/homedepo.pdf


    Customer care number. 1-800-430-3376
    Contact link:
    http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/...atalogId=10053

    Recieved this from Jerry. Seems to contradict the letter.

    Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 06:13:57 -0400 (EDT)
    From: "HD Consumer Affairs" <
    hdconsumeraffairs@homedepot.com>
    To:
    warchild44spcl@yahoo.com
    Subject: Re: Other Website Questions

    Dear Jerry,
    The Home Depot Customer Care is in receipt of your email. We appreciate you taking the time to email us. Our general policy is not to ban customers from carrying firearms on the Home Depot property in those states having a concealed firearm law, provided they are carrying the firearm in accordance with the applicable laws.
    If the firearm is not concealed in accordance with the carrying permit (typically that means concealed and cannot be seen by members of the public), it is up to the manager based on personal comfort level to approach the individual directly and request them to leave the premises or to contact local law enforcement for purposes of having the individual removed. Thank you for contacting us.


    Sincerely,
    Ricky
    Customer Care


    LOWE'S

    Dear XXXX XXXX:

    Thank you for giving Lowe's the opportunity to respond to your concerns regarding our policy on firearms in our stores.

    Lowe's currently does, and will continue to abide by federal, state and local laws regarding firearms, and we do not prohibit customers from carrying firearms into our stores.

    Our first and foremost concern is for the safety of our customers, however; we take all comments and concerns from our customers seriously. We are considerate of all customers, and will remain neutral regarding the right to carry firearms. We will respect federal, state and local laws regarding this.

    If Lowe's can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call 1-866-284-8989 or email
    execustservice@lowes.com. You may also contact us by mailing your correspondence to P.O. Box 1111, Mail Code CON8, North Wilkesboro, North Carolina 28659.

    Thank you,
    Julie Holloway
    Lowe's Executive Customer Service


    Sears/K-mart

    (Big thanks to SCJeffro for this policy)

    Subject: RE: Request for fire arm/weapon policy

    Here is the response from Sears Senior Counsel:

    Our corporate policy regarding customers who openly carry firearms on our store premises is that as long as the law of the state in which our store is located legally permits the open carrying of firearms (i.e. carrying a firearm on one's person in plain sight), customers will be permitted to openly carry firearms within our stores.

    Emerald Sloan
    Blue Ribbon Service Case Manager
    Sears Holdings Corporation
    Toll Free: 1-888-266-4043 extension 75
    Email: BlueRibbonService2@searshc.com

    Toys-R-US

    Dear Mr. Ross:

    Thank you for contacting Toys R Us regarding the recent tragedy in our store. Naturally, we want our guest's to be safe and feel confident while they are shopping. We adhere to the state law of whatever state a particular store is located in since the governing laws regarding gun control vary across the country. At this time I have not been notified that this will change though I can not guarantee that it won't in the future. I invite you to submit your concerns to our corporate head office for further attention.

    Toys R Us
    Attn: Gerald Storch (CEO)
    1 Geoffrey Way
    Wayne, NJ 07470

    If you have any further questions or concerns please email us or contact our customer service line at 1-800-869-7787.

    Sincerely,

    Beverly McCann
    Toys R Us Corporate Guest Relations Team


    Walmart

    Policy is to follow the law of the state the store located.
    Customer Service1-800-Wal-Mart
    (1-800-925-6278) Questions regarding a Wal-Mart Store issue
    702 SW 8th Street
    Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
    Bentonville, Arkansas 72716-8611


    Email contact link:
    http://walmartstores.com/contactus/feedback.aspx

    Audio of Walmart Policy: Walmart_Firearm_Policy_Call.mp3

    White Castle

    Dear Mr. Xxxxxxxx:
    Thank you for your complimentary response concerning your recent
    visit to our Lansing White Castle.
    Please be advised that our policy regarding firearms is that we follow
    all State and Federal guidelines/laws and we would expect our customers
    to do the same.
    We hope that you will continue to be a loyal White Castle Craver.
    Thank you,

    White Castle Management



  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    Nice. This needs to be a sticky elsewhere. Why is it in the Michigan section?
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    Nice. This needs to be a sticky elsewhere. Why is it in the Michigan section?
    It was part of the stickied Michigan Events Schedule Thread I had for upcoming OC Events, Previous OC Events and also OC Friendly Places By County. Mike went through some sub-forums a while back to unstickie threads thinking it would help the site to function better. :X

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Muskegon (Cloverville), Michigan, USA
    Posts
    37

    Post imported post

    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?

  5. #5
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

    Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

  6. #6
    Regular Member sohighlyunlikely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Overland, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    724

    Post imported post

    I just got walked out of a Cabela's this weekfor OC. Here in Missouri. I called cooperate and got the run around. They say they will be recheck what the policies are and calling me back. You can see the video here.

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum33/42290.html

    Doc

  7. #7
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811

    Post imported post

    sohighlyunlikely wrote:
    I just got walked out of a Cabela's this weekfor OC. Here in Missouri. I called cooperate and got the run around. They say they will be recheck what the policies are and calling me back. You can see the video here.

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum33/42290.html

    Doc
    sadly many managers or employees dont know they're firearms policy,to most of them OC is a new thing.

    but in your video you mentioned that the handgun was there for business,meaning it would be out of the holster,generally if your bringing your handgun in to fit it for a holster you are to unload and case it,and check it at the front desk...safety reasons
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Cadillac Area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    96

    Post imported post

    While I realize that .pdf, or .doc, or .whatever files can be doctored and even created (forged) without the knowledge of the originating company, it would certainly seem helpful to have scans or otherwise formatted copies of these letters posted so business patron can carry and present same when confronted in respective stores.

    Dan

  9. #9
    Michigan Moderator Big Gay Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mason, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,954

    Post imported post

    So, did anyone ever ask the staff at Meijer's? I just wonder cause I OC the South side Lansing Meijer store all the time. I've never even been questioned. Gawked at, yes, but that's about it.
    Big Gay Al
    Coordinator, Michigan Pink Pistols
    Big Gay Al's Big Gay (Gun) Blog
    Fabrique Nationale d'Herstal FNX-45 .45ACP 16 rounds of hurt.

  10. #10
    Guest

    Post imported post

    autosurgeon wrote:
    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Private property rights of whom?

    I believe that the constitution protects the rights of the people.

    How does an entity that is not a person have rights?

    Maybe this is the impetus for all of these corporations adopting state laws as their policy regarding firearm possession in their places of business.

  11. #11
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Private property rights of whom?

    I believe that the constitution protects the rights of the people.

    How does an entity that is not a person have rights?

    Maybe this is the impetus for all of these corporations adopting state laws as their policy regarding firearm possession in their places of business.
    Well I hope you are right! What you say makes sense
    Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

    Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

  12. #12
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Private property rights of whom?

    I believe that the constitution protects the rights of the people.

    How does an entity that is not a person have rights?

    Maybe this is the impetus for all of these corporations adopting state laws as their policy regarding firearm possession in their places of business.
    A corporation is a person.

  13. #13
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Private property rights of whom?

    I believe that the constitution protects the rights of the people.

    How does an entity that is not a person have rights?

    Maybe this is the impetus for all of these corporations adopting state laws as their policy regarding firearm possession in their places of business.
    A corporation is a person.
    Interesting!

    A corporation is an institution that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members.[1][/sup] There are many different forms of corporations, most of which are used to conduct business.
    Corporations exist as a product of corporate law, and their rules balance the interests of its stakeholders: the management who operate the corporation; creditors who loan it goods, services or money; shareholders who invest their capital; the employees who contribute their labor; and the clients they serve.[2][/sup] In modern times, corporations have become an increasingly dominant part of economic life.
    An important feature of corporation is limited liability. If a corporation fails, shareholders normally only stand to lose their investment, and employees will lose their jobs, but neither will be further liable for debts that remain owing to the corporation's creditors.
    Despite not being natural persons, corporations are recognized by the law to have rights and responsibilities like actual people. Corporations can exercise human rights[3][/sup] and they may be responsible for human rights violations.[4][/sup] Just as they are "born" into existence through its members obtaining a certificate of incorporation, they can "die" when they lose money into insolvency. Corporations can even be convicted of criminal offences, such as fraudmanslaughter.[5][/sup] against real individuals and the state, and

    Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

    Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

  14. #14
    Guest

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Private property rights of whom?

    I believe that the constitution protects the rights of the people.

    How does an entity that is not a person have rights?

    Maybe this is the impetus for all of these corporations adopting state laws as their policy regarding firearm possession in their places of business.
    A corporation is a person.
    Explain it. I know that a corp is a person as defined in the codified laws. But it does not enjoy civil liberties as enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

    I misused the term "person" in my post. I was attempting to use everyday vernacular to explain a concept.

    I am fully cognizant of the government's legal definitions of terms used in our everyday vernacular to mean something that does not resemble what we would expect . Example: "individual" or "Notice of Levy" in the tax code.

    Your generalization is however misleading and while a fact it is not the truth.

  15. #15
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    CV67PAT wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Private property rights of whom?

    I believe that the constitution protects the rights of the people.

    How does an entity that is not a person have rights?

    Maybe this is the impetus for all of these corporations adopting state laws as their policy regarding firearm possession in their places of business.
    A corporation is a person.
    Explain it. I know that a corp is a person as defined in the codified laws. But it does not enjoy civil liberties as enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

    Your generalization is misleading and while a fact it is not the truth.
    LOL.



  16. #16
    Guest

    Post imported post

    autosurgeon wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Private property rights of whom?

    I believe that the constitution protects the rights of the people.

    How does an entity that is not a person have rights?

    Maybe this is the impetus for all of these corporations adopting state laws as their policy regarding firearm possession in their places of business.
    A corporation is a person.
    Interesting!

    A corporation is an institution that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members.[1] There are many different forms of corporations, most of which are used to conduct business.
    Corporations exist as a product of corporate law, and their rules balance the interests of its stakeholders: the management who operate the corporation; creditors who loan it goods, services or money; shareholders who invest their capital; the employees who contribute their labor; and the clients they serve.[2] In modern times, corporations have become an increasingly dominant part of economic life.
    An important feature of corporation is limited liability. If a corporation fails, shareholders normally only stand to lose their investment, and employees will lose their jobs, but neither will be further liable for debts that remain owing to the corporation's creditors.
    Despite not being natural persons, corporations are recognized by the law to have rights and responsibilities like actual people. Corporations can exercise human rights[3] and they may be responsible for human rights violations.[4] Just as they are "born" into existence through its members obtaining a certificate of incorporation, they can "die" when they lose money into insolvency. Corporations can even be convicted of criminal offences, such as fraudmanslaughter.[5] against real individuals and the state, and
    "Footnote 3 source: ^ e.g. South African Constitution Art.8, especially Art.(4)"



  17. #17
    Regular Member Bailenforcer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    City
    Posts
    1,077

    Post imported post

    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Private property rights of whom?

    I believe that the constitution protects the rights of the people.

    How does an entity that is not a person have rights?

    Maybe this is the impetus for all of these corporations adopting state laws as their policy regarding firearm possession in their places of business.
    A corporation is a person.
    Interesting!

    A corporation is an institution that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members.[1] There are many different forms of corporations, most of which are used to conduct business.
    Corporations exist as a product of corporate law, and their rules balance the interests of its stakeholders: the management who operate the corporation; creditors who loan it goods, services or money; shareholders who invest their capital; the employees who contribute their labor; and the clients they serve.[2] In modern times, corporations have become an increasingly dominant part of economic life.
    An important feature of corporation is limited liability. If a corporation fails, shareholders normally only stand to lose their investment, and employees will lose their jobs, but neither will be further liable for debts that remain owing to the corporation's creditors.
    Despite not being natural persons, corporations are recognized by the law to have rights and responsibilities like actual people. Corporations can exercise human rights[3] and they may be responsible for human rights violations.[4] Just as they are "born" into existence through its members obtaining a certificate of incorporation, they can "die" when they lose money into insolvency. Corporations can even be convicted of criminal offences, such as fraudmanslaughter.[5] against real individuals and the state, and
    "Footnote 3 source: ^ e.g. South African Constitution Art.8, especially Art.(4)"

    I still find it amazing that pro carry pople are buying the lie, that a Corporation who has "open to the Public" property has the right to limit your Constitutional rights. The ignorance is profound.

    Not to mention those who think the Supreme court of the United States is the final word. WE ARE! WE THE PEOPLE! We have "unalienable" rights which can never be taken away nor given away nor surrendered.

    The entire infrastructure of the United States is being sold off and unless we wake the f%$K up we will one day wake up with NO rights. I have said this before and 99% of the people in here are so willing to just pi$$ away their rights to some corporation.

    Here is something you people need to read. The articles are documenting the fire sale of the United States infrastructure to FOREIGNERS! yes that's right in ten years you will always be on PRIVATE "corporate" Property even your own street is being sold.

    Wake up! Quit being so gullible.

    http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53639


    GA_googleFillSlot("WND_NWS_C0100");
    GA_googleCreateDomIframe('google_ads_div_WND_NWS_C 0100' ,'WND_NWS_C0100');

    THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
    U.S. infrastructure for sale to foreigners State, local officials gathering for seminar to learn 'how-to' Posted: January 05, 2007
    1:00 am Eastern

    By Jerome R. Corsi
    ©2010WorldNetDaily.com

    http://www.euromoneyseminars.com/default.asp?Page=1]EuroMoney Seminars[/url], a UK-based company, is holding a seminar to teach state and local government officials in the U.S. how to lease a wide range of public assets – ranging from highways to water departments – to international and foreign private investment groups. The event, entitled "PPP: The North American Private Partnerships Intensive Seminar," will be held at the Hyatt Regency in Miami March 19 to 21. The cost will be $3,500 per attendee.
    A spokesman for EuroMoney Seminars in the UK told WND the target audience was government employees at the state and local level who want to learn the "how-to" of putting together deals such as the one by http://www.cintra.es/]Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte[/url] to finance the http://www.keeptexasmoving.com/projects/ttc35/contracts.aspx]Trans-Texas Corridor[/url]. The EuroMoney Seminars spokesman talked with WND on background, complying with EuroMoney Seminars policy that spokesmen not be named in news stories................. More on site....
    .................................................. .............................................



    http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...ndex_top+story

    class="bighed"Roads To Riches
    class="deck"Why investors are clamoring to take over America's highways, bridges, and airports—and why the public should be nervous

    class="leadin"COVER STORY PODCAST

    Steve Hogan was in a bind. The executive director of Colorado's Northwest Parkway Public Highway Authority had run up $416 million in debt to build the 10-mile toll road between north Denver and the Boulder Turnpike, and he was starting to worry about the high payments. So he tried to refinance, asking bankers in late 2005 to pitch investors on new, lower-interest-rate bonds. But none of the hundreds of investors canvassed





    More at the site listed above...

    .................................................. .................................................. ..


    http://jonathanturley.org/2008/12/28...-make-budgets/

    http://motherjones.com/politics/2007/01/highwaymen


    ...................................

    http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/09/let-the-great-a/
    Let the Great American Infrastructure Sell-Off Begin!
    You know the economy’s in great shape when our elected leaders start handing over our highways, airports, bridges and tunnels over to the highest bidder.
    That might be a bit simplistic, but on some level it’s accurate. States and cities, struggling with gargantuan budget deficits, are increasingly selling or leasing vital transportation infrastructure to private companies. Yes, it helps fill state coffers, but it’s a scary development nonetheless.
    One of the biggest proposed deals is a plan to lease the 537-mile Pennsylvania Turnpike, the nation’s oldest major toll road, to a private investment group that includes Citigroup and the Spanish firm Abertis. The legislature votes on the deal next month; if it goes through, Abertis will pay $12.8 billion to run the turnpike for 75 years. That’s a big chunk of change.

    If last year’s bridge collapse in Minneapolis made one thing clear, it’s our infrastructure is a mess. The American Society of Civil Engineers says it will cost $1.6 trillion to get things shipshape again. With many states grappling with growing budget deficits, no one expects to see the problem tackled anytime soon. Turning over our infrastructure to the free markets may be the best way to save it, and the Department of Transportation under President Bush has made no secret of its interest in doing just that.
    With that in mind, leasing sounds like a great idea. States get a nice infusion of cash and wash their hands of pesky repairs and rebuilding, while the private sector steps in to do what it does best — make money. It’s a big win-win.

    Read More http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/09...#ixzz0ljZteT5g


    More at the link provided.






    Exo 22:2 "If anyone catches a thief breaking in and hits him so that he dies, he is not guilty of murder.
    Luke 22:36: "Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Luk 11:21 "When a strong man, with all his weapons ready, guards his own house, all his belongings are safe.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Bailenforcer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    City
    Posts
    1,077

    Post imported post

    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    CV67PAT wrote:
    autosurgeon wrote:
    BlueStarDad wrote:
    Thanks for that good info on these businesses. On another note, does State Pre-emption override policies of a workplace i.e. Standard Operating Procedure that states "no firearms allowed on premises" (for employees).?
    NO Private property rights overrule.
    Private property rights of whom?

    I believe that the constitution protects the rights of the people.

    How does an entity that is not a person have rights?

    Maybe this is the impetus for all of these corporations adopting state laws as their policy regarding firearm possession in their places of business.
    A corporation is a person.
    Interesting!

    A corporation is an institution that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members.[1] There are many different forms of corporations, most of which are used to conduct business.
    Corporations exist as a product of corporate law, and their rules balance the interests of its stakeholders: the management who operate the corporation; creditors who loan it goods, services or money; shareholders who invest their capital; the employees who contribute their labor; and the clients they serve.[2] In modern times, corporations have become an increasingly dominant part of economic life.
    An important feature of corporation is limited liability. If a corporation fails, shareholders normally only stand to lose their investment, and employees will lose their jobs, but neither will be further liable for debts that remain owing to the corporation's creditors.
    Despite not being natural persons, corporations are recognized by the law to have rights and responsibilities like actual people. Corporations can exercise human rights[3] and they may be responsible for human rights violations.[4] Just as they are "born" into existence through its members obtaining a certificate of incorporation, they can "die" when they lose money into insolvency. Corporations can even be convicted of criminal offences, such as fraudmanslaughter.[5] against real individuals and the state, and
    "Footnote 3 source: ^ e.g. South African Constitution Art.8, especially Art.(4)"

    Corporations have NO "private Property" rights. yes I said just that. Get an old Law Dictionary and you will see a Corporation is described as an "entity CREATED IN FICTION"
    It is not a real person there are NO holders of PRIVATE assets nor property, it is described as a PUBLIC Operation or company. Yes when you go or become a Corporation you are NO longer the Owner you are an employee. A CEO is ONLY an employee! Meaning you are NO longer the property owner, just another employee. The Constitutional rights are for "persons" and a "person" is a natural born human being not a entity created in fiction.

    Sound complicated? It really isn't.

    Frankly the ONLY business man who can legally claim a property right must own the business and "Property"
    Allodial title is a concept in some systems of property law. It describes a situation where real property (land, buildings and fixtures) is owned free and clear of any encumbrances, including liens, mortgages and tax obligations. Allodial title is unalienable, in that it cannot be taken by any operation of law for any reason whatsoever.
    In common legal use, allodial title is used to distinguish absolute ownership of land by individuals from feudal ownership, where property ownership is dependent on relationship to a lord or the sovereign. Webster's first dictionary (1825 ed) says allodium is "land which is absolute property of the owner, real estate held in absolute independence, without being subject to any rent, service, or acknowledgement to a superior. It is thus opposed to feud."
    True allodial title is rare, with most property ownership in the common law world—primarily, the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the Republic of Ireland—described more properly as being in fee simple. In particular, land is said to be "held of the Crown" in England and Wales and the Commonwealth realms. In England, there is no allodial land, all land being held of the Crown; even in the United States most lands are not allodial, as evidenced by the existence of property taxes. Some of the Commonwealth realms (particularly Australia) recognise native title, a form of allodial title that does not originate from a Crown grant.
    I am amazed that people can't understand this.

    Look at your deed to your home, you are NOT the owner! You are listed as the Tenant!

    This slippery slope of arguing your rights away to some fictional entity is dangerous and leaves you as a SERF! Or slave. You are a PERSON and have the Unalienable right to carry.

    Quit arguing away your and my rights!

    You people might wish to be property "citizen" of a King, but I am NOT and refuse to be. I have carried everywhere and will carry everywhere, because I know I am a FREE man not someones property.

    I suggest a serious study of what I have listed here and you people might wake up one day as FREED men once again.
    Exo 22:2 "If anyone catches a thief breaking in and hits him so that he dies, he is not guilty of murder.
    Luke 22:36: "Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Luk 11:21 "When a strong man, with all his weapons ready, guards his own house, all his belongings are safe.

  19. #19
    Guest

    Post imported post

    Bailenforcer wrote:
    "Look at your deed to your home, you are NOT the owner! You are listed as the Tenant! "
    [line]
    Only the holder of a "Land Patent" owns his property.

    Furthermore, the holder of a land patent pays no property taxes whatsoever.



  20. #20
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    CV67PAT wrote:
    Bailenforcer wrote:
    "Look at your deed to your home, you are NOT the owner! You are listed as the Tenant! "
    [line]
    Only the holder of a "Land Patent" owns his property.

    Furthermore, the holder of a land patent pays no property taxes whatsoever.

    I have been researching this and have come to the same conclusions.. Private property rights are largely fictitious in regards to firearm carry.
    Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

    Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

  21. #21
    Guest

    Post imported post

    autosurgeon wrote:
    CV67PAT wrote:
    Bailenforcer wrote:
    "Look at your deed to your home, you are NOT the owner! You are listed as the Tenant! "
    [line]
    Only the holder of a "Land Patent" owns his property.

    Furthermore, the holder of a land patent pays no property taxes whatsoever.

    I have been researching this and have come to the same conclusions.. Private property rights are largely fictitious in regards to firearm carry.
    Got another one for you to research...

    Residents of the State of Michigan are required to have a CPL in order to carry concealed.

    Can you find me a law that states that Citizens of the State of Michigan are required to?

    Or even that a Citizen of the State of Michigan has to obtain a permit to purchase.

    Oh it will really start to get interesting when you look for the law that specifies that Citizens of the State of Michigan have to obtain driver's licenses or register their vehicles.

    I am not a resident of the State of Michigan. I am a Citizen of the State of Michigan.

    If there is no difference, then why are the two clearly identified as seperate entities in this statute?

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%2...ame=mcl-32-509


    32.509 State military establishment; composition; organized and unorganized militia.
    Sec. 109.
    The organized militia of this state taken collectively shall be known as the state military establishment and constitutes the armed forces of this state. The organized militia consists of the army national guard, the air national guard, and the defense force when actually in existence as provided in this act. The unorganized militia consists of all other able-bodied citizens of this state and all other able-bodied citizens who are residents of this state who have or shall have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, who shall be age 17 or over and not more than age 60, and shall be subject to state military duty as provided in this act.


  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Northern lower & Keweenaw area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    667

    Post imported post

    Could this part "and all other able-bodied citizens who are residents of this state who have or shall have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, who shall be age 17 or over and not more than age 60, and shall be subject to state military duty as provided in this act." mean all those citizen-residents that are not presently within the borders of the state of Michigan?springerdave.

  23. #23
    Guest

    Post imported post

    springerdave wrote:
    Could this part "and all other able-bodied citizens who are residents of this state who have or shall have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, who shall be age 17 or over and not more than age 60, and shall be subject to state military duty as provided in this act." mean all those citizen-residents that are not presently within the borders of the state of Michigan?springerdave.
    My point is that the two are specifically identified separately.

    There are citizens of the state and residents of the state.

    Which are you? Before you answer do some research. You may be quite surprised.

    I offer the cite as a beginning point for research into the other areas that I indicated in my previous post.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Bailenforcer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    City
    Posts
    1,077

    Post imported post

    CV67PAT wrote:
    Bailenforcer wrote:
    "Look at your deed to your home, you are NOT the owner! You are listed as the Tenant! "
    [line]
    Only the holder of a "Land Patent" owns his property.

    Furthermore, the holder of a land patent pays no property taxes whatsoever.

    I am glad to see there is one person on this site who get's it.

    But I suspected by many of your posts you did understand what's going on.

    Now if the rest take the time to learn how to become FREE men, we have won a victory for rights all around which includes Carry rights.

    Frankly we have the right to carry concealed without any permit. Most have no idea about this. Statute laws are NOT constitutional, which means all UCC and their Statute laws are ONLY for commerce which crosses State lines, which is Interstate commerce. Unless you are a corporation you have rights that Supersede all Federal and State Statutes.
    Exo 22:2 "If anyone catches a thief breaking in and hits him so that he dies, he is not guilty of murder.
    Luke 22:36: "Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Luk 11:21 "When a strong man, with all his weapons ready, guards his own house, all his belongings are safe.

  25. #25
    Guest

    Post imported post

    Bailenforcer wrote:
    CV67PAT wrote:
    Bailenforcer wrote:
    "Look at your deed to your home, you are NOT the owner! You are listed as the Tenant! "
    [line]
    Only the holder of a "Land Patent" owns his property.

    Furthermore, the holder of a land patent pays no property taxes whatsoever.

    I am glad to see there is one person on this site who get's it.

    But I suspected by many of your posts you did understand what's going on.

    Now if the rest take the time to learn how to become FREE men, we have won a victory for rights all around which includes Carry rights.

    Frankly we have the right to carry concealed without any permit. Most have no idea about this. Statute laws are NOT constitutional, which means all UCC and their Statute laws are ONLY for commerce which crosses State lines, which is Interstate commerce. Unless you are a corporation you have rights that Supersede all Federal and State Statutes.
    Absolutely correct.

    Nowhere in any statute in the State of Michigan am I bound to comply as a Citizen of the State of Michigan.

    Residents on the other hand are specifically identified.

    I am not a resident. I am a Citizen of the State of Michigan.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •