Asked to leave US Bank in Sumner (while OC'ing)

[amlevin]

Except they are not illegally barring anyone from carrying a firearm. They are well within their rights as a property owner to restrict firearms from their premises.

A hard point to get across to some.

 

[1911er]

A hard point to get across to some.

What I,m saying is if they don't want guns in their bank they should post it somewhere so people can see instead of making a big deal and escorting them outside. As it stands now the only people they are bothering is the OCers. Where as if it were posted it would have been a different senario. The weapon would probably not had been carried in. After all we can't read minds or most of us can't.

 

[MKEgal]

I talked to a customer service from us bank today and they told me its "just general knowledge that you don't carry a gun into a bank, it would cause panic".

Oh, good grief. :banghead:
Completely aside from the fact that people conceal in banks & nobody freaks out, even OC doesn't freak people!!! Here's a video of me at my credit union, and nothing happens that's different from any other customer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKxYSczw_94

Feel free to share it, especially with annoying uninformed officious bank people.
This was done with a pen cam, which I used to sign the check... hence the shaking & noise at about 45-50 sec. But nobody knew they were being videod.

I've been in several branches (even - shudder - one in a WalMart in a less-than-nice part of town), all with the same results, that is, nothing odd happening.
Not the customers, not the employees, nobody seems the least bit upset.

Wells Fargo policy - NO WEAPONS except for LEO.

I opened an account there while OCing, and eveyone was fine with it. Even had a chat about OC with the gal who was processing all the forms & numbers, & the manager who came in to say hi.

(It started by her asking if I'd been in an accident - I was depositing a check written on my attorney's account - and when I explained I'd been wrongfully arrested she of course was interested in details, so between that & my wearing the pistol she learned something.)

 

[gogodawgs]

My family stopped using US Bank back in '99-'00, they kept robbing us of our money and covering it up with excuses and bank policies "We are FEDERAL so shaddup!" So it is no surprise (somewhat) illegally barring you from carrying your firearm on their premises.

Except they are not illegally barring anyone from carrying a firearm. They are well within their rights as a property owner to restrict firearms from their premises.

A hard point to get across to some.

What I,m saying is if they don't want guns in their bank they should post it somewhere so people can see instead of making a big deal and escorting them outside. As it stands now the only people they are bothering is the OCers. Where as if it were posted it would have been a different senario. The weapon would probably not had been carried in. After all we can't read minds or most of us can't.

Is it ok to bar people from the bank if they are wearing a yamaka or a cross? (Or a "End the Fed" t shirt) What about if they use a cane to assist them while walking? Or perhaps a bank that excludes homosexuals?

With all due respect to the private property argument a business that is open to the general public can not exclude protected classes in our system of ordered liberty. (You may do what ever you want on private property that is not a business and not open to the general public. i.e. your home/property, a club [Costco]) However, once you decide to open a business with access to the public, the public egress is then covered by the Bill of Rights and excluding protected classes is forbidden.

At this time SCOTUS has not considered a properly holstered handgun and its owner a protected class, however, in time it is my opinion that the only logical conclusion is some variation of the above premise.

 

[Just Us]

Chase Bank - anti gun all the way. WILL NOT issue banks accounts to gun type businesses[/COLOR]

Just my experience.

I've never had a problem with chase. I don't do business hardly anymore because of all the fees that WAMU never had.

 

[END_THE_FED]

Is it ok to bar people from the bank if they are wearing a yamaka or a cross? (Or a "End the Fed" t shirt) What about if they use a cane to assist them while walking? Or perhaps a bank that excludes homosexuals?..........
.

Yes, I think it is, or at least should be. If they don't like purple shoes and they notice you wearing them, then they should be able to kick you out for wearing purple shoes.

There will be another bank down the street that is more then happy to serve those with purple shoes.

I have never been a fan of the "protected class" designation. It seems to me to be a violation of equal protection.

If we are going to decide that businesses that are open to the general public have to follow the "bill of rights" then it needs to be equally applicable to everyone not just a "protected class".

When I worked security at an office building in downtown Seattle the bottom floor had a food court and a few other businesses that were open to the general public. We had a rule against any signature gathering, donation soliciting, or pamphlet distribution. We applied this rule equally to all.

Are you saying we were violating the law by doing so? Should we have only allowed certain people to seek donations or gather signatures?

 

[gogodawgs]

Yes, I think it is, or at least should be. If they don't like purple shoes and they notice you wearing them, then they should be able to kick you out for wearing purple shoes.

There will be another bank down the street that is more then happy to serve those with purple shoes.

I have never been a fan of the "protected class" designation. It seems to me to be a violation of equal protection.

If we are going to decide that businesses that are open to the general public have to follow the "bill of rights" then it needs to be equally applicable to everyone not just a "protected class".

When I worked security at an office building in downtown Seattle the bottom floor had a food court and a few other businesses that were open to the general public. We had a rule against any signature gathering, donation soliciting, or pamphlet distribution. We applied this rule equally to all.

Are you saying we were violating the law by doing so? Should we have only allowed certain people to seek donations or gather signatures?

Well, the protected class designation is and has been the law of the land for some time now and your opinion and mine are moot on the issue. Please don't bring up a straw man argument of 'purple shoes', it is a waste of time.

Secondly, your description of of the office building in DT is one that the courts have made decisions upon. You would not be violating the rules of such 'activities' as long as applied to all groups (including internal; no selling your daughters girl scout cookies in the lunch room) AND that the access way outside the public door was accessible to protected activities (religious and political pamphleteering).

 

[joeroket]

At this time SCOTUS has not considered a properly holstered handgun and its owner a protected class, however, in time it is my opinion that the only logical conclusion is some variation of the above premise.

And there lies the issue. Is carrying a firearm a protected right? I happen to think it is, however as you noted SCOTUS has not ruled on this and placed it into the protected classification. I honestly don't think they ever will.

 

[gogodawgs]

And there lies the issue. Is carrying a firearm a protected right? I happen to think it is, however as you noted SCOTUS has not ruled on this and placed it into the protected classification. I honestly don't think they ever will.

It is my opinion that they will. The variation of how they do it will look different, but I believe it will happen. With the many different lawsuits around the country that the SAF, NRA, CalGuns have on the docket and the current make up of the court the only logical conclusion is that this will happen in the next 5 to 10 years.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I really don't believe in protected class on private property. I personally would want to know who were bigoted, racist, homophobes, etc. so that me and others would not shop their and they would go out of business.

 

[1911er]

i really don't believe in protected class on private property. I personally would want to know who were bigoted, racist, homophobes, etc. So that me and others would not shop their and they would go out of business.

+10 svg

 

[BigDave]

With all due respect to the private property argument a business that is open to the general public can not exclude protected classes in our system of ordered liberty. (You may do what ever you want on private property that is not a business and not open to the general public. i.e. your home/property, a club [Costco]) However, once you decide to open a business with access to the public, the public egress is then covered by the Bill of Rights and excluding protected classes is forbidden.

At this time SCOTUS has not considered a properly holstered handgun and its owner a protected class, however, in time it is my opinion that the only logical conclusion is some variation of the above premise.

I fully agree with you on this issue concerning, if a business is open for commerce then they can no more restrict any other right we maintain in society.
Though at this point in time, the private property owner has a right to restrict open carry (sadly).
We should also respect their wishes as we would want ours to be respected as well until such time the right to carry in public becomes recognized as a civil right with the rest.

How do we effect change? by putting forth a positive position not by conflict when compliance is a request rather then a demand.

As stated by others, conceal carry is a viable option, which is more important being armed or not?

As for issues of putting them out of business by not taking your business to them, well it will have to be great deal more then check cashing fees to motivate a change.

 

[BigDave]

I really don't believe in protected class on private property. I personally would want to know who were bigoted, racist, homophobes, etc. so that me and others would not shop their and they would go out of business.

Careful what you wish for, it may turn the other way and make it worse.

 

[Jeff Hayes]

The Constitution and Bill of Rights restricts the goverment not individuals, business owners or organizations. Federal laws cover protected classes some of the time. There is no such thing as a 2nd Amendment right at my business or at my home for anyone. Just try coming on to my property and exercising you 1st Amendment rights and see how far you get.

 

[Bookman]

Just a thought....

All bank and credit union branches inside grocery stores and other businesses have to aboide by the policy of the business in which the bank is located. That's why DEROS can OC at his US Bank branch and I can OC at my AlaskaUSA branch. They are both located in a Safeway. Safeway follows state law.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

The Constitution and Bill of Rights restricts the goverment not individuals, business owners or organizations. Federal laws cover protected classes some of the time. There is no such thing as a 2nd Amendment right at my business or at my home for anyone. Just try coming on to my property and exercising you 1st Amendment rights and see how far you get.

+1

I like the sign at a local place,

The customer is always right but we decide who is a customer. (or something to that effect)

 

[Vitaeus]

A private business is not open to the "public", it is open to the folks who chose to enter into a contract with it. If they chose to not provide the service they are offering to anyone, I would prefer that they have the option to do so. This also means they can chose to go out of business, if they decide to limit their clientele. Your mileage and opinion may vary, this is a good thing and the essence of the social contract we share as Americans.

 

[KBCraig]

I really don't believe in protected class on private property. I personally would want to know who were bigoted, racist, homophobes, etc. so that me and others would not shop their and they would go out of business.

+1

"Place of public accommodation" is a legal invention that tries to pretend private property is open to everyone.

I'm a white heterosexual monogamous married Christian, but I don't want to do business with anyone that restricts their clientele to those like me.

Don't make the government be your henchman: have the nuts to put up your signs declaring that you're a racist. I'll be more than happy to stay away!

 

[.45ACPaddy]

Who wants to open a completely new bank?

The name of the bank will be:

C, L & B Bank.

This stands for Cordite, Lead and Brass Bank.

All forms of lawful carry are allowed.

AND we'll beat everyone else's interest rates!

CAUTION: Robbers may leave with lead and copper in lieu of cash.

 

[1911er]

this is another e-mail I recieved from US bank


Thank you for contacting U.S. Bank via email.

Since U.S. Bank is located on private property, it is their discretion whether to allow concealed weapons. We are not obligated to post signage since it is private property. I have reviewed your previous emails and forwarded your concerns to the branch manager of the branch referenced in your reply. If I receive any additional information in the future, I will be sure to contact you.

Please let us know if you have additional questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

Darla Shupp
Email Operations
U.S. Bank 24-Hour Banking and Financial Sales