The forces fighting for total civilian disarmament first utilized the power of government to pressure financial institutions to stop doing business with the gun industry. The Obama administration undertook that effort via Operation Choke Point.
The general outline is the DOJ and bank regulators are putting the screws to banks and other third-party payment processors to refuse banking services to companies and industries that are deemed to pose a “reputation risk” to the bank. Most controversially, the list of dubious industries is populated by enterprises that are entirely, or at least generally, legal.
Allegedly sketchy, but still legal businesses like payday lenders, escort services, pornographers and, yes, firearms and ammunition manufacturers and retailers.
As American Banker wrote once the Obama administration was safely in the rear-view mirror . . .
Those involved in Operation Choke Point demonstrated a blatant disregard for the rule of law and due process, as well as the U.S. regulatory system, and the effect of their actions will resonate for years to come. All Americans should demand answers and corrective action, including the immediate removal of all those involved from their current positions — including both (FDIC Chairman Martin) Gruenberg and (FDIC Chicago Regional Director Anthony) Lowe, who still serve in FDIC leadership.
That all finally came to an end after the 2016 election. But the pressure on banks and insurers then shifted from the federal to the state level. After Parkland, New York’s Governor Andrew Soprano and his Consigliere of Financial Services, Maria Vullo, put the squeeze on banks and insurers with operations in New York (i.e., almost all of them). They let it be known, in no uncertain terms, that they wanted to see them stop doing business with the NRA and to cut off their Carry Guard insurance program. Others have since jumped on board.
The NRA has sued New York over their strong-arm tactics and that legal action is still working its expensive way through the courts.
In the wake of those moves, a number of banks and other businesses made ostentatious announcements letting all the good people know that they’d decided not to touch any gun money any more because it’s all so icky. Too-big-to-fail lenders like Citigroup and Bank of America were prominent among them. It was all part of a new corporate gun control push by big American business against the déclassé gun industry.
Now, as the New York Times reports, some operation calling itself Guns Down America is publishing a scorecard of big banks and the degree to which they’re doing business with gun makers, the NRA and other firearms-related entities. They’ve just published the grades at isyourbankloaded.org.
Guns Down America and our partners reviewed public financial and legal filings to determine how much business the nation’s 15 largest banks have conducted with gun manufacturers, the NRA, and the top recipients of NRA contributions in Congress. Based on this information, we have graded the banks on a 100-point scale.
If you’re keeping score at home, a failing grade is very much a good thing (see above).
The new scorecard ranks consumer banks on financial relationships between banks and gun, ammunition and accessory manufacturers, financial relationships between the banks and the NRA or Gun Owners of America, sponsorships or member benefits provided to NRA members, statements by the banks regarding the need for stronger gun violence prevention laws, and campaign donations to the NRA’s Million Dollar Members.
As the NYT quotes GDA’s ED . . .
Igor Volsky, Guns Down America’s founder and executive director, said he hoped the grading system would compel banks to be more publicly supportive of gun control measures, in the same way that many companies have taken positions on gay rights, immigration and other social issues.
Part of the mission, he added, is stopping “the Wild Wild West of how gun manufacturers both produce military-style weapons and also how they can market those firearms.”
Put your coffee down before reading the next part.
“We’re not interested in shaming banks or running a campaign focused on how evil they are,” Mr. Volsky said. “Our end goal is to change the way banks make decisions when doing business with the gun industry.”
Uh huh. It’s just the latest effort to other-ize the gun industry and its millions of customers. Whether it’s branding Carry Guard as “murder insurance,” spreading fake news about guns and credit cards, or this latest move to name and shame banks that finance firearm-related businesses, the beat goes on. And on.
What I said! Baby steps and get your tentacles into any place you can influence or coerce the people you need to. Yes, it is insidious.
So is an “F” less than 67% or 50%? I need to know if I am looking at a grammar school “F” or a graduate level thermodynamics “F”.
In graduate school, anything less than an A is an F.
Looks like they did grammar school with no A’s.
Yay! My bank got an F!
Both of the banks I use are F 👍
Have you considered quitting using their services?
Re-read the article. An “F” is a GOOD thing.
“If you’re keeping score at home, a failing grade is very much a good thing (see above).”
This whole concept of weaponizing private business against political interests is a dangerous one.
To butcher a line from history: Any time there’s a business big enough to help you step on the rights of others there’s another, bigger business to step on yours.
Sadly, we have recent historical precedent that concretely establishes the viability of this tactic.
Perhaps the most famous example: Nazi Germany declaring that Jews were deplorables and choking-off business with them.
I am sure there are other examples as well.
This reveals the double-edged sword of anti-discrimination initiatives. On the one hand, anti-discrimination laws can literally save the lives of a disfavored class of people that would otherwise perish. On the other hand, anti-discrimination laws can force people to violate their own longstanding, deeply-held standards of right-and-wrong.
I do not see any good solution for this.
The solution to this problem is contained within the problem itself. The only question is how much bullshit we have to go through to get there.
For the sake of brevity I’ll condense it in my reply to your other comment below.
As I stated a few weeks ago on another post, this is just the beginning. At some point in the near future (perhaps in the next 5 to 20 years), some entity will begin quietly maintaining and discretely disseminating a “political enemies” list to various key businesses such as banks, energy utilities, communications companies, and Internet “gatekeepers” (the likes of Google, FaceBook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and web hosting giants). And the entity that disseminates that list will expect those key businesses to refuse any and all interaction with the “political enemies” on that list.
Please do NOT poo-poo this concept. It is already exceedingly easy and cheap to generate and disseminate such lists. Progressives have already let the mask slip and declared that their political enemies are “deplorables” and deserve having the U.S. Government drop nuclear weapons on them. Finally, Progressives have begun demonstrating that they are willing to do whatever it takes to “win”.
Or even look at it from a practical perspective. Why go through the hassle of trying to win elections and then pass legislation when you can rub shoulders with top executives at a handful of companies (many of which are already enthusiastically on-board) and quietly achieve your desired goal?
Yeah, yeah, kulaks & whatever. It’s not worth worrying about, because there’s no way to defend against it. Unless you’re willing to revolt *today* and physically “remove” enough of people driving this stuff to end it (without succumbing to enemies lists yourself, lol) there’s not much you can do to stop it. If you’re willing to let it happen, there’s no use fretting the unavoidable.
For such an alleged “populist,” Trump sure seems to have exactly zero appetite for breaking up these anti-trust interests –direct manipulation of politics & public policy by business without having to go through congress was quite literally the reason people elected old Roosevelt to bust up the big trusts. Gotta be careful though, since nature abhors a vacuum, and therefore when Roosevelt dismantled some of those power structures, Uncle Sam was ready & willing to take their place. Thus began the early Progressive Movement in America.
Are you sure about that?
I can imagine at least two possible solutions off the top of my head (although one requires anti-discrimination laws which could cause other problems). How do we know if we ignore this coming problem?
Dude, get over it, that kind of crap has been going on for as long as there has been people.
Using your standard we should quietly and graciously accept slavery and murder since both have been happening throughout recorded history.
When did accepting evil become fashionable?
Since Adam and Eve? From where I sit, lots and lots of humans are evil to the core, and spend a lot of time and effort trying to hide that.
Except on the internet. Here, lots flaunt it. Just see above for more than one example of posts that say; ‘you should just let rapists and thugs do whatever they want’. ‘People have been stealing forever, just get over it already’. Some variety of; ‘how else am I supposed to survive? Stealing is all I know. It’s just business… etc…’
Rampantly Evil. But flaunting it on the web, because of the anonymity. People don’t say that stuff to your face. They know better. They put up their well polished facade instead. But inside, they’re still thinking it. They just won’t SAY it.
“People don’t say that stuff to your face. They know better.”
Sure they do. They’re called “robbery boys” and they’ll say it right to your face, from behind the gun they have pointed at you as they take your wallet. You can look at that as evil, I’d say it’s a refreshingly honest appraisal of their own bad behavior.
POTG can generate lists, too. Read Unintended Consequences, lately?
The issue of “Please Wait while the List is being Populated” is a problem that, really, contains it’s own solution. Kind of the the flaw in The Matrix but in reverse. The further the system goes the larger the problem becomes, which is why Lefties and other statists see the need for more and more power and more and more crack-downs until, eventually the whole thing ends in tears.
This kind of thing works and works well for a time but the cumulative error within it eventually leads to serious problems. That error is the fact that, for lack of a better term, “the system” treats people like cattle. Someone like AOC, whether she realizes it or not, looks at the citizens of this country like a rancher looks at cows and steers: a resource to be developed and exploited. Nothing the rancher does is for the long-term benefit of the herd but rather is a means to an end in the production of things like leather and beef.
The problem with treating people like cattle is that they are not bovine in nature. People have wants and desires and the ability to see problems and wonder why things are happening. They eventually start to see things are wrong and start to ask questions. Cows don’t wonder why they’re going to the North pasture, people do. People, by their nature, are iconoclastic and resistant to attempts to control them. That resistance leads to the government taking over more and more and trying to exert more control over the population which in turn leads to but more resistance until you end up with 1775.
This is why most of the more fucked up governments in history have started with extreme violence. They know that people will eventually notice the problems and so they try to stamp out any resistance right from the start. Historically speaking that hasn’t worked out well in the short term for the population but it also hasn’t worked out well for the government in the longer term.
The other difference with people vs. cattle is that we have the ability to understand what has happened to others. You can do the same thing to different herds of cows with the same predictable result because they are not capable of understanding that you intend the same end for their herd and, in fact, every individual in it. People do start to notice things like that.
The Left has pushed things to the point that already you’re starting to see that former Leftist anthems, like RATM-Killing in the Name start to have application to the other side of the aisle where, we can see from non-compliance with something like the SAFE Act that people have started to mumble to themselves the same thing Zack de la Rocha screamed into a mic in 1992. “Fuck you. I won’t do what you tell me”.
IMHO, that issue is only going to get worse for the control freaks in this country because Americans, even Lefty Americans don’t like to be told what to do and the Left is increasingly telling them what to do in a very condescending manner which only accelerates the problems the Left hopes to curtail.
I agree with your commentary that people don’t like someone telling them what to do and have some level of desire to push back.
I also believe that you are missing three important points:
(1) The “central committee” of Soviets, Cubans, North Koreans, and Chinese have been holding on to power for 50+ years with no end in sight — at least no end in sight from internal insurrection that is.
(2) Even people who are disgusted with the violent methods of the “central committee” will almost always play along as long as it means they get to live another day — and such people are especially prone to play along if the ruling class doles out minor rewards for reporting insurrectionist behavior. Looking at it another way, I don’t know very many people who are willing to quit their jobs in some attempt to cripple companies that refuse to support “political enemies”.
(3) We are rapidly coming up against a truly faceless enemy. Even if we are committed to “get our hands dirty”, who do we go after? Consider just the example where banks refuse to do business with you: who do you go after? A bank teller at a local bank? The branch manager at a local bank? The regional manager of a local bank? The C.E.O. of a local bank? And which local bank? Just one? All of them?
What we will soon be facing is far more nebulous than the British Army in 1776. At that time, the British Army gathered in groups at a limited number of locations and wore matching uniforms of the same color. That made it relatively easy to know who the enemy was and where to fight them. In the near future clandestine entities will compile lists of “political enemies” and disseminate them in secret. And, perhaps even worse than the British Empire, those clandestine entities will have a war chest over one trillion dollars, an army of technical workers numbering in the 100s of thousands, the ability to instantly attack you anywhere in the world from anywhere in the world, and the ability to do all of this more-or-less in anonymity without formally and publicly declaring war on you.
All of the motivation in the world to fight back is useless if you don’t even realize that you are under attack, much less who is attacking you. As Sun Tzu said in The Art of War, you cannot win the war if you do not know your enemy and fight on their terms. Sadly, that is exactly what is looming against us.
The difference here Uncommon is that I take a longer view of history than most.
Without getting into a long post about the history of the world and time frames for this and that I will simply say this: It’s not that I don’t recognize the attack. It’s that I don’t think much of it.
If going after the banks was so effective then narcotics wouldn’t be a thing. I mean heck, even the “legal” pot industry, both medical and recreational, isn’t really legal under federal law and they have openly set up their own banking system so that they can pay taxes while avoiding federal regulations on marijuana money.
If a bunch of stoners and botanists can set up their own banking system to openly operate an entire illegal industry, you’re telling me that we can’t do the same thing with a bunch of engineers and math nerds who design machines that contain explosions and for an industry that’s legal? Of course we can.
Money goes where it’s treated best and nothing is going to stop that. Nothing is going to stop those transactions. One way or another they’re going to happen. Ignore marijuana, heroin and cocaine prove this to be true.
You can’t stop the signal and if you pull back from a narrow view of history to a scale of a few thousand years or so, even Europe is far more free today than most of the world was for most of history. Today the people in the EU are starting to get ticked about the freedoms they don’t have and getting feisty about it too, which doesn’t bode well for the statists in the shorter historical time frame either.
As much as some people might claim otherwise the arc of history, when placed in the correct time scale, bends in one direction: ours. Things like the internet only accelerate this. Like TTAG likes to say: You can’t stop the signal. Sure, there will be missteps and even steps backwards at times, history is uneven, but generally speaking things are going in our direction and have been for thousands of years.
Yeah, but that business is 100 times larger than the entire firearms industry. It depends on how you measure it, but the gun industry is about 2/3 the size of McDonald’s.
McDonald’s doesn’t have their own banking system.
Look at China’s social credit score system. Those labelled “Social Deadbeats” can’t get loans, can’t use high speed trains or planes so they must use slow services, and have constant official intrusion in their lives.
And once on the list there is no way to clear your name once the debts are settled, so it is likened to a life sentence.
How is this not considered “red-lining” or a similarly-illegal discriminatory practice, and second, how are these sorts of lobbying efforts not considered illegal anti-trust, and how is the implementation of this practice by banks not considered (again) illegal fiduciary malfeasance?
I think the only thing saving this “politically-motivated business investment” schtick is the fact that it’s 98% feel-good bluster at the end of the day, and doesn’t truly impact either banks or the gun industry to a significant degree.
Thanks for showing us the Fifth Column Banking Institutions of America, each apparently susceptible to expensive manipulation at the hands of government & “charity.” I’ll know not to invest my pennies with these turds…knowing I could make more money investing them elsewhere. Somehow I suspect professional traders ‘eventually’ will as well.
“I think the only thing saving this “politically-motivated business investment” schtick is the fact that it’s 98% feel-good bluster at the end of the day, and doesn’t truly impact either banks or the gun industry to a significant degree.”
I think you are very wrong on that.
Remember a number of months back when BoA (if memory serves) effectively put FC’s NFA business nearly out of business? Just told him one day his account was closed and all funds ‘in transit’ were frozen?
This is big, and it needs to stop. Attack it on civil right grounds?
The next ‘Progressive’ president is just gonna reinstate and use Obama’s “Operation Choke Point” as a starting point…
Meh. No need to attack when you can make the enemy walk through their own minefield to attack your position.
Money goes where it’s treated best and the gun industry, just guns themselves, is like $16 billion a year just for the US private market.
Someone’s going to see the business opportunities there and take advantage of them. Will that be the current crop of financial institutions or a new entity?
Ultimately money talks and bullshit of all stripes walks.
I’m sure the cartel’s bank HSBC would step in for a slice of that pie.
HSBC openly facilitated their cartel clients by installing extra large cash drawers in their branches to speed up the processing of large volumes of cash.
People like Dick’s Sporting Goods C.E.O. (who just eliminated firearm business from his company, knowing full well that it would reduce his company’s profits) are tripping over themselves to uphold their anti-firearms virtue. And countless people willingly advocate for government to take away their money to provide “security activities” and welfare entitlements for others.
They have drank the Kool-Aide so deeply that they no longer care about dollars from their political enemies. Remember, we will be going up against Google, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, the Hollywood/New York City Entertainment Empire, Big Banking, Big Energy, Big Communications, and Big Money (e.g. most of the billionaire crowd). The combined cash resources of those entities is pretty much beyond comprehension. And the combined technical armies of those entities are also pretty much beyond comprehension.
And the really scare part: if those entities decide to go the Soviet route and simply take away the wealth of their political enemies. I can assure you that taking away your home, vehicles, possessions, and cash (checking, savings, and retirement accounts) is FAR more attractive than courting your few hundred dollars that you might spend every year on firearms and ammunition.
“I can assure you that taking away your home, vehicles, possessions, and cash is FAR more attractive than courting your few hundred dollars that you might spend every year on firearms and ammunition.”
The problem with this argument is that while it might appear to be a smart thing to do from their point of view it fails to follow a principle from a book you mentioned in an earlier post. You never, ever put your enemy in a “fight or die” position because then they’ll fight as if their life depends on it. IIRC Sun Tzu suggests that this increases the fighting prowess of each man by eight-fold.
I’ll just flat out say this. I don’t give a fuck any more. At all.
Here’s why: I fully expect that at some point in my life the Democrats will manage to lie their way back into the kind of power they had under Obama and they’ll go full socialist in the medical system and implement a QALY system that is a death sentence for people like me. Sounds scary, but I don’t think it is because of the rule I posted above.
When it comes to such a system becoming law my only question about such is this: How do we use QALYs to measure the life-expectancy of the people who pass such a law? Minutes are too short but years are too long. A couple of months might be about right. See, when a few million people like me realize they’re going to die a horrible slow death anyway because the government’s “cost saving” measures are to just cut them off from their medication, well, there ain’t gonna be enough police on the planet to keep the Congress Critters that passed that law alive for very long.
IMHO, we’re not to the “cartridge box” yet about any of this but the Left basically has two choices on this (and by the Left I mean “statists” in general), they can give up their fanciful notions or they can force them on the rest of us and pay the price. Either way, what they want will never happen in this country.
First off, thanks for that Art of War reference: I had not heard of that one. It certainly makes sense.
While “liquidating” your political enemies indeed violates that Art of War principle, it never seems to stop power-hungry entities. Notice how the Soviets and China did it mercilessly to more than 100 million of their own people. Of course Nazi Germany applied it with gusto to millions of Jews prior to World War II.
Ultimately, it sure looks like we will be abused considerably. The real question is if/when enough of us finally determine that enough is enough, and whether we will be able to do anything significant about it. As I mentioned earlier, those totalitarian countries (Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba, etc.) have been and continue to hum along with no end in sight. If Russia’s activities which murdered 10s of millions of its own people and China’s activities which murdered 10s of millions of its own people were not enough incentive for a restorative uprising, I don’t know what would be.
As I stated in a post about four weeks ago, whoever is most ruthless seems to achieve and stay in power. Are we willing to be more ruthless than the people among us who lust for totalitarianism? If we choose to be, that is ultimately the purpose of the Second Amendment.
Good point, Barnbwt, about the red lining comparison. Gun sales are a legal business transaction. Maybe those activists should go after the liquor stores and pharmacies. Their legal products/businesses can kill too.
That website is the most pathetic pile of crap I’ve ever seen –no doubt it will make its way around the news channels all week.
Every single “failing” bank is failing for two reasons;
1) Endorsing “NRA-backed” (read: Republican) candidates in elections
2) Not explicitly denouncing the NRA (read: endorsing the DNC platform)
Though there are other criteria that allegedly impact their “ratings,” they amount to a couple ten-grand of total contributions to either gun-groups or “NRA-backed” (read: Republican) candidates…out of the hundreds of billions these institutions have to play with.
Are these idiots for real? What a childish bunch of bull crap masquerading as something ‘academic.’ This is embarrassing even by Brady Bunch standards. Like, “nine out of ten Helens agree guns are bad” level stupidity. The must have thought the Halloween color scheme would be too scary for anyone to dare click on or read.
That site would probably be libel if there was actually any content being presented, lol.
I am pleased to report that last year I closed all my accounts at Bank of America specifically because of their gun policies and moved all my business over to Chase. I’m sure Chase will screw me over sooner or later, but I’m glad to know that as of now, it’s rated a big fat “F” on that site.
They will target Chase next. They smell blood in the water. No banking institution is safe from this, unless our billionaires start up their own 2A friendly banks and credit services…
If I might offer a suggestion on which banking organization you want to do business with, who basically supports the 2nd , or at least does not openly put obstacles in their path, as does BoA, etc……go to your local gun dealer and ask them who they do business with. The gun dealer is not going to put up with a bunch of bullshit from a financial institution, unless they are the dealer’s only recourse.
I used my cash back to buy a gun before I closed my BofA credit card. Tee hee
Reminds me of the treatment of Jewish businesses in Germany prior to 1938.
Normal people living their lives look for good rates and convenient locations. How privileged are these elitist turds to do their banking on biased morals. Since America has effectively been split into Richie Rich’s and welfare recipients I suppose that filthy working class isn’t worth even appearing to relate to.
I’m starting to welcome our third world invaders as long as I get to see a few of these liberal assholes get beheaded before my turn comes up.
They are getting quite savvy and it’s deeply affecting this country, especially now when it comes to money. When Obama was President, I had to wait eight months to get a box of fifty 22LR ammo from the local hardware store. That’s when it really hit me.
They are downright scaring people into groups now that are preparing for civil war from the deep/police state. Their pushing this into a high noon showdown.
There are sanctuary counties and states on both sides already. People are going off the grid, some living mobile. Have any of you heard of a pastor originally out of Florida that’s in Kalispell, MT now by the name of Chuck Baldwin? chuck Baldwin live.com?
I believe he was on the ticket for President once?
Chuck is a very strong vocal proponent of not only the second amendment, but of natural law and critic of certain political parties and behavior. Chuck has some great information from a biblical perspective and some of his own opinions. Now I/we don’t always agree on every topic or discussed solution with people, but he has some good information and awareness for the average person. He offers some excellent constitutional founding fathers books, all factual and quoted from documents going back to the beginning that today are often perverted, suppressed or ignored by those in public office or law, that should be honoring them and expelling opponents of our constitutional rights.
The early debates that were over “states rights” by the founding fathers is really complex and seems to have really thrown a monkey wrench into laws, imo.
However, now it’s currently protecting some of our rights from corrupt federal proponents of things and also pins us against the Feds for other laws.
Most of this information you could spend months compiling yourself, but it’s done for you and affordable. I think his current best selling books are called “The Freedom Documents”. Currently, we have seen gun and ammo companies move to friendlier states just to stay in buisness on second amendment related issues, etc. Another issue that’s similar in mechanics is “Hemp”. The Feds say it’s legal for industrial use and most states are already making revenue from it. In other states the have Native American reservations, its legal on the Rez, but illegal in the same state, because of uneducated law makers or bullied governors that would legalize it for industrial use or sales/etc, but law enf officials oppose it with unsubstantiated claims that stem from dogmatic paranoid thinking. No different than saying red flag 🚩 on old Bob that just got called in by some (do good) that says he depressed and owns a few rifles, so let’s get the swat team together and plan a home invasion and violate his rights, even though he has broken no laws and we all know where that goes. So native Americans can make hemp products that they intended to use to generate income, sounds like capitalism? But, unfortunately they can’t sell it to anyone in their own state, because of states rights to outlaw it. Same thing, just a different product. Imo, CO really just shot itself in the foot by implementing the red flag law in a state where recreational marijuana is legal. Pure insanity..
Especially, with its wildlife hunting and fishing and great outdoors with the occasional carnivore run ins.
It sounds like pandora’s “confrontation” Box to me.
I read financial investing information regularly and I’m guessing that banks that are making money working with the firearms industry and those who have government contracts with the military are going to have to conglomerate or diversify. I think they have plenty of leverage, if they stick together and not get lobbied out, etc. Currently, I don’t know what the heck Lindsay is doing with left, but it don’t look or sound good.. Let’s be in prayer for our country and do what you can for the good of our liberties any chance you can get. Awareness alone is critical and get solid constitutional leaders in office who won’t turn their backs on their jobs serving the republic.
Some of these anti-firearms activities may violate 18 US Code 241.
I See this list as a good thing, only do business with the banks that get an F 😉
241 and 242
I think banks are like most businesses. They just want to make money. They don’t want to get political. They play both sides when they have to. There could be board members on both sides of the aisle. ( Except for Dick’s. We know where they stand.)
Fair enough, though how about the following. Banks and other corporations should be made to realize that their “bottom lines” will suffer as a result of the anti rights positions that they take, applicable to those that are inclined to take such positions.
Problem is…..the right just boycotts and writes letters. The left riots, torches cars, slices tires, doxes employer/employees. They’re more likely to do what the violent crowd tells them to do.
How about a review of corporations, banks included, that display hostility toward the exercise of civil and constitutionally guaranteed rights, amongst which are the ownership, possession and use of arms?
You go BB&T! I was thinking of moving my accounts to Santander but I’ll stay put for now.
I didn’t see Santander on the list. Hopefully they’re an F too.
I’m glad TTAG published the “F” list. It’s not something we’d see in the MSM.
I’ve always liked BB&T. They’re one of the very few banks that didn’t get caught up in the sub-prime mortgage circus. And now they get an F from these clowns. Definitely the bank for me.
The 2nd amendment is a civil right. If banks are penalized for violating the civil rights of others, for example not giving enough loans to minorities, why doesn’t that apply to gun owners and businesses supporting gun owners? The answer is not yet. In my opinion, this argument needs to push its way through the courts until reasonable judges make a ruling to recognize it as a civil right and force these banks and their executives to pay reparations for their crimes.
I wish president Trump would quit just speaking about supporting the second Amendment and starting to actually do something to stop the war on our rights. I am not a troll, I voted for our now president Donald Trump and he has done a lot for the everyday working class citizens that run and support out country. He has done much for our country while fighting the deep state. I haven’t seen anything more than lip service that is given at rallies to actually fight for our rights. I have seen the same thing from people that got their permission slips to carry and ignore the fact that by getting the permission slip, you are acknowledging that it is a priviledge and not a right .
You can’t “shame” someone (or something). You can insult or criticize, but shame comes from within.
Bank locally. I’ve never given a penny (directly anyway) to any bank on this list. There’s thousands of small banks tobdo business with and they don’t give a single shit on what you spend your money on.