Citi becomes first big bank to press clients to restrict gun sales

[spin]

To recap. Citi implements THEIR OWN POLICY ON GUNS.

1. ME: THIS IS WHY I bought a gun.
2. YOU: THIS doesn't effect anyone from buying a gun. You didn't read article.
3.ME: Sure it does, people under 21...
4. YOU: retailers are free to choose their own restrictions past the law


If I am LEGALLY able to purchase it based on every existing law...A bank forcing additional regulations is a problem.

to recap. Citi implements their policy of accounts they'll personally do business with, and will aid fully in the transfer of accounts to other banks.

i can do this every time.

 

[ineverpost]

Just trying to appease the right people so they are in front of the line for bailouts during the next financial crisis

 

[Judge]

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/22/citi-clients-restrict-gun-sales-881040



*Note to self* purchase more magazines, a lot more. Also consider moving on that rifle purchase.

Time to change banks.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Just cancelled my Citi cards. They were nice and explained it was for safety. I said that's fine and my position was to take a stand for civil rights. All very pleasant.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Guess I'll be cancelling my Bank of America cards too.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/10/business/bank-of-america-guns.html

Bank of America will stop lending money to gun manufacturers that make military-inspired firearms for civilian use, such as the AR-15-style rifles that have been used in multiple mass shootings, a company executive said Tuesday.

The policy is the latest example of Wall Street wading into the divisive gun control debate after Citigroup’s announcement last month that it would require business customers to restrict certain types of firearms sales.

“We want to contribute in any way we can to reduce these mass shootings,” Anne M. Finucane, vice chairwoman at the Bank of America, said on Bloomberg TV.

The bank works with “just a handful of manufacturers,” with whom it has had “intense conversations over the last few months,” Ms. Finucane said. Their reactions to the new policy have been “mixed,” she said.

Mixed reactions? Wonder which manufacturer was in support.

 

[spin]

"For now, Bank of America will continue to offer banking services to firearms retailers. Asking gun shops to stop selling certain types of handguns or long guns “gets into civil liberties” and is “a ways off,” Ms. Finucane said."

they aren't changing what citibank changed.



"Bank of America will stop lending money to gun manufacturers that make military-inspired firearms for civilian use"

which once again does not infringe on anyone's civil rights.

 

[BarackLesnar]

Finally. Men with hearts of gold stepping up to the plate and doing what needs to be done.

Names of gold

 

[Islam Imamate]

I'm fine as it stands. The 2nd Amendment is specific as to the government because the entire Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, is specific to the government. The government can't infringe on those rights but nothing requires private corporations to sell the goods.

I'm sure you and others are thinking about the cake issue. THe cake issue is one of alleged discrimination - they were selling cakes except to a protected class for a specific purpose. In this gun thing, Citi isn't treating different classes of gun buyers differently - they are limiting the scope of terms under which they will enter business with another company. And even if the underlying companies bow to the pressure, I still think they're fine.

To suggest otherwise would imply that if a store chose to only sell handguns and not rifles, they would be infringing on the 2nd Amendment. Or if they priced their firearms at exorbitant prices, that would also be infringement. Or if they sold guns but not ammunition. I can't see that a logical endpoint and so I can't see how an interpretation of the 2nd Amendment extends to dictating how firearms are sold when private companies impose their own internal restrictions.

And see, this is why this story scares me. We have restrictions on the government via the constitution and of course the people can affect change through voting.

Do we vote on the policies of Citi Bank? Do we have any mechanism to affect change on such an institution? The power of concentrated capital is, in some ways, surpassing that of states. The government was unable to respond to the call for gun control in the wake of the shooting but Citi Bank has.

 

[RerouteToRemain]

"Bank of America will stop lending money to gun manufacturers that make military-inspired firearms for civilian use"

So basically all modern semi auto firearms.

 

[Neph]

 

[panamaican]

And see, this is why this story scares me. We have restrictions on the government via the constitution and of course the people can affect change through voting.

Do we vote on the policies of Citi Bank? Do we have any mechanism to affect change on such an institution? The power of concentrated capital is, in some ways, surpassing that of states. The government was unable to respond to the call for gun control in the wake of the shooting but Citi Bank has.

You do vote on the policies of Citi Bank and can affect change on such an institution. You can withhold your business and vote via the power of the purse. Additionally, Citi's competitors can step in and fill the void.

And on a subject as contentious as this one, you'd rather have society impose its own limitations. It leaves the most options on the table to reverse a course of action. Citi Bank can always walk back their policy relatively quickly while the government cannot.

 

[Islam Imamate]

You do vote on the policies of Citi Bank and can affect change on such an institution. You can withhold your business and vote via the power of the purse. Additionally, Citi's competitors can step in and fill the void.

And on a subject as contentious as this one, you'd rather have society impose its own limitations. It leaves the most options on the table to reverse a course of action. Citi Bank can always walk back their policy relatively quickly while the government cannot.

That sounds nice in theory and all but to make a dent in Citi Bank would require a pretty massive mobilization against them, one that is highly unlikely.

 

[panamaican]

That sounds nice in theory and all but to make a dent in Citi Bank would require a pretty massive mobilization against them, one that is highly unlikely.

Which would mean that the opposing position isn't as widespread as believed. The NRA can make an outsized impact on Congress because Congress people don't make a lot of money, constantly need campaign dollars, etc. So they have the power to exaggerate their voice on the national scale.

If the issue is as serious as groups like the NRA propose, massive mobilization should be quite possible.

 

[MTT]

It's a damn shame as that FNBO NRA card was one of the best gas rewards cards (5%).

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

That sounds nice in theory and all but to make a dent in Citi Bank would require a pretty massive mobilization against them, one that is highly unlikely.

You're probably right. I will say that I vaguely alluded to why I was leaving and they new without question what the issue was. Even seemed like a pre-prepared statement was at their disposal.

 

[Stoic1]

Dumping my BoA stock on Monday.

They were a fucking piece of shit bank to begin with. Now I cannot own any on general principle.

 

[spin]

So basically all modern semi auto firearms.

lets say yes.




its still loans to manufacturers.

 

[RerouteToRemain]

Just cancelled my Citi cards. They were nice and explained it was for safety. I said that's fine and my position was to take a stand for civil rights. All very pleasant.

"For safety". Better stop lending to manufacturers of blunt objects, such as hammers. They kill more than double what AR's do every year.

Same with knives, they kill like 10x more people than AR's every year.

Oh shit people with hands and feet as well. Hands and feet kill 3x more than AR's.

Maybe phones as well, distracted driving kills a ridiculous amount.

It is for safety after all

 

[RerouteToRemain]

lets say yes.




its still loans to manufacturers.

Let's say no because they are too stupid to realise what that actually implies. If they did...

What about tactical bolt action rifles.

Manufacturers of what? Over under shotguns. Wood stock only bolt action rifles with no mag or fixed mag only.

 

[spin]

Let's say no because they are too stupid to realise what that actually implies. If they did...

What about tactical bolt action rifles.

Manufacturers of what? Over under shotguns. Wood stock only bolt action rifles with no mag or fixed mag only.

they could cease giving loans to any and all gun manufacturers, and it still wouldn't restrict anyone's access to acquiring or owning guns.

it just means they don't want be involved in that business. gun manufacturers have other banks to choose from.


nobodies rights are being trampled on by any of these moves.