Louisiana Bans 2 Banks over Second Amendment stance

Here's my two cents worth; if a company or its assets is traded on Wall St. it is not a private company. Period. Secondly, the 'bank' acquiesced its authority to the State when it agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained in the Charter issued to said Bank by the State. The Secretary of State is the legal representative of the people of the State who elected the Secretary. As a representative of the People the Secretary is thereby a Witness to said acquiescence of said Bank. No foreign entity or person owning shares or otherwise has authority to violate any citizen's right be they State or Federal Constitution based rights. If such were the case Charters would not be required. Anywhere.
so we can apply that concept to charter cities.
 
Here's my two cents worth; if a company or its assets is traded on Wall St. it is not a private company. Period. Secondly, the 'bank' acquiesced its authority to the State when it agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained in the Charter issued to said Bank by the State. The Secretary of State is the legal representative of the people of the State who elected the Secretary. As a representative of the People the Secretary is thereby a Witness to said acquiescence of said Bank. No foreign entity or person owning shares or otherwise has authority to violate any citizen's right be they State or Federal Constitution based rights. If such were the case Charters would not be required. Anywhere.
Then there are the legal tender laws.
 
Here's my two cents worth; if a company or its assets is traded on Wall St. it is not a private company. Period. Secondly, the 'bank' acquiesced its authority to the State when it agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained in the Charter issued to said Bank by the State. The Secretary of State is the legal representative of the people of the State who elected the Secretary. As a representative of the People the Secretary is thereby a Witness to said acquiescence of said Bank. No foreign entity or person owning shares or otherwise has authority to violate any citizen's right be they State or Federal Constitution based rights. If such were the case Charters would not be required. Anywhere.
When any company takes a stand or position on a Government law or policy they become a adversary source and can be charged with being incorrect and against the Charter.
 
Here's my two cents worth; if a company or its assets is traded on Wall St. it is not a private company. Period. Secondly, the 'bank' acquiesced its authority to the State when it agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained in the Charter issued to said Bank by the State. The Secretary of State is the legal representative of the people of the State who elected the Secretary. As a representative of the People the Secretary is thereby a Witness to said acquiescence of said Bank. No foreign entity or person owning shares or otherwise has authority to violate any citizen's right be they State or Federal Constitution based rights. If such were the case Charters would not be required. Anywhere.
so we can apply that concept to charter cities.
A government charter is not the same as a Company charter. God just because they have the name charter in the title does not mean it is the same. Use a dic to look it up
 
Bank policies concerning funds used to purchase firearms still has nothing to do with the Second Amendment, no rights are being violated, Louisiana lawmakers are being ignorant and ridiculous.

The Second Amendment concerns solely the relationship between government and those governed; not between and among private persons and entities.
Don't want the business of gun shops or the people who makes them is stupid. Shareholders might take it badly.
 
But it's ok for Cuomo in NY to pressure insurers to stop covering the NRA

New York People do not depend on 'POSSUM STEW or
those critters which are thrown into the BRUNSWICK POT
New Orleans Louisiana boasts some of the finest cuisine to be found in the USA. Cajun style cooking can be found from sea to shining sea. Let us see what we have here. Why it is another self righteous, ignorant, pompus bigot who probably can't find their ass with both hands.
 
Here's my two cents worth; if a company or its assets is traded on Wall St. it is not a private company. Period. Secondly, the 'bank' acquiesced its authority to the State when it agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained in the Charter issued to said Bank by the State. The Secretary of State is the legal representative of the people of the State who elected the Secretary. As a representative of the People the Secretary is thereby a Witness to said acquiescence of said Bank. No foreign entity or person owning shares or otherwise has authority to violate any citizen's right be they State or Federal Constitution based rights. If such were the case Charters would not be required. Anywhere.
so we can apply that concept to charter cities.
A government charter is not the same as a Company charter. God just because they have the name charter in the title does not mean it is the same. Use a dic to look it up
In the United States, a charter city is a city in which the governing system is defined by the city's own charter document rather than by general law. --https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_city
 
In the United States, a charter city is a city in which the governing system is defined by the city's own charter document rather than by general law. --https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_city

The charter is granted by the state. It still has to abide by the state Constitution and laws.
 

Forum List

Back
Top