Bank of America is apparently cancelling Mcmillan Firearms accounts in what is purely a political anti-gun move.
I have notified them that I intend to close my accounts next week.
Jim

http://www.examiner.com/article/boa-drop...pting-boa-cards

Nice work Jim! As an Arizonan (home state of McMillan Firearms), gun owner, and constitutional protector, I applaud your action. I walked out of my local BofA branch in 1992 with a fist full of cash and two closed accounts. I've never looked back and have never regretted it.

Nice work guys! Wish I had accounts there to close.

I pulled my money from BofA 30 yrs ago in disgust over their customer service. They were known in SoCal as the worst service in the business at the time.

That is scary. A major bank in which a lot of the banking industry follows as a leader in that industry is closing accounts solely on the position of gun manufacturing and gun ownership.
They're hitting gun ownership from all angles so what's next?

Quoting, but not singling out anyone in particular, I gotta ask where everyone's attention was 6 months or a year ago when all the banks, all the credit cards, PayPal (and probably even the Postal Money order people) got the word (from the government) to shut off every method for funding Wikileaks, because they had published stories the government didn't like.

And, answer honestly (even if it is only to yourself): how many of those among you who were paying attention, were cheering the money being cut off?

The sad problem with constitutional rights (under any and every amendment) is that too often it's a matter of whose ox is being gored - if it's someone whose rights would defend something the observer doesn't like, the observer is far more likely to cheer the right being violated. (Some of the worst offenders when it comes to this kind of hypocrisy are cops and their civilian supervisors - they revel in kicking in doors without warrants and trashing the place and people inside, but howl when they get one-tenth the same treatment themselves.)

If you intend to be taken seriously when it comes to constitutional rights, then you really should make an effort to stand alongside those other, unpopular people and acts protected by amendments other than the Second.

Dave, we are a firearms forum and we try to stick to 2nd Amendment issues as much as we can, as that would be a key issue to all of us, but you do make a good point.

What was that quote from President James Madison, “If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy”.

Quote; Typical from "Dave".
"If you intend to be taken seriously when it comes to constitutional rights, then you really should make an effort to stand alongside those other, unpopular people and acts protected by amendments other than the Second."

Just another attempt to (MIS) direct a 2nd Amendment issue into another area. If you have anything else irrelevant to say post it over on the "Misfires" forum when it belongs.
Jim

At the heart of it, you're absolutely right Dave.
The problem I find, is I don't have time - or, honestly, sometimes, the interest, to research the details of all these constitutional issues. I firmly believe you can't just take the media's report on a situation (regardless of what side of the aisle you stand) because they are all so biased.
The Wiki deal, for example. Maybe I should stand shoulder to shoulder and support the 1st Amendment, but I don't know enough about that situation. If there were top-secret things leaked, obtained illegally, I don't see that qualifying for protection. Realize I'm not saying any of that occurred - like I say, I'm semi-ignorant on the situation.
So, for the issues I understand, I'm usually standing behind the law - be it Amendment 1, 2, 13, 21(THANK GOD)........

So let me get this straight.......I should support Nazis, NAMBLA, and the plethora of other morally abhorrent groups the ACLU (for instance) seeks to protect or I should shut up? Tell you what, when Wikileaks moves to the US and does what they do responsibly I'll consider them to be protected by the 1st Amendment. That's right. They're a foreign organization. I'm a US citizen. Not a "citizen of the world". Wikileaks is a poor example, but Maine Democrats don't live in the real world where there are nation states and such.

Rights carry with them responsibilities. The responsibility is to exercise that right with the understanding that your rights end at the tip of my nose. i.e. when you doing your thing adversely effects me doing mine I get to take a shot at stopping you. Wikileaks is a non-US orangization whose actions endanger American lives. Wikileaks publishes documents for no other reason than they can. They accept zero responsibility for the results. Screw them and their anarchist BS, as well as their sex offender daddy. But hey, Dave, you stand shoulder to shoulder with anyone you want. Next you can tell us all about the heroic Occupiers of Lincoln Park.

In this case BofA has every right to refuse to do business with any company they choose. I have the right to stop doing business with BofA as a result. Mcmillan has the right to tell as many people as he wants. BofA can spend every dime they have taking down Wikileaks. Pretty easy to accept and not really something to get worked up about. In fact it's a good thing this came up. BofA will probably suffer in a big way if this is truly company policy, and other businesses will take note.

I know a couple folks who do major business with BofA and they "can't believe it". They are both looking into it through their channels to determine that it is in fact a policy rather than an agenda being pushed by a few people. They are prepared to pull out as am I. Too bad. My experience has been good with their customer service and the interest rate I have is very very nice. But you gotta take the bad with the good.

Just another attempt to (MIS) direct a 2nd Amendment issue into another area. If you have anything else irrelevant to say post it over on the "Misfires" forum when it belongs.
Jim

_________________________
I think I said it all right here above. More B.S. from the left wing weenies that infest this site periodically.
They have NOTHING relavent to say so they attact those that do. You WILL be ignored.
I personally intend to tell as many as possible to make life as(financially) miserable as they can for the likes of BofA.

My apologies, I think this might be a misfire topic.

Thanks for the lecture Dave. The only two known people, and some vague advisors, associated with wikileaks are an Australian and an Icelander operating outside of the United States. Answer honestly to yourself why you would offer them protection under the US constitution.

Ask yourself if assange is subject to charges in the US of A, but for now is careful to stay in safe haven foreign jurisdictions. I wonder how veep biden characterizes the wikileaks head honcho, seeing as how he would be a credible authority in your eyes.

Read about this yesterday, I worked for them for a few years, I am going to call them this p.m. and try and move my BA pension which I think I am legally entitled to do, best

There may be more to it.

http://digg.com/newsbar/Politics/nra_ila_bank_of_america_clarifies_position

Snopes also cannot verify a company policy.

If it ulimately turns out to be true, I'll also cancel my excellent credit card account which rebates me about $150/year on gas and groceries. It's a good product, and up to now I haven't cared a bit who the issuing bank is.

"You want to know about code reds? On the record I tell you that I discourage the practice in accordance with the NIS directive. Off the record I tell you that it's an invaluable part of close infantry training, and if it happens to go on without my knowledge, so be it."

That's what I think of their "clarification".

You realize you're quote another work of fiction, right?

OWD

Sure - and I bet you got the point. If not, I'm saying, "just because it is - or is not - policy, sure don't mean it ain't happenin'."

I will no longer accept checks drawn on a BOA account as a matter of policy. I'm sure they will not even notice but it sure makes me feel better.

McMillan is also going to find out that his credit card agreement is with Mastercard/Visa and not with BofA.

Let's let this play out a while and find the real story.

I had a talk with the B of A Manager about this situation this morning. She was aware of the situation as reported by Mcmillan and asked that I hold off until her executuves respond with their side of the story. Stay tuned.
Jim

You got'em now.

She's probably talking to Mr. Moynihan right now about this issue.

Wascally wabbits!

OWD

BofA ???? Moynihan
Here is another of his/their brilliant schemes!!

Quote
"As of March 1, 2012, B of A was experimenting with charging customers $6-$25 a month for debit accounts"

Update!
Here is the response I received from Dick Davis(McMillan Firearms) inre. to their meeting with Bank of America.

Email I received is below:

Jim,

This split with B of A is a true account of what happened last week. I’m sure that any support you might want to give against this political attack on the firearms industry will help in some way.

Regards, McMillans