PDA

View Full Version : Emanuel, and Guns has he gone to far?



Jarvan
01-30-2013, 02:35 PM
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/01/25/emanuel-to-banks-stop-supporting-gun-makers/

So.. He thinks it's ok that as the mayor of Chicago, he can tell Banks, and now Mutual funds to stop doing business with Gun Manufacturers unless they come on board with Obama's gun views. Kinda a do what we say, or else.

Also A Dem in NYC that is doing the same thing.

Honestly, how exactly can they do these things and get away with them? What's next Rob? You going to tell any bank doing business with the gun companies that if they continue to, you will kick them out of Chicago?

What's to stop a Republican from doing something similar? Maybe tell banks to stop working with MoveOn.org until they start supporting cuts to entitlements? Or maybe tell banks to stop working with the ACLU unless they fall in line with Republicans on immigration.

Yeah, I read that someone on FoxNews used abortion, and frankly it is a valid example, since the dem from NYC said that since so many people were being killed by guns it is ok for him to do this. Well, Pro-Lifers would argue that many many more lives are lost via abortion, so why shouldn't republicans try to pressure banks to stop working with Planned Parenthood?

Does anyone here think it's ok for a public official to use the power of their office to try to coerce a company into curtailing their own rights because it doesn't coincide with your own?

Androidpk
01-30-2013, 02:39 PM
He can't force the banks to do anything, he can only make suggestions.

Jarvan
01-30-2013, 02:59 PM
He can't force the banks to do anything, he can only make suggestions.

At this point, that is all he is doing. Along with calling for a blacklisting of the gun companies. But it doesn't take much to go from Suggesting, to not approving the building of a new bank... unless.

Androidpk
01-30-2013, 03:04 PM
The thing is, the banks he is targeting are already well established in Chicago, so I don't see them caring all too much if they ran into trouble opening up new branches. Even then, the banks have more money than Chicago and there would be lawsuits galore.

Jarvan
01-30-2013, 03:15 PM
The thing is, the banks he is targeting are already well established in Chicago, so I don't see them caring all too much if they ran into trouble opening up new branches. Even then, the banks have more money than Chicago and there would be lawsuits galore.

Hell, I have more money then Chicago. (if you include their debt)

I just wonder how long it's going to take the Big O to do something similar.

Warriorbird
01-30-2013, 03:23 PM
Hell, I have more money then Chicago. (if you include their debt)

I just wonder how long it's going to take the Big O to do something similar.

Welcome to city politics.

Androidpk
01-30-2013, 03:24 PM
Honestly I don't see it as all that big of a deal. This sort of thing is mostly for posture. "Hey guys, look me taking a tough stance on this issue without actually doing anything." Just like when the Federal government had their faux crackdown on banks over the housing bubble issues. Politicians receive boatloads of campaign contributions from financial institutes and the last thing any of them wants to do is bite the hand that feeds them. It isn't just the banks either, don't underestimate how much clout firearms manufacturers have either, as well as the NRA.