Letter to Banks/CU's Concerning OC

[bwarren917]

Hi Everyone,

It's been a while since I've posted to the forums. But I drafted up a letter I was planning to send to banks/CU's concerning OC. Below, I've copy and pasted a draft. Any opinions and suggestions you have would be gladly appreciated. Also, anyone who wants to use this letter as a baseline to drafting their own letters to banks/CU's (or other anti-gun), are welcome to do so. Just make sure you remove the parts that are only applicable to me, and modify it for yourself.

Apologies in advance for the poor editing. That will be fixed before I send it. I just want to see if you believe my point has been made in a convincing manner, or if you believe it's not coming across with the correct tone.

Thank you.

To Whom This May Concern,

Several months ago, I sent an email to your bank asking for your policy concerning customers lawfully carrying firearms into your branches. The response was a resounding “no weapons allowed,” stating, “Montana and federal law prohibit carrying weapons into banks and credit unions.” Once I informed your representative I was speaking to, of the law in Montana (and federally) concerning the legal ability to carry firearms into financial institutions, I was ignored. In this letter, I’d like to address that subject.

Montana code 45-8-328, states that concealed carry is illegal in financial institutions. Open (or exposed) carry is not mentioned, which immediately makes that form of carrying a firearm in financial institutions legal.

I understand this is a highly polarized and emotional topic. However, I hope with this letter to address some of the many reasons people enjoy the right to bear arms, and why we want to be afforded the protection we get to enjoy almost everywhere else in town, but not in most financial institutions.

Firearms, where carried by law-abiding citizens, have consistently been shown to be a deterrent to criminals. Several studies have been performed (some by the Department of Justice in the 1980’s, some by private individuals, and some by college professors) to show criminals are between 70 and 90% less likely to commit their crimes if they know a citizen is armed. There are many situations where this has shown true, over the past several years - and even recently in financial institutions. These studies were conducted by interviewing maximum security felons at various prisons. The felons were asked several questions about the likelihood of robbing a place (or person) if they know citizen(s) had guns. The resonating response was “no.” When the same felons were asked if they were afraid of Law Enforcement, most of them responded with “no.”

What does this mean? This is saying that criminals are far less likely to commit their crimes against the innocent when they know citizens have firearms. Considering financial institutions have the single-most sought after thing criminals want: money. The ability for people to protect themselves when dealing with their hard-earned money, in a financial institution (especially since financial institutions have a lot of money on-hand), firearms should be welcome with open arms.

I recently saw an article stating that Yellowstone County, Montana made 14th position, on the Top 30 list of the most armed counties in America. The article cited that 48.7 percent of residents owned firearms. Banning firearms on the guise of “it’s hard to tell the good guys from the bad” is stereotyping all gun owners as bad guys.

I come from a background of guns. My father was in the Air Force, and his father was also in the Military. I’ve been around guns my whole life. I’ve taken the Montana Conceal Carry course, and regularly train with my pistol. I am very safe and responsible with my pistol. What I ask of you is not to create a pro-gun policy necessarily, but rather a firearm-neutral policy - similar to Walmart, Best Buy, Home Depot, and so on.

Currently, I am in need of a bank to open a business account, and several personal accounts. I would gladly store my money with you, but I need the ability to protect myself within your bank. Please consider changing this policy, inform me in writing of the change, and I will start an account at my earliest available date. Firearms are nothing to be scared of. Similarly, cars are nothing to be scared of. It’s the person behind the trigger, or behind the wheel. And it’s quickly obvious who’s following the law, and who’s not. Please don’t let a few bad apples spoil the whole bunch. Law abiding citizens will protect themselves, and anyone else they possibly can. Criminals must learn who to victimize, and I can’t afford to be a victim.

Thank you for taking the time to consider my thoughts.

Sincerely,


Benjamin Warren
xxxx@xxxxx.com

Thank you again for your input!

 

[Statkowski]

Make it short, sweet, and to the point. Essentially, the 25-words-or-less school of thought.

When drafting such, first identify (on your draft) what specific points you wish to make. Then, expand on those points, with a one-paragraph limit to each. Basically, you're following the problem-discussion-resolution method.

Opening paragraph - the basic purpose of your letter.
Discussion paragraphs - one per point discussed.
Closing paragraph - the logical conclusion based on the discussion.

Oh, and point out that federal law says nothing about firearms in financial institutions.

Here's how I would have written it:

Dear Mr. Whatsis,

A few months ago I emailed your bank asking for your policy concerning customers lawfully carrying firearms into your branches. The response I received was a resounding, “No Weapons Allowed.” Your representative further stated, “Montana and federal law prohibit carrying weapons into banks and credit unions.” Any further attempts at discussion were met with silence.

While it is true that Montana Code 45-8-328 states that concealed carry is illegal in financial institutions, open (or exposed) carry is not mentioned. Ergo, it's not illegal. Federal law, on the other hand, is silent on the entire subject matter, which means it's not illegal under federal law. Please advise your email representative accordingly.

I am currently in need of a bank to open a business account and several personal accounts. I would gladly do business with your bank, but I would like to retain the ability to protect myself, especially when transporting what I consider to be large sums of money to and from your bank. If prevented to do so by your policy, will your bank assume pecuniary liability should I suffer a loss due to the illegal actions of some miscreant?

Please consider changing your policy and I will start an account at my earliest available date. Until then, however, I would prefer not to do business in a Disarmed Victims Zone.

Thank you for taking the time to consider my thoughts.

Sincerely,

 

[bwarren917]

Hi Everyone,

My apologies for not replying sooner. I've been very busy over the holidays with vacation, traveling, and seeing family.

Thank you, everyone for your input (and to Statkowski) for your proposed revision. I will surely put all of your thoughts into a revised copy. I also apologize for the lack of editing, it was more a getting ideas down to paper, draft. I absolutely, unequivocally, agree that I should have reviewed it more than I did before posting it. My apologies. I will work on a revised draft here in the coming week (or so) and post it here for your thoughts.

Thank you again!

 

[3FULLMAGS+1]

Personally, I've had luck talking w/ the bank manager, "in person" first . I've ,(and others), have perswayded two banking companies to change their policy, (in Ohio).

There was four of us complaining about their policy and we all had accounts w/ them, .....which may or may not have had an affect on their decision),......and the board president actually called each of us because we said we would take our accounts elswhere. We were polite and. said we didn't have anything against their banks except for this. But there will be some businesses that will continue to keep t5heir heads in the sand no matter what and if that's the case move on to another bank and don't look back!

 

[color of law]

Personally, I've had luck talking w/ the bank manager, "in person" first . I've ,(and others), have perswayded two banking companies to change their policy, (in Ohio).

There was four of us complaining about their policy and we all had accounts w/ them, .....which may or may not have had an affect on their decision),......and the board president actually called each of us because we said we would take our accounts elswhere. We were polite and. said we didn't have anything against their banks except for this. But there will be some businesses that will continue to keep t5heir heads in the sand no matter what and if that's the case move on to another bank and don't look back!

Well, we know it wasn't 5/3 bank then.

 

[color of law]

I personally would not send a letter, but I definitely would not send the letter unless you are willing to take your business elsewhere. Remember, posting the signs was a business decision. Closing your account is a business decision. Banks understand business decisions. Banks don't make emotional decisions.

I'm just say'n.

 

[3FULLMAGS+1]

I personally would not send a letter, but I definitely would not send the letter unless you are willing to take your business elsewhere. Remember, posting the signs was a business decision. Closing your account is a business decision. Banks understand business decisions. Banks don't make emotional decisions.

I'm just say'n.

Well, banks make business decisions all the time , that's for sure. As for them making emotional decisions, well.......I would say they, (and many other business's), make decisions........specifically regarding the issue of carry.......... "based" on emotion, (not to mention misinformation), all the time and I would say this bank mentioned here is making a decision to post based on these two criteria. So a decision "based" on emotion is an emotionally made decision. Maybe I'm wrong here, but.......


I'm just say'n.


......and no, 5/3rd bank was NOT one of them.....smh.

 

[MSG Laigaie]

I personally would not send a letter, .................

Why even address this to them. You are "stirring the pot" unneccesarily. You will put them in a position where they would have to choose and people will take the path of least resistance. OC. OC every day and it will become normal. If someone is unhappy with you enough they will say something. If they are a liitle uncomfortable, and don't say anything, they will acclimatize. Perservere. A letter will be shooting yourself in the foot.

Just my opine, YMMV.

 

[bwarren917]

Here are the reasons I'd rather write the letter:

1. I don't want to be the subject of a police call saying "guy with a gun in a bank." Considering how frantic some banks are about things like this, I'd rather clear the air before even attempting to carry a firearm into the branch.

2. There are some branches that have signs that prohibit weapons. Therefore, I can't carry in to those branches.

3. If I write the letter, I can send the message that I want a change in the policy, and I've put it in writing (so they can't come back later and make up anything about what I did or didn't say).

4. With my unpredictable schedule, it's easier for me to send a letter, than go in and talk to a manager. If I find out later they want to talk in person (or over the phone), I can make that arrangement at that time.

5. Assuming the banks/CU's change their policy, and write me back, I then have written consent to carry into the branch. If I then run into problems in the future, I can show them the written proof.


I hope that clarifies the reasons why I would rather write the letter.

Thank you.

 

[OC Freedom]

Here are the reasons I'd rather write the letter:

1. I don't want to be the subject of a police call saying "guy with a gun in a bank." Considering how frantic some banks are about things like this, I'd rather clear the air before even attempting to carry a firearm into the branch.

2. There are some branches that have signs that prohibit weapons. Therefore, I can't carry in to those branches.

3. If I write the letter, I can send the message that I want a change in the policy, and I've put it in writing (so they can't come back later and make up anything about what I did or didn't say).

4. With my unpredictable schedule, it's easier for me to send a letter, than go in and talk to a manager. If I find out later they want to talk in person (or over the phone), I can make that arrangement at that time.

5. Assuming the banks/CU's change their policy, and write me back, I then have written consent to carry into the branch. If I then run into problems in the future, I can show them the written proof.


I hope that clarifies the reasons why I would rather write the letter.

Thank you.

Read post #9. Do not ask permission, just open carry.

 

[1245A Defender]

Wowwie!!!

Why even address this to them. You are "stirring the pot" unneccesarily. You will put them in a position where they would have to choose and people will take the path of least resistance. OC. OC every day and it will become normal. If someone is unhappy with you enough they will say something. If they are a liitle uncomfortable, and don't say anything, they will acclimatize. Perservere. A letter will be shooting yourself in the foot.

Just my opine, YMMV.

To the OP,, Im confused, from the OP, 3 Months AGO!!!

To Whom This May Concern,

Several months ago, I sent an email to your bank asking for your policy concerning customers lawfully carrying firearms into your branches. The response was a resounding “no weapons allowed,” stating, “Montana and federal law prohibit carrying weapons into banks and credit unions.” Once I informed your representative I was speaking to, of the law in Montana (and federally) concerning the legal ability to carry firearms into financial institutions, I was ignored. In this letter, I’d like to address that subject.


You have indeed stirred the pot!

What was in the E-mail that you sent the bank before 3 months ago?
Who was it that you Talked to?
Why did you even embark of this bad idea?

Its been said before, and it needs to be said again, until folks start to Understand,,,
Never ASK For Permission!!!! Just DO IT!!!

 

[solus]

Benjamin, timeliness is key. this is true since from your post today it appears you apparently haven't sent your second letter, does that mean you have not visited the financial institution you are having problems with since November?

if this is an infrequent situation visiting your financial institution, then next time you need to visit...plan on expending extra time and speak with the MANAGER and the manager only. they are the only individual who can make changes to their site specific policies.

however, if the manager states it is a corp manager, ask for specifics on who to contact to 'personally discuss' the issue over the phone or if nearby in person.

singular letters/emails, ad nauseam, have a way of magically end up in the receiver's circular trash can, much to the chagrin of the writer.

just a few thoughts...

ipse

 

[bwarren917]

Hi Everyone,

I'm going to try to touch on everyone's comments in this reply:

1. No, I haven't OC'd into any of the banks that have stated they don't permit weapons in their branch. This includes both the banks with "NO WEAPONS" signs, and those without (I was told in email they prohibited it). As I've said before, Banks/CU's are places I don't want to find out what their policy is by "just doing it," also for reasons I've mentioned before. Banks and CU's are a touchy area for "Just OC! And see what happens!" Admittedly, it might just be me that's being overly cautious, but due to the nature of banks always being nervous about various things involving robbery and security, I'd rather know in advance, before attempting this. Whether or not you agree with me, can we at least put this reason to bed?

2. The emails I wrote to the various banks were really simple. I just asked for their policy regarding law-abiding citizens carrying into their branches (or what their corporate policy was). It was from there that I was told one way or the other.

3. As far as going into the branches and speaking with the managers, I'll try that. It's just a matter of when. As someone here has mentioned, I haven't been the best at keeping to my word about various dates and times that I would do things (sorry).

Thank you everyone for your input. Sorry this had to be such a point of agitation. I'm simply unwilling to take risks when carrying a loaded weapon into a bank/CU, and want to make sure I cross all my T's, and dot all my I's. This isn't Walmart, Home Depot, or Lowe's. This is a place where most require you remove your hat and sunglasses "for security reasons," I'm not willing to see what they will do when someone carries a weapon in their branch (especially after hearing some branches will "take action, if they see someone carrying a weapon"). This is not something I want to find out the details of. Perhaps I'll dedicate a day where my schedule is free, and go talk to managers.

Thank you again!

 

[slapmonkay]

I'm simply unwilling to take risks when carrying a loaded weapon into a bank/CU, and want to make sure I cross all my T's, and dot all my I's. This isn't Walmart, Home Depot, or Lowe's. This is a place where most require you remove your hat and sunglasses "for security reasons," I'm not willing to see what they will do when someone carries a weapon in their branch (especially after hearing some branches will "take action, if they see someone carrying a weapon"). This is not something I want to find out the details of.

I think this is a self inflicted concern. I have carried into different banks in several different states with absolutely no reaction with concern as you mention.


Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[bwarren917]

Just a quick update - Opportunity Bank in Billings is a NO GO for OC. The President/CEO is very arrogant, clueless (and even rude), when talking to him about OC. I tried to inform him of the law, and he didn't care in the slightest. I would advise people boycott them, as I will be doing. The funny thing about my conversation with the President, is it happened the same day the armed guards were there.... That didn't seem to bother him all that much.

Same goes for Valley Federal CU, but they are not rude at all, and even seem somewhat receptive to the idea of changing their current policy (no guns).

Carry on!