K
Kitty Sinatra
This is exactly why I've been courting all the lingerie companies. I wanna marry Victoria's Secret but I'll settle for La Senza.
Supreme Court rule in FAVOR of unlimite political ads from private industry
- Status
That BS, there's differences between the 2 types of individuals in most systems... no reason why this couldn't be one of them.
I raise you a Mel Gibson...
W
WolfOfOdin
Now you're going to make me look up corporate, civil and criminal law. Here's a small rundown of how the definition of individual is applied to a corporation as well as the restrictions and penalties that come with it;
keeping it in mind this was put in place as a time saver for courts. CorpA makes a product that is found to be lethal or harmful to x number of citizens, X will bring suit against A for damages in a civil proceeding, or criminal if the crime or actions perpetrated by A have been deemed egregious enough to offend or in some way harm the body-politic. X is grouped under a Class Action suit, wherein multiple individuals are construed under the eye of the Law as one discreet individual and the damages rewarded are to be split amongst them all equally, with Y amount being paid to the attorney(s) who represented the case. In this manner, A is held to be as an individual and fined as a whole, since bringing suit against each and every person that may have been reposinible for the flaws in their product will be too time consuming and problematic for the court the sort out.
This is a typical liability afforded to a corporation which is viewed, legally as a Separate Legal Entity, Legal Person or Artificial Personage in which the Corporation itself is viewed as an individual apart from its owners/operators/CEO's, CFO's, COO's and board of directors. Granted with this status are the rights and privileges that Citizen A would normally receive, as well as the liabilities that Citizen A would normally receive in a court of law.
Keeping with this, as per Santa Clara V. Southern Pacific Railroad, it has been taken to precedent that all rights inherent in the constitution which are held to an individual are thus to be afforded to a Legal Person/ Separate Legal Entity. So, until Santa Clara V SPR is viewed as invalid, or a new definition of personage is afforded to a SLE that implicitly denies heretofore previously inalienable constitutional rights unto an SLE, it will remain under the auspices of the aforementioned constitutional rights.
Well there is Xe (the mercenary band formerly known as Black Water), and H. Ross Perot kept about a squad of mercenaries on his payroll... International Fruit Company had an army.
Or just do what a lot of corporations used to do, hire the Pinkertons.
Or just do what a lot of corporations used to do, hire the Pinkertons.
S
Shadazz
The individual right to bear arms (and that of militias) already means they can't stop corporations from having armed personnel, with no need for the existence of a juridical person...
W
WolfOfOdin
The right to bear arms in regards to corporations is a...tricky issue.
As is, a corporation can legally maintain a standing army or militia/police-like task force, but they usually hire off-duty police officers as a way of guarding property/securing safety of employees.
However, with the Roberts court extending the previous constitutional rights granted by SLE status and SC V SPR, this may change, but probably won't. The reason being that as nice as it would be for every company to have a full compliment of armed guards, it is incredibly expensive and time consuming to not only equip personnel with weaponry and gear, but also prohibitively expensive in the amount of training they'd need in order to do it well. Look at how much money the US spends on an average soldier, and you'll get a slight inkling of why we won't be seeing WAL-MART's Pacification Squad anytime soon.
Also, a nugget of wisdom from Chief Roberts
"If the first amendment applies to Corporations, surely the second amendment also applies. Since Corporations have no history of abusing their power, we expect that they will employ their private armies with restraint and discretion,"
As is, a corporation can legally maintain a standing army or militia/police-like task force, but they usually hire off-duty police officers as a way of guarding property/securing safety of employees.
However, with the Roberts court extending the previous constitutional rights granted by SLE status and SC V SPR, this may change, but probably won't. The reason being that as nice as it would be for every company to have a full compliment of armed guards, it is incredibly expensive and time consuming to not only equip personnel with weaponry and gear, but also prohibitively expensive in the amount of training they'd need in order to do it well. Look at how much money the US spends on an average soldier, and you'll get a slight inkling of why we won't be seeing WAL-MART's Pacification Squad anytime soon.
Also, a nugget of wisdom from Chief Roberts
"If the first amendment applies to Corporations, surely the second amendment also applies. Since Corporations have no history of abusing their power, we expect that they will employ their private armies with restraint and discretion,"
What about companies like Blackwater?
What about companies like Blackwater?[/QUOTE]
They are treated as outside contractors, like a private plumber or electrician. Their specialty skill is just knowing how to kill people exceptionally well.
I
Iaculus
What about companies like Blackwater?[/QUOTE]
They are treated as outside contractors, like a private plumber or electrician. Their specialty skill is just knowing how to kill people exceptionally well.[/QUOTE]
Or, at least, sorta-well. Maybe. I guess.
Hey, is that guy over there still twitching?
What about companies like Blackwater?[/QUOTE]
They are treated as outside contractors, like a private plumber or electrician. Their specialty skill is just knowing how to kill people exceptionally well.[/QUOTE]
But they own their own military type equipment.
C
Chazwozel
What about companies like Blackwater?[/QUOTE]
They are treated as outside contractors, like a private plumber or electrician. Their specialty skill is just knowing how to kill people exceptionally well.[/QUOTE]
But they own their own military type equipment.[/QUOTE]
I am as much against Blackwater type deals as I am for thinking it might probably be the coolest job on the planet. Contracted by the government to bounty hunt. Man.
W
WolfOfOdin
Blackwater's specifically designed and operated as a paramilitary outfit, all of their personnel are (supposedly) combat veterans or specialists who know how to handle gear and weaponry as well as any solider or police officer, so the massive training cost is cut down by that fact alone. Keeping with this, as they are a 'security' firm or protection agency, the funding provided to them by both A) The government for protecting high risk targets abroad and B) the insanely lucrative fees they draw from private companies are usually enough to make procuring gear cost effective.
I love how history is starting to sound like Shadowrun's backstory 
Murray Hill wants your support
Yes, the company is running for congress. Yes, it is to protest the Supreme Court decision.
Yes, the company is running for congress. Yes, it is to protest the Supreme Court decision.
K
Kitty Sinatra
what does Murray Hill do?
Run for congress.
K
Kitty Sinatra
I should start a company that runs for Congress. My business would be selling votes.
I
Iaculus
Wut.
- Status