TexasCHLforum.com

Posted: **Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:26 pm**

b322da wrote:
jimlongley wrote:I was, briefly, a member of USAA in the early 70s, right after I got off active duty. My late wife, who was an insurance agent herself, read some of their literature and talked me into rescinding my membership and I haven't regretted it until now. Now my only regret is that I did not "know my enemy" and keep track of them and their insidious campaign against legal gun possession. They can be assured that I will never even consider doing business with them at any time in the future too, even if they do change their public policy, as I do not think they will ever really change.
In my opinion this discussion, in general, is really wandering off into never-never land, Jim. I say this just after your post not because you are alone, but that you repeat a common theme of this thread, and it may just be the use of loose language.

Neither USAA nor any other 30.06 poster is, according to my reasoning, insidiously campaigning against "legal" gun possession. Does that proper 30.06 sign mean that a CHL-licensee is guilty of illegally carrying a concealed handgun if she ignores the sign? As we all know so well, it only means that if one enters ignoring the sign, if correctly worded, shaped and posted, she would be trespassing. Is she not still legally carrying the handgun? Could she be arrested for illegally carrying a handgun? If USAA is "insidiously campaigning against legal gun possession" I could be accused of insidiously campaigning against legal gun possession if I courteously tell a visitor to my home that my home is not open to anyone carrying a handgun, whether CHL-licensed, or not, and she may not enter if she is carrying a handgun.

With the greatest of respect for you and your invariably intelligent well-reasoned postings here, Jim, I feel that it is simply not right, once again in my personal opinion, to assume that my having said this to a visitor is because I am "insidiously campaigning against legal gun possession." Nothing could be more untrue of this particular NRA member, CHL-licensee from the very beginning, and tireless advocate of the 2nd Amendment.

I cannot close without observing that absent the wide circulation given on this forum, and others similarly oriented, to USAA's sign on its premises, one, my being one of them, would not even know of USAA's policy on this, unless they visited the offices, which gives me a serious question as to whether USAA is being "insiduous."

Elmo

You will have to take my word for it, and excuse my memories from the early 1970s when I was a newlywed and getting the least expensive whole life insurance as well as homeowner's was a priority. I received advertisements for USAA through the US Navy, and it looked like a good idea to me. And then my insurance agent wife got her hands on policy paperwork and found language that indicated that the homeowner's was null and void if firearms or ammunition were stored as they deemed improperly, which included just having a gun in your house for self defense. At that time I saw that as insidiously campaigning against legal gun possession, and have seen nothing to change my opinion since. At the same time we checked into similar clauses by other insurance companies and eventually bought from a company that did not have such a clause.

When my first (late) wife turned 50, she was sent an "automatic" membership in AARP, and shortly thereafter we became aware of their well known anti-gun policy, and she resigned. I see AARP as insidiously anti-gun too.

And I see an outfit that posts its physical property without notifying ALL members of its policy, as particularly insidious, they are depending on the ignorance of their members to keep them from quitting due to their, now stated, anti-gun policy (not just anti-CHL.) My statement has its initial basis in the anti-CHL policy, to be sure, but their stated policy goes far beyond that.

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:36 am**

Received this today...

Dear XXXXXXX
Thank you for your recent email inquiry.

USAA is committed to promoting the safety of our employees, visitors, and children on our campuses. To do so, USAA supports public policies that allow employers to establish reasonable policies related to guns on our property, especially given the pressures inherent in any workplace. In this regard, USAA believes we can best promote a safer workplace if weapons are not allowed on USAA property.

We value your business and the opportunity to serve all your financial needs.

Thank you,
Maria Rosado-Wright
USAA

As soon as I can find an alternative, I will be getting my insurance elsewhere.

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:50 am**

"....safety of our employees, visitors, and children on our campuses....

"We choose to put them at risk from those who ignore gun laws rather than protect them with our clients who honor gun laws."

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2011 12:57 am**

I have been with USAA since 1986; I only use them for car insurance and some investment. Their banking, loans and CC have always been sub par to Navy Federal where I do my banking and loans from. I called USAA about 3 months ago to change my home owners Insurance only to find they wanted about $349 a year more then what I was already paying. I really wanted to reward my children who will be off to college next year with their own USAA membership ( they already got them automatically) but I think I will shop around for other car insurance and defiantly a better investment company ( they have always been sub par, IMO). I need to write a letter to let them know.

PS: Navy Federal has the gun buster sign, I wrote them and they said they don’t like guns in there office, Randolph Brooks credit union who I also use, flat out told me CHL is ok. The security guards ask if I would give him a nod when I walk just so he knows, I can do that.

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2011 7:04 am**

Vecco wrote:I have been with USAA since 1986; I only use them for car insurance and some investment. Their banking, loans and CC have always been sub par to Navy Federal where I do my banking and loans from. I called USAA about 3 months ago to change my home owners Insurance only to find they wanted about $349 a year more then what I was already paying. I really wanted to reward my children who will be off to college next year with their own USAA membership ( they already got them automatically) but I think I will shop around for other car insurance and defiantly a better investment company ( they have always been sub par, IMO). I need to write a letter to let them know.

PS: Navy Federal has the gun buster sign, I wrote them and they said they don’t like guns in there office, Randolph Brooks credit union who I also use, flat out told me CHL is ok. The security guards ask if I would give him a nod when I walk just so he knows, I can do that.

I carry past the gunbuster and NFCU in Fort worth every week.

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:05 pm**

tboesche wrote:
I carry past the gunbuster and NFCU in Fort worth every week.

Same here ... been with them for over 20 yrs. Still pay my insurance with USAA, too. Their homeowners policy is a little $$$ but, the policy is so much better that I feel it's worth the price.

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:11 pm**

I've had USAA for 29 years now. They are more expensive, but their service is great. I've had a number of hurricane losses with them. I had check in hand within 72 hours. Also good service on a number of more minor auto claims. I'm willing to pay more for better service...

Posted: **Fri Apr 29, 2011 4:31 pm**

tboesche wrote:
Vecco wrote:I have been with USAA since 1986; I only use them for car insurance and some investment. Their banking, loans and CC have always been sub par to Navy Federal where I do my banking and loans from. I called USAA about 3 months ago to change my home owners Insurance only to find they wanted about $349 a year more then what I was already paying. I really wanted to reward my children who will be off to college next year with their own USAA membership ( they already got them automatically) but I think I will shop around for other car insurance and defiantly a better investment company ( they have always been sub par, IMO). I need to write a letter to let them know.

PS: Navy Federal has the gun buster sign, I wrote them and they said they don’t like guns in there office, Randolph Brooks credit union who I also use, flat out told me CHL is ok. The security guards ask if I would give him a nod when I walk just so he knows, I can do that.

I carry past the gunbuster and NFCU in Fort worth every week.

I do the same when I am inclined to visit that branch. Most everything I can do I do online so my visits are very limited.

I hate USAA policy but since I never have to walk into that branch, I am willing to put up with it for the moment. They had the best auto insurance rate and I was even able to reduce my deductable while raising my coverage in other area's and they still came in unde my former company by a few hundred dollars.

If I had to walk into the main branch and disarm, well that would probably change my mind.

Posted: **Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:03 pm**

USAA is committed to promoting the safety of our employees, visitors, and children on our campuses.

Don't you just love how the libs love to talk about protecting children. Most have no idea how to protect children or anyone else.

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2011 10:02 am**

Katygunnut wrote: When this is done by a UK citizen, as in the case of Jarrods and Kay Jewelers (parent company is based in the UK), it is understandable that they would feel no compulsion to live up to the ideals espoused in America's core founding legal document. Foreigners have a limited moral obligation to respect our ideals and values, and I can give them somewhat of a pass for doing anything they want within relevant laws, without regard to the higher principles embodied in the Constitution.

I agree, as long as they're not doing business in the US. If they want to do business here then they need to respect our ideals and values. Otherwise, they're free to conduct their business in Iraq or Afghanistan, where I suspect they are actually more inclined to respect the local values --or so it seems based on the widespread concern the socialist west countries like the UK seem to have for respecting Muslim values.

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2011 10:08 am**

txbirddog wrote:
USAA is committed to promoting the safety of our employees, visitors, and children on our campuses.
Don't you just love how the libs love to talk about protecting children. Most have no idea how to protect children or anyone else.

Don't dare question my or other "liberals" ability to protect anyone. I see that comment as a huge slap in the face.

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2011 10:23 am**

I try to ignore generalizations. I wouldn't consider it a huge "slap in the face". On this board, I am considered a Liberal.

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2011 10:27 am**

loadedliberal wrote:
txbirddog wrote:
USAA is committed to promoting the safety of our employees, visitors, and children on our campuses.
Don't you just love how the libs love to talk about protecting children. Most have no idea how to protect children or anyone else.

Don't dare question my or other "liberals" ability to protect anyone. I see that comment as a huge slap in the face.

Thank you, Sir. The attitude expressed by the poster you quote is precisely the reason many (most?) of the general public consider "gun nuts" to be irresponsible right wing Bubba "gun nuts," and I am not in that crowd, although I am accused of it when I argue in favor of the Second Amendment. I am proud to think of myself as a Liberal with a capital "L," and I have fought long and hard in support of all our constitutional rights -- all of them. I am a member of both the NRA and the ACLU, but comments like the above cannot but cause me to seriously reconsider the former. Thankfully, when I turn to the NRA, itself, looking for where attitudes like this spring, I tend to see adult, thinking, and rational opinions, and little of what I would consider unhelpful.

Posts like the above, in my not-so-humble-opinion, spread around the world via the internet, cause me intense frustration, and I consider them harmful to my cause -- as well as personally insulting, as you do.

Elmo

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2011 3:45 pm**

I have an idea for all of us USAA members, we can try to find out who on the board thought this was a good idea and supports gun control and Vote them off.

Posted: **Mon May 02, 2011 4:41 pm**

That is an excellent suggestion. In the past I've just checked the box to accept the nominated individuals...out of a trust that the folks making the decisions were making good ones. This thread has made me question that greatly. I've only been a USAA member for 12 years, via my Dad's service first then my own, but I am very surprised and disheartened knowing I was wrong about their corporate culture and governance.

TexasCHLforum.com

USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06

Re: USAA and 30.06