TexasCHLforum.com

I recently received notice from Texas3006.com that the USAA main campus in San Antonio was posted with both 3006 and 3007 signs. I sent the attached letter to the CEO requesting his reevaluation of this policy. I received a phone call from that office this morning. I got the "will review" answer but was at least pleased to get such a prompt response. Perhaps if more USAA members would voice similar concerns, we could get this policy amended. Interestingly, his representative said that the satellite financial centers are not posted. I confirmed this yesterday at the location I visit on 1604.

Feel free to reiterate the points in my letter but I believe it will have better effect if it is reworded. Otherwise, it would look like a form letter which tend to be placed in "File 13".

I may be mistaken, but I believe USAA posted 30.06 signs at their campus long before open carry passed. I have been a member for 50 years, but I live a long way from SA.

USAA has been anti-2A for a long time. This is the reason I don't do any business with them. I am currently looking to switch from State Farm for insurance on 2 houses and 3 vehicles, and am not even looking at USAA.

I would be elated if they changed their current anti-freedom stance.

My insurance agency is extremely pro-2nd Amendment and encourages people to carry.

mojo84 wrote:My insurance agency is extremely pro-2nd Amendment and encourages people to carry.

And who are they?

This is extremely disappointing. I had no idea up till this morning of their apparent stance on the issue...

suthdj wrote:

mojo84 wrote:My insurance agency is extremely pro-2nd Amendment and encourages people to carry.

And who are they?

PM sent.

TexasJohnBoy wrote:This is extremely disappointing. I had no idea up till this morning of their apparent stance on the issue...

They've had the signs up since 1997 and were opposed to the parking lot law as I recall. I've used them for 28 years and for a mutual insurance company they have very good rates and their banking services are good too. But like a lot of organizations heavily populated by ex-military, they tend to have an authoritarian view on things. I say this as a former military officer and I've noted this point of view since I served in the late 80's.

You have been in the military and swear to uphold the constitution. Hard to believe that this is their stance but it has been for a long time..

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=35988

I have been a member for 40 years and have never been into any of their buildings. Obviously they are not going to change with any letters. Not very logical.

rotor wrote:You have been in the military and swear to uphold the constitution. Hard to believe that this is their stance but it has been for a long time..

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=35988

I have been a member for 40 years and have never been into any of their buildings. Obviously they are not going to change with any letters. Not very logical.

I'm interested in knowing how many of those that were so dismayed and upset at USAA in that old thread are still compromising their 2nd Amendment principles by still doing business with them. Did any of them actually stand on principle and move their business away since they found out USAA's stance on concealed carry, specifically, those that take such a hard line stance with other businesses?

mojo84 wrote:

rotor wrote:You have been in the military and swear to uphold the constitution. Hard to believe that this is their stance but it has been for a long time..

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=35988

I have been a member for 40 years and have never been into any of their buildings. Obviously they are not going to change with any letters. Not very logical.

I'm interested in knowing how many of those that were so dismayed and upset at USAA in that old thread are still compromising their 2nd Amendment principles by still doing business with them. Did any of them actually stand on principle and move their business away since they found out USAA's stance on concealed carry, specifically, those that take such a hard line stance with other businesses?

That's an interesting question. The first I heard about their stance was today but found the reference of the old post on Google. The problem is that USAA is such a good insurance company and I have so much invested in them with their USAA subscriber accounts and life, home, auto and Medicare supplements I can't walk away. So, it's like the old saying, its not will you be a *****, it's how much?

Because USAA is a mutual insurance company, the policyholders/members are the owners of the company. I suppose if we really wanted to make a point we could put a proposal up for the annual meeting. Members used to be restricted to current and former commissioned officers in the Armed Forces and their families. Now they've opened it up to anyone that served or is serving & families. Regardless, I doubt we'll have much success changing their minds. If I boycotted purchasing from or owning every company whose politics I disagreed with, I'd be naked living in the street...

ScottDLS wrote:Because USAA is a mutual insurance company, the policyholders/members are the owners of the company. I suppose if we really wanted to make a point we could put a proposal up for the annual meeting. Members used to be restricted to current and former commissioned officers in the Armed Forces and their families. Now they've opened it up to anyone that served or is serving & families. Regardless, I doubt we'll have much success changing their minds. If I boycotted purchasing from or owning every company whose politics I disagreed with, I'd be naked living in the street...

I've never even bothered looking at USAA given their anti-freedom stance. But are they really that much cheaper, and/or is their customer service really that much better, than the other insurance companies out there?

Yes, we have to compromise sometimes, but only when the benefits are compelling enough to be worth the negatives.

mojo84 wrote:

rotor wrote:You have been in the military and swear to uphold the constitution. Hard to believe that this is their stance but it has been for a long time..

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=35988

I have been a member for 40 years and have never been into any of their buildings. Obviously they are not going to change with any letters. Not very logical.

I'm interested in knowing how many of those that were so dismayed and upset at USAA in that old thread are still compromising their 2nd Amendment principles by still doing business with them. Did any of them actually stand on principle and move their business away since they found out USAA's stance on concealed carry, specifically, those that take such a hard line stance with other businesses?

I myself dropped them about two years ago for two reasons - but this was one of them. I felt my expressing concern about pretty much any issues with them fell on deaf ears, so I dropped them and told them exactly why.

USAA has been the most valuable benefit I received from military service, except of course the thanks of a grateful nation which is tendered to your widow as the officer hands her the flag removed from your coffin.

I think I have SAVED more in auto and home insurance premium costs in the last nearly 50 years than I MADE the entire time I was in the military, 19 years as a reservist. Earlier this year, I received checks for my share of the distributable dividends declared from last year that totalled MORE than the cost of insuring all our cars. Moreover, the service I have always received has been excellent on every occasion, and occasionally supurb.

I frankly am more bothered by their idiotic voice mail system than the weapons policy. This may be due to the circumstance that I have always called for service and have never actually been in a USAA office other than an auto claim office in San Diego where the delicacy of carrying is mostly moot.

When I see businesses displaying 30.06 signs, it tells me that management is irrational and superstitious, given the undeniable fact that signs only deter the law abiding who pose no threat whatever. USAA needs to work through that.