3 ms·

I’ve been reading what you linked and I see nowhere that the all the same legal rights of PEOPLE were applied to corporations for millennia. Not sure if you act

I’ve been reading what you linked and I see nowhere that the all the same legal rights of PEOPLE were applied to corporations for millennia. Not sure if you actually found that either? Either way, I’m arguing that it is an unintuitive idea in light of the fact that the Bill of Rights was written with people in mind as the recipients of those rights, and not corporations. If Google suddenly invoked their “right” to bear arms and form well regulated militias, we wouldn’t be swirling our oat milk saying “well they have the right”. I’m arguing they shouldn’t

throw0101c 4y ago
> I’ve been reading what you linked and I see nowhere that the all the same legal rights of PEOPLE were applied to corporations for millennia. Not sure if you actually found that either? Ability to partake in contracts, due process of law, have internal rules of conduct (like having a conscience). Are these not rights that both both 'types of persons' have? > There are therefore two kinds of legal entities: human and non-human. In law, a human person is called a natural person (sometimes also a physical person), and a non-human person is called a juridical person (sometimes also a juridic, juristic, artificial, legal, or fictitious person, Latin: persona ficta). * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juridical_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juridical_person IANAL.
- throwoutway 4y ago
  Ya that doesn’t say they had the ALL the same rights as people. You’re actually proving my point that they’re different by people and got a different definition with different interpretations, NOT the same
  - ChadNauseam 4y ago
    Corporations are not the same as people in the US and there are many rights that people have that corporations don’t. They are legal persons in the sense that they can sign contracts and have the right to a fair trial and have a right to free speech.
Volundr 4y ago
Private militias already exist in the US and are legal. There is absolutely nothing stopping google from forming one. Should they? No. Would it be completely legal to do so? Yes.

throw0101c 4y ago

> I’ve been reading what you linked and I see nowhere that the all the same legal rights of PEOPLE were applied to corporations for millennia. Not sure if you actually found that either? Ability to partake in contracts, due process of law, have internal rules of conduct (like having a conscience). Are these not rights that both both 'types of persons' have? > There are therefore two kinds of legal entities: human and non-human. In law, a human person is called a natural person (sometimes also a physical person), and a non-human person is called a juridical person (sometimes also a juridic, juristic, artificial, legal, or fictitious person, Latin: persona ficta). * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juridical_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juridical_person IANAL.

throwoutway 4y ago
Ya that doesn’t say they had the ALL the same rights as people. You’re actually proving my point that they’re different by people and got a different definition with different interpretations, NOT the same
- ChadNauseam 4y ago
  Corporations are not the same as people in the US and there are many rights that people have that corporations don’t. They are legal persons in the sense that they can sign contracts and have the right to a fair trial and have a right to free speech.

Volundr 4y ago

Private militias already exist in the US and are legal. There is absolutely nothing stopping google from forming one. Should they? No. Would it be completely legal to do so? Yes.