I would tend to draw the line at controlling what "corporations" are allowed to do.
There is no natural right to form a corporation. Such legal entitities are entirely the creation of man and their legal positions are entirely subject to legislative definition.
There are distinct economic advantages to being able to form corporations and there is a price to pay in additional taxation for the legal privilege of forming a corporation.
I would modify corporate law to specify that the Constitutionally-protected, individual right to keep and bear arms will not be infringed by any corporation. Any corporation unwilling to abide by this legal requirement will simply have to be taken private and lose its legislatively enacted "limited liability".
Private enterprises would quickly decide that there is no competitive advantage, but rather a competitive disadvantage, to infringing the right to keep and bear arms of its customers.
I am disgusted by the attitude of anti-gun liberals that it is permissible to dictate practically any behavior whatever of a business, but then suggest that "private property" is somehow sacrosanct with regard to the right to keep and bear arms.
The anti-gunners want businesses to bar weapons because they believe that weapons are unsafe, not because they believe that businesses should have the right to decide for themselves.
Didn't Oklahoma include a liability exemption for businesses with regard to employee-owned guns?
However, there is a Constitutional right for the private ownership of property. Under current law, a publicly traded company still retains all rights of ownership just as if a citizen owned the property in question. Be it land, buildings, vehicles, or patents.
If the State can take from a company the free exercise of the rights of ownership of property, and forcing a company or a private citizen to give up their property rights if favor of someone else’s rights .... say their right to speech is not acceptable to me.
Consider this scenario. A person, without your permission, walks onto your property (away from the public sidewalk or public access entrance), say into your lawn and puts up a Hilary Clinton for President sign.
Yes that person has the right to free speech but they do not have the right to use your property to exercise their free speech.