Corporations can be better influenced by the public than governments.

That's only because the corporations are the government, and thus when you mess with the government nothing gets done as there is a filter, a proxy, an excuse, for it not to be done.
In regards to regulations, I thought you were talking about as a goal. Are you genuinely advocating for us to not regulate banks whatsoever? To simply let them burn everybody's money and do their nasty artificial money-creating scheme between each other?
Sorry but the market is them, things will just crash and burn.

Minorities could be easily abused this way.

And in other communities the'd accept minorities no issue and such oppressive communities would likely be economically suffocated.

it's another thing if they go after a mom&pop business that got rich from some good innovation.

If someone innovated and provided value they likely aren't to be killed or their things damaged.
If all they did was enslave others and trade magical non-existent spooks called stocks, then they didn't provide value but merely stole it, so it'll probably be re-possessed.

It's not who I think is immoral, it's who violated the NAP by definition.

At least they should get an open and free trial

And what would happen there?
"Did you or did you not trade stocks and bonds?"
"Did you or did you not pay thousands of workers no more than the minimum for them to live while making millions of dollars off their labor with threat of death if they didn't comply?"
There's no purpose in that, and as I said nobody would be particularly lynched unless they provided resistance. If someone steals your property and when you try to retrieve it they again commit violence you're authorized to kill them if need be by the NAP if your in danger.