Bill Aims To Allow Concealed Carry In Workplace Parking Lots

[Hoopla Phil]

"House Bill 571 is a fair, viable effort to protect employees in the state of Ohio. When enacted, it will prevent employees from unjust discrimination or termination simply for exercising their second amendment rights," Uecker said.

"This is going to protect people with their self-defense," said Linda Walker. "Right now, they've effectively been disarmed by their employer, so now this will give them the option of being able to at least protect themselves," she said.

http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2010/aug/27/bill-aims-allow-concealed-carry-work-parking-lots-ar-211578/

I'm glad to see this being done. This as a clash of property rights. Some companies claim to have the authority to say what people can and can not have in their cars if the car is parked in company property. B.S. I don't see how any person can tell someone what legal personal property they can keep in their own car.

[katandmoon]

1. Why not if their car is parked on COMPANY property?

Chickenshit dumbasses can't even go to WORK without their guns?

[Hoopla Phil]

2. Because the companies property rights do not extend into the car.

And the name calling begins in the first post. Why?

[virginia mountainman]

4. Because..

That is all they have anymore...

The facts don't support them.

The people don't support them.

Most of the congress and senate no longer support them.

The VOTERS despise their views.


They have been abandoned, and name calling is all they have left....Well, that and a few worn-out Republicans..

[divideandconquer]

13. The fact that Europe, Australia, New Zealand have less guns and better outcomes

Welcome to America, the world's greatest third world country. Hey, we're just one supreme court justice away from being civilized on gun issues!

[virginia mountainman]

17. You are free to go thier anytime..

Not really it is now what you call "settled law"....

[divideandconquer]

27. The Supreme Court decides if it is "settled law"

New Supreme Court means new "settled law". BTW, you mean "there" and not "thier".

I wished I could afford to move a better country.

[Hoopla Phil]

31. It's called stare decisis. It is also why the Slaughterhouse decision was

allowed to stand in the McDonald decision. That, IMO, is the worst standing case law we have in this country.

[Hoopla Phil]

30. Could you please define how you define "third world country"? I'm not sure how the

forward thinking progressive views on the right to keep and bear arms qualifies. As I remember my history the US Constitution was derived from a number of theories of governing that ran contrary to the popular thinking of the time. John Lock comes to mind.

[Euromutt]

37. "Any country with a homicide rate equal to or higher than the United States'

Regardless of other circumstances, and regardless of what the United States' homicide rate is at any given moment.

For example, according to d&c, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are "third world countries" (even though they've been members of the European Union for six years) because their homicide rates are higher than that of the U.S. (in spite of having stricter gun control laws).

[onehandle]

18. Because the companies property rights do not extend into the pants.

So I will be showing up at work with my pants full of C-4.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hoopla Phil]

32. Is that really the best you can do? We are discussing property rights and the right

to self defense and you go off talking about stuffing Compound Four down your pants? There is a reason why the anti's are loosing the right to bear arms argument - this only epitomizes it.

[SteveM]

34. Your "pants full of C-4?" Here I thought it was something else. nt

[oneshooter]

38. C-4 is a heavily controlled explosive, without the proper permits

you would be in violation of Federal law by merely possessing it, at any amount.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[one-eyed fat man]

40. Great idea!!!!!!!

Not very original, but do go ahead. Say "Hi" to the 47 virgins when you're done.

[Euromutt]

42. You're right; employers should not be hampered from arbitrarily strip-searching employees!

Better let them arbitrarily have corporate security search the employees' houses as well. You never know whether one of them might be doing something objectionable. Let's let them reinstate corporate scrip and company stores while we're at it. After all, "FREEDOM IS SLAVERY."

[DongHa69]

3. Now now

calling people names gets you nowhere. Try to be a little civil.
Just say-Aummmmm

[benEzra]

6. Because the interior of your car is NOT company property.

The police can't fish through your trunk just because you choose to drive on a public road, either, nor can a restaurant owner or a Walmart greeter demand to see the contents of your glove compartment.

FWIW, this whole issue got started when Weyerhauser did a sweep of a public lot on the first day of hunting season, and summarily fired anyone who was set up to go hunting after work or who refused consent for a blanket search of their car. If the gun prohibitionists don't like legislation protecting gun-owner privacy, maybe they shouldn't have goaded multinational corporations into that type of egregious behavior.

[pipoman]

8. So your employer should be allowed to limit

what CDs are in your car? Or books/news papers? What other legal items should your employer be able to control in your car?

[Euromutt]

24. Or what bumper stickers you have on your car?

Once again, the animosity towards corporations that is so widespread on this site evaporates the moment the corporation wants to restrict firearms, even legally owned ones.

[PavePusher]

28. Hypocracy must be nutritious...

It seems to be a dietary staple for all too many people here.

[proteus_lives]

9. There she is. Old reliable.

[PavePusher]

14. Are you volunteering to provide work-place security?

I'll bet a month's salary that you won't.

[pipoman]

5. I believe most companies welcome this legislation..

I think many companies ban guns on company property, even if they are in cars, to avoid any chance of civil liability, not because they really care what are in people's car. By making it unlawful for employers to disallow guns in cars on company property, it relieves them of civil liability based solely on a rogue employee using a gun at the work place.

[hack89]

20. Of course corporations would love the opportunity to violate your privacy

the issue here is can the company fire you if you refuse to let them search your car whenever they wanted to. Because how will they know if you have a gun in your car without a coerced search?

[X_Digger]

7. I'm ambivalent on this one.

I've worked in places where parking off-site is not possible (mining) but at the same time, I have respect for a company's ability to set restrictions on their property.

Ultimately, I fall on the side of the individual employee. Businesses are already limited in their control of their property- ADA, CRA II, EEOC, OSHA, MSHA, FDA, etc.

I doubt that those who are against this would say that a business shouldn't have to have a handicapped bathroom, or should be able to set whatever working conditions they'd like.

[pipoman]

10. Exactly

for states to pass these laws drawing a line making a person's property rights in their car equivalent to their home, it is a win for individual rights. Additionally, every business in every state is subject to many rules and laws which dictate the use of their property rights as you pointed out in your post.

[PavePusher]

15. If the company were to guarantee a workers security from the moment they left home...

until the moment they re-entered their house at the end of the day, including any and all stops along the way, then it would be acceptable to restrict the persons' ability to provide for their own defense.

Since they won't and can't, screw the .Corp., individuals have rights.

[old mark]

11. Good. It is none of anyone's business what I have in my car, which is MY PROPERTY

and should not be searched without either my permission or a warrant.

Company parking lot or not.

mark

[safeinOhio]

16. Same for lunch boxes.

Who's business is it what I take in or take out.

[mvccd1000]

23. As long as you're not taking their property, that's true.

They don't get to tell you if you can bring peanut butter and jelly but not bologna.

Similarly, if they give you permission to park your car on their property, they should have to allow all legal contents of that car.

[oneshooter]

21. Many company's, if not all, have you sign off on the company

health and safety policy's. This paper also includes your permission to search your vehicle at any time. If you do not sign, you ain't hired. If you refuse a search, you are no longer employed.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Euromutt]

25. I'd call that an agreement entered into under duress

Nadine Strossen, former president of the ACLU, put it rather well in my opinion in a 1994 interview with Reason magazine (http://reason.com/archives/1994/10/01/life-liberty-and-the-aclu/1):

Our view is that there are certain fundamental individual rights which may not be intruded upon or violated. When our Constitution was written, the state was the only entity in society that had sufficient power to deprive individuals of fundamental rights. Now we have corporate concerns with far more power over people's lives than the state ever had in the 18th century. The market-liberal response is that if the individual doesn't like what their employer is doing--for example, saying that you cannot smoke at your home--then the individual goes off and gets another job. Our view is that's unrealistic.

And if people are not going to have fundamental freedoms at work, then they are not going to have them for all practical purposes, because that's where they're spending the vast majority of their time.

An important principle in humanitarian law--which is expressed explicitly in a number of international agreements including the Geneva Conventions--is that you cannot sign away your rights, not even voluntarily. When the whole point of rights is that they are inalienable, it means you can't not have them. It also heads of any attempt by violators to insulate themselves against prosecution by coercing their victims to sign document in which they purportedly accede to the removal of their rights.

[DonP]

39. Same issue as with "Non compete" agreements

Once upon a time, in a galaxy far far away, I worked for a very large corporation.

We had a person in my department go to a direct competitor with, what we assumed were, customer and detailed product information.

They tried to enforce the non-compete agreement we were all required to sign on hiring.

The outside law firm they retained explained to me that no true, enforcable contract can exist in a "non compete", "health and safety" or any other area unless "something of value" is offered in return for the agreement or if the agreement is forced upon the signer.

And accepting a job is not the "value" they require. You accept the job in return for the salary/wages you are paid.

The non-compete, or "health and safety" agreement are separate contracts and therefore require a separate form of compensation to be valid.

[spin]

12. Florida has had a "take your gun to work" law since 2008...

you do need a concealed carry permit to legally be allowed to leave your firearm in your car in your employer's parking lot. Some industries are exempt.

There has been no real problems with the law so far.

Actually, Florida allowed employees to carry firearms in their cars to work for years before the new law was passed. Some of the groups that oppose RKBA pointed out to employers that if they didn't have a policy against allowing firearms in their parking lot, they might be liable if a workplace shooting occurred. Many employers decided to adopt such rules which led to the new law.

The new law was stricter as it included the requirement to have a concealed carry permit.

[S_B_Jackson]

22. The key would seem to be whether the lot is public or private....

if the lot is not enclosed, and is available to the public to park in, then the employer cannot prohibit guns in their employee's vehicles. If the lot is enclosed, and only available to the employees, then they may.

The company doesn't get to have it both ways, though.

[spin]

26. The problem is that the employees have to drive to and from work ...

and if the employer is allowed to ban firearms in his parking lot and alternative parking is not available, the employees are unarmed while traveling to and from the workplace.

I lived in Tampa and worked the graveyard shift. Over the years, my neighborhood had deteriorated and was far more dangerous than when I first moved there. While I wasn't afraid or paranoid, I carried a firearm in my car and also obtained a concealed weapons permit. Fortunately, I never had to use my weapon in self defense. The possibility that I might have to was very slim, but it existed. Some people prefer to be prepared, others are "risk takers".

I didn't take a firearm to work because I felt ANY need for a weapon while working. We had a security force who, while unarmed, were fairly competent. (Strangely, the Sargent of the Guard knew I had a firearm in my vehicle, as he had sold me it. He often said that if the shit hit the fan, he would borrow it. I would reply that I had no problem with that, but I came attached to the weapon.)

[S_B_Jackson]

29. I do understand and am sympathetic to that problem...

my comments were directed to whether an employer can impede on the right to keep a firearm in your (presumably) locked vehicle. They certainly cannot restrict the general public, and thus if their lot is open to the public, then they cannot prohibit their employees from having them. If, however, the employer has a secured, fenced lot available only to its employees, then whether you or I like it or not, then it seems that they can.

My employer does have a rule about firearms in the workplace, is aware that I have a carry permit, and that I likely have it in my vehicle on any particular day. Every couple of weeks, I take lunch at the range to engage in a little "destructive stress relief" and more often than not, our CFO is part of the group as well. :D

[Hoopla Phil]

33. Does that mean they can ban my "Hope and Change" bumper sticker too?

How about other bumper stickers. . .
Abortion is a choice.
Support the NRA.
Bush lied, people died.

etc, etc.

On edit: Heaven forbid I should leave a Koran on my passenger seat.

[RamboLiberal]

36. Funny thing is we have read stories of people who got fired

for their poliical stickers at work. It has happened in this highly-charged political climate. I remember reading these stories here on DU during the presidential campaigns.

[Hoopla Phil]

41. I could see that happening. I've never put any political stickers on

my vehicles because people that did were having their cars vandalized. Very sad.

[Endangered Specie]

35. What would be best is a "can't search your car w/o a warrant/police" type law