GTAVercetti 0 #51 October 4, 2005 QuoteQuotewhat good does a gun in your car do at work? That's not the issue. The problem is that many states allow citizens to keep a self defense gun in their cars, either with or even without a special gun carry license. So the issue is that these companies are making it impossible for the citizens to exercise this right. If you can't have a gun in your car at work, then you also can't have the gun with you while driving to and from work. All gun owners want to be able to do is to have their self defense gun in their car for their commute. And private companies shouldn't be able to override state law in this specific regard, because their policy has an effect that reaches beyond their own property line. Ill effect or not, the company has the right to ban something from occuring on ITS property. It does not matter it that choice affects the right to carry before they get there. They are no saying you cannot carry up to the get. They are just saying that you cannot carry onto the grounds. I think gun owners should just suck it up and deal with it. PRIVATE properties should be able to retain PRIVATE rules. I like guns. I like to shoot them, but people get absolutely RIDICULOUS with the right to carry. If a company has a no gun policy, and you don't like it... QUIT.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #52 October 4, 2005 QuoteQuotewhat good does a gun in your car do at work? That's not the issue. The problem is that many states allow citizens to keep a self defense gun in their cars, either with or even without a special gun carry license. So the issue is that these companies are making it impossible for the citizens to exercise this right. If you can't have a gun in your car at work, then you also can't have the gun with you while driving to and from work. All gun owners want to be able to do is to have their self defense gun in their car for their commute. And private companies shouldn't be able to override state law in this specific regard, because their policy has an effect that reaches beyond their own property line. It would be the same thing if a company with a no-smoking policy banned employees from having a pack of cigarettes in their car. The cigs in the car have no ill effect on the employer or his premises, and they therefore shouldn't concern themselves with it if an employee simply wants to enjoy a smoke on his ride home. Should companies also be permitted to search private vehicles for the presence of cigarettes? If they don't like company policy they are free to look elsewhere for employment.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfc 1 #53 October 4, 2005 QuoteThat's not the issue. The problem is that many states allow citizens to keep a self defense gun in their cars, either with or even without a special gun carry license. So the issue is that these companies are making it impossible for the citizens to exercise this right. If you can't have a gun in your car at work, then you also can't have the gun with you while driving to and from work. All gun owners want to be able to do is to have their self defense gun in their car for their commute. And private companies shouldn't be able to override state law in this specific regard, because their policy has an effect that reaches beyond their own property line. It would be the same thing if a company with a no-smoking policy banned employees from having a pack of cigarettes in their car. The cigs in the car have no ill effect on the employer or his premises, and they therefore shouldn't concern themselves with it if an employee simply wants to enjoy a smoke on his ride home. So park in the street, or exercise your right to work in a company that does allow gun in the parking lot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #54 October 4, 2005 Quote>Should companies also be permitted to search private vehicles for >the presence of cigarettes? If the employee agrees to such searches, and there is a 'no tobacco in the parking lot' policy - then yes, they should. That's a highly qualified "yes". Now how about this question for all you naysayers: Don't you think such an action by an employer would be really stupid? Also for the naysayers: I'll bet you would change your tune if it was your ox being gored... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #55 October 4, 2005 QuotePRIVATE properties should be able to retain PRIVATE rules. Consider this. What is the purpose of such a company rule? Presumably, they're worried about people shooting off their guns in the parking lot, causing the company to be sued. But all over America, there are already people with guns in their cars, and you never hear of any company parking lot shootouts. So this is really just the company acting out of fear to protect themself in the event of some lawsuit. If there is some kind of injurious gun discharge, the company can just say; "Hey, we told 'em not to bring their guns to work - don't blame us!" But anyone intent on purposefully shooting another, is not going to give a damn about a minor company rule. Such a rule won't stop things like murder, aggravated assault or armed robbery. But such a rule will certainly provide a defenseless victim-rich environment for these criminals. So, when a woman with a concealed handgun license is raped in the company parking lot at night, because she was unable to defend herself due to obeying the company gun-ban policy, I hope she sues the ass off the company for forcing her to be a helpless victim. I guess the company doesn't care as much about their employees becoming violent crime victims. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #56 October 4, 2005 No, the purpose is the same for which many states have waiting periods. The fear that angry employees will run to their car, come back with their convenient weapon, and use it. Frankly I think that fired disgruntled employees will start angry long enough to be a threat long after they drive home, but that's the crux of it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #57 October 4, 2005 QuoteQuotePRIVATE properties should be able to retain PRIVATE rules. Consider this. What is the purpose of such a company rule? Presumably, they're worried about people shooting off their guns in the parking lot, causing the company to be sued. But all over America, there are already people with guns in their cars, and you never hear of any company parking lot shootouts. So this is really just the company acting out of fear to protect themself in the event of some lawsuit. If there is some kind of injurious gun discharge, the company can just say; "Hey, we told 'em not to bring their guns to work - don't blame us!" But anyone intent on purposefully shooting another, is not going to give a damn about a minor company rule. Such a rule won't stop things like murder, aggravated assault or armed robbery. But such a rule will certainly provide a defenseless victim-rich environment for these criminals. So, when a woman with a concealed handgun license is raped in the company parking lot at night, because she was unable to defend herself due to obeying the company gun-ban policy, I hope she sues the ass off the company for forcing her to be a helpless victim. I guess the company doesn't care as much about their employees becoming violent crime victims. I work in a pretty bad area of town. Guns are not allowed on our property. I walk to the metro everyday, yet we have had no incidents in many years of employees being attacked or assaulted. The need for handguns in the car or on the person for protection is highly overrated and blown out of proportion by gun lobbyists and activists. They serve the same purpose as the media does in creating a climate of fear in this country. Our country is REALLY not as dangerous as people try to make it. But that is all beside the point. I believe in the right to own guns and I don't care to get into a debate over gun use and the history of guns in our country. I don't care what the reason is for a company's decision. The point is that it is their decision.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #58 October 5, 2005 QuoteSo park in the street, or exercise your right to work in a company that does allow gun in the parking lot. Would you feel the same if the company said that you can't skydive on your own time?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #59 October 5, 2005 QuoteQuoteSo park in the street, or exercise your right to work in a company that does allow gun in the parking lot. Would you feel the same if the company said that you can't skydive on your own time? I am QUITE certain that I am not allowed to skydive into the parking lot where I work.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #60 October 5, 2005 Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So park in the street, or exercise your right to work in a company that does allow gun in the parking lot. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you feel the same if the company said that you can't skydive on your own time? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am QUITE certain that I am not allowed to skydive into the parking lot where I work. Answer the question, not dodge it. Would you feel the same way if your company said you could not skydive if you wanted to work there?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #61 October 5, 2005 QuoteQuote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So park in the street, or exercise your right to work in a company that does allow gun in the parking lot. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you feel the same if the company said that you can't skydive on your own time? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am QUITE certain that I am not allowed to skydive into the parking lot where I work. Answer the question, not dodge it. Would you feel the same way if your company said you could not skydive if you wanted to work there? You have a funny idea of dodging. The idea is this. Company says: you cannot have a gun on our property That means I cannot carry and gun there but has NO effect on my ability to carry at my home, in the woods or off the property granting I have the proper permits. Now, implicitly, if you choose to follow the rules, then yes, you probably do not want to keep the gun in the car on the way there, but they are not making that direct rule. You posed the question: What if they made a rule that says you cannot skydive OUTSIDE of work? That is a DIRECT rule about it, not something implicit. just like they have not made a direct rule about skydiving outside of work, they have not made a direct rule about guns outside of work. They are making rules about THEIR property and how I act while there, not elsewhere. It is a DIRECT corollary. My company says I cannot skydive into work and I cannot have a gun there. They made NO rule about me skydiving outside the fence or carrying a gun to just outside either. I am sorry that eluded you. If they said, "owning and using a gun is strictly prohibited by our employees at ANY TIME" then I would take issue.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #62 October 5, 2005 If a company wanted me to quit skydiving on the weekends because they are concerned about my safety (since I'm a valuable asset they invested a ton of effort in) - they can certainly ask. I suspect they can even make it a condition of my employment. No matter how nuts I think that policy is. At that point, I go somewhere else. (no hard feelings - well, actually very hard feelings, but I think they have the right to do that. They also have the right to get the reputation as a crappy employer and eventually go out of business for sticking their nose outside their property. But, then again, I think a company can choose to only hire non-smokers if they wish.) I don't know if it's illegal for a company to do that or not. I suspect if they were bad enough about positions like that, they'd go out of business with or without the law. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #63 October 5, 2005 QuoteQuoteSo park in the street, or exercise your right to work in a company that does allow gun in the parking lot. Would you feel the same if the company said that you can't skydive on your own time? Apples and lemons. The issue is what you do on company time on company property, not what you do on your own time off company property.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #64 October 5, 2005 Quote If a company wanted me to quit skydiving on the weekends ... I had a person on one of my teams along time ago that was an investment banker here in NYC. The investment bank told her to stop jumping. She ignored them. They ignored her ignoring them. We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #65 October 5, 2005 QuoteIf a company wanted me to quit skydiving on the weekends because they are concerned about my safety (since I'm a valuable asset they invested a ton of effort in) - they can certainly ask. I suspect they can even make it a condition of my employment. No matter how nuts I think that policy is. At that point, I go somewhere else. (no hard feelings - well, actually very hard feelings, but I think they have the right to do that. They also have the right to get the reputation as a crappy employer and eventually go out of business for sticking their nose outside their property. But, then again, I think a company can choose to only hire non-smokers if they wish.) I don't know if it's illegal for a company to do that or not. I suspect if they were bad enough about positions like that, they'd go out of business with or without the law. Exactly. I have said it over and over again: You don't like company policy? Either talk to management and get it changed or quit. And I also agree, a business with the attitude of not allowing sports OUTSIDE of its property will not last long. But they ARE allowed to exist.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #66 October 5, 2005 QuoteApples and lemons. The issue is what you do on company time on company property, not what you do on your own time off company property And one is a right given in the Constitution, and the other is not protected. I find it funny that Liberals fight like hell to defend all the Amendments but the 2nd."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #67 October 5, 2005 >And one is a right given in the Constitution . . . Nope. Read the amendment closely. The constitution does not guarantee you the right to carry a gun. It is a statement that the GOVERNMENT will not infringe on your right to carry a gun. A company is not the government, nor is a private citizen. Your DZO could have a "no weapons on the DZ" policy just as he could have a "no political speeches on the DZ" policy, "no alcohol on the DZ" policy or a "no 3:1 loadings on the DZ" policy. He could even have a policy that states you can be searched for beer before a load! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #68 October 5, 2005 QuoteQuoteApples and lemons. The issue is what you do on company time on company property, not what you do on your own time off company property And one is a right given in the Constitution, and the other is not protected. I find it funny that Liberals fight like hell to defend all the Amendments but the 2nd. In no way did I say that you cannot have a gun. But you choose to work at a company you abide its rules. Just like the free speech rule. Can you say shit about your boss and disparage your company at work? Doubt it. There goes the 1st too. And liberal? Yeah, I am liberal, but if you think that means democrat, you are wrong. Liberal means I have the right to do what I want and so does a business. If I choose to work for said business, what I want is now trumped by the agreement I made with the company. If I don't like it, I am free to leave. I am NOT against guns. I am for following the rules of a company I CHOSE to work at. Oh and funny how you use skydiving as an example of similar reasoning, but when we call you on the fact that your analogy was not in corrolation with the topic (guns on business property), you dismiss YOUR OWN EXAMPLE. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #69 October 5, 2005 QuoteQuoteApples and lemons. The issue is what you do on company time on company property, not what you do on your own time off company property And one is a right given in the Constitution, and the other is not protected. Rights extend as far as they can until they interefere with the rights of others. With a certain SC decision notwithstanding, property rights are pretty far up there. Your 2nd Amendment rights don't trump them, not for a private company. They have the right to be scared of inanimate objects on their own premises, and even to reduce the safety of their employees. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #70 October 6, 2005 QuoteNope. Read the amendment closely. The constitution does not guarantee you the right to carry a gun. It is a statement that the GOVERNMENT will not infringe on your right to carry a gun. Read it yourself QuoteAmendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. It says "shall not be infringed" it does not say "shall not be infringed by the government.""No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #71 October 6, 2005 >It says "shall not be infringed" it does not say "shall not be infringed >by the government." The constitution delineates the powers of the government. It does not apply to private persons or companies. You are not required to allow people to peaceably assemble in your bedroom to complain about something, for example. And if a transportation company refuses to let you carry your gun on their airplane or ship - you're not carrying it, period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #72 October 6, 2005 QuoteRights extend as far as they can until they interefere with the rights of others. So, the Constitution only applies in certain situations? I guess an apartment complex could outlaw guns, or maybe a home owners association? Would you be OK with that?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #73 October 6, 2005 QuoteThe constitution delineates the powers of the government. Wrong the bill of rights says what rights the people have."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #74 October 6, 2005 >Wrong the bill of rights says what rights the people have. So can I come into your bedroom and list my grievances with the senate? I got that right; says so right there in the First Amendment! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #75 October 6, 2005 QuoteSo can I come into your bedroom and list my grievances with the senate? I got that right; says so right there in the First Amendment! Sure, and I have the right to blast you when I tell you to leave and you don't."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
