Florida Concealed Carry banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
806 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As you all know, the bill that the governor signed that should take effect on July 1st is under assault right now. The lawsuit filed against it is being heard today. We are hoping that this lawsuit will be tossed out or ruled against. If an employer can't provide security for us to and from work then they should not take that responsibility away from us. Even if they provide security at work once we leave work we are on our own. So this law is a sensible law. Does anyone here opose it? And if so why.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
no oposition here, i carry to and from work. what the company cant see shouldnt worry them.:dancingbanana
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
When my company provides armed security guards I'll leave my gun in the car but I'm not leaving it at home. There are many women who need to have their firearm with them as much as possible because of stalkers.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
3,949 Posts
Don't ask, don't tell!

-JT
Thats my policy also. I think I'm confident enough that I can get a new job if I loose this one. I cant get back my life if its taken away because I chose to leave my firearm at home. I understand that a company should have a say in what goes on on their private property but I also have a right to protect myself. My gun won't walk out of my car and start shooting people by itself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
I found this interesting write article about this subject on the NRA website.

Parking Lot Gun Laws and the Right to Transport Firearms

Should people who lawfully possess firearms be able to leave them locked in their motor vehicles, on business property? Common sense would say, "yes." All 50 states allow the transportation of firearms in motor vehicles for all lawful purposes and 48 states allow the carrying of firearms in vehicles for personal protection, in some manner.1 More than one of every four of America`s 65-80 million gun owners carries a firearm in his or her vehicle for protection.2

The U.S. Constitution and the constitutions of 46 states protect the right to arms and/or self-defense.3 And since 1986, federal law has protected the right to transport firearms in vehicles interstate.4

However, over the last few years disagreements over the right of people to leave firearms locked in their vehicles on business property have arisen. As a result, five state legislatures have passed, and during their current legislative sessions additional states are considering passing, laws to protect that right.5

The issue began in 2002 in Oklahoma, when the Weyerhaeuser corporation fired employees for having guns in personal vehicles on company property. The Oklahoma Legislature responded, unanimously in the House and by a vote of 92-4 in the Senate, by prohibiting "any policy or rule" prohibiting law-abiding people "from transporting and storing firearms in a locked vehicle."

Arguments raised against the right of people, particularly employees, to leave firearms in locked vehicles on business property are unconvincing:

A business owner`s private property rights are not affected by a law preventing the micro-management of the lawful contents of a person`s privately-owned automobile. Moreover, an employer`s private property interests do not trump a person`s right to have a firearm available for self-defense, if needed, during the daily commute to and from work. As with all civil rights, employers and owners of commercial property may not act with disregard to the rights of citizens. Reasonable accommodation is the foundation of the protection of all civil rights.
A commercial landowner is subject to numerous limits, imposed by the federal, state and local governments, on what may and may not occur on its property.
Employees have a legitimate private property interest where their automobiles and their contents are concerned. In our legal system, property rights extend to property other than land.
Most gun-related violent crimes in workplaces are committed by non-employees. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 84% of all workplace murders are committed by strangers; 7% are committed by current or former employees.6 Naturally, strangers and former employees are not bound by any company policy pertaining to employees.
Anyone determined to commit a violent crime will not be prevented from doing so by a mere company policy against having guns in cars. This should go without saying, since criminals are already willing to break laws against murder, rape, robbery and assault.
Laws protecting the right to leave firearms in locked motor vehicles do not authorize a person to have a firearm outside his or her vehicle.
Laws protecting the right to leave firearms in locked motor vehicles on business property specifically protect the property owner from liability for any related injuries or damages. Also, if a business prohibits people from possessing the means to defend themselves in their vehicles, it is potentially liable for injuries and damages incurred for failure to provide adequate security.
The problem of workplace crimes has been exaggerated. The nation`s violent crime rate has declined every year since 1991 and is now at a 30-year low, the murder rate is at a 39-year low, and workplace violent crime has decreased more than violent crime generally. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health says, "the circumstances of workplace homicides differ substantially from those portrayed by the media and from homicides in the general population."7
Notes:

1. Only Illinois and Wisconsin do not have such laws.

2. USA Today/CNN/Gallup National Poll, Dec. 17-19, 1993.

3. The constitutions of the United States and all states except California, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York protect the right to possess firearms for protection, recreation, sports, hunting, and other lawful purposes. Iowa and New Jersey`s constitutions protect the right to self-defense in general terms.

4. 18 U.S.C. sec. 926A.

5. In 1998, Kentucky`s Attorney General determined that state law prohibits employers from prohibiting people from having firearms in their vehicles. Minnesota`s Right-to-Carry law (2003) prohibits employers from prohibiting carry permit holders from having firearms in their vehicles. Laws protecting the right of any lawful possessor of a firearm to have a firearm in a personally-owned vehicle were passed in Oklahoma and Alaska in 2005, and Mississippi in 2006.

6. "Violence in the Workplace, 1993-1999," Dec. 2001 (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/vw99.pdf). The study also noted, the highest percentage of work-related murders occur between 8p.m.-12 a.m., when most businesses are closed.

7. "Violence in the Workplace," July 1996 (www.cdc.gov/niosh/violhomi.html).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I just posted this in the ACLU Heller Blog. I am curious how they respond with their own bashing them for their stance on Heller.

http://blog.aclu.org/2008/07/01/heller-decision-and-the-second-amendment/#comment-1875

--------------------------------------------

Inspector Gadget Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:54 am
From WFTV Channel 9 Orlando
“Security Guard Plans To Challenge Disney By Bringing Gun To Work”

This violates the US Constitutions right to Self Defense, Florida Constitutions Right to self defense and specifically Edwin Sotomayer’s right to defend himself IAW Heller during his commute to and from work. This is not about having a Gun at your desk “Guns to Work”, it is about having a way to defend yourself when you go home at 2 in the morning in a high crime area.

My question is will you (ACLU Lawyers) be defending his right to self defense under the BOR or will you be defending Disney. I see 1 of three things happening:

1. You defend Disney and the Gun Banning Groups. (Expected)

2. Remain silent and not Defend in court a man that wants a way to defend himself from criminals during his work commute through a high crime area. (Possible).

3. ACLU Vigorously and Publically defends Edwin Sotomayer’s right to self defense (Unlikely, even with both Heller and Warren (Warren v DC 1981 which concludes that no individual has a right to individual protection by the police.))

? Do you stand for the Bill Of Rights or do you stand for Left Wing Anti Gun agendas ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,083 Posts
I think the suit being brought up against the law is to be brought before a judge next month.

Far as I'm concerned, if I'm not carrying illegally, then I'm not worrying about it.

-JT
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
3,949 Posts
The ACLU only goes to bat for people on the liberal side of things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,170 Posts
I frankly don't understand how any business owner can think that they have any authority to prohibit you from having a firearm within your locked vehicle. They certainly don't have any legal authority to prohibit an employee from having any other legal, non-contraband item in their car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Honestly, I can see merit to their argument, however, there is no way they can prevent ANYONE from keeping a gun in their car nor can they prevent someone from bringing one into the building and killing people.

Lets reverse this a little. If you were giving someone a ride in your car and they wanted to bring their gun with them while keeping it inside their "tote bag" lets say. You still have the right not to allow it. However, what if the law said you couldnt refuse them?

The car is your property, but the tote bag is theirs.

All you can do is refuse them entry to your car.

This new law prevents the property owner from refusing your entry into his parking lot while there is a firearm in your car.

I support the bill as it is and would like more rights as to carrying a firearm, but, we have what we have and its pretty good.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top