Should/can employers ban firearms in your car?

Discussion in 'Hunters Rights Forum' started by The Other David, Sep 30, 2005.

  1. tule

    tule Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    2,967
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2000
    Location:
    Livermore, CA
    Ok, so in other words your house is private property with no public access, and the workplace is publically accessed private property. Yes they are different, but, how does that pertain to this debate???? I mean your allowed to do most things in your private dwelling, however a lot of those same things are not permitted at work, is this what you are getting at???

    Is there any evidence that the "cooling off period" doesnt work??? I mean, the person who just got fired, goes down to buy a gun, but has to wait 10 days, isnt going to go back to some sensus reporter and say, "whew, thank gosh there is a cooling period for firearms purchases, or i was going to kill all my co-workers"........this isnt going to happen. However that person who killed a co-worker is going to explain why he chose such actions because he is being interragated and being asked questions as so.

    People are not robots, and should be treated as such, "poor little granny" has commited murder on more than one occasion, then theres the biker looking dude all tatoo'd up with multiple piercings that does nothing but charitable work.

    Im not saying that the POed employee is going to observe the rules, i didnt say that im observing the rules, the difference is this, should i get caught with the firearm in my vehicle, i shall pay the price by termination. I am not going to go off and kill people, i'll go find another job, no biggee.

    Here's the difference, how about the guy who doesnt know his day at the workplace is terminated, so he doesnt have a gun in his truck, he gets fired, now, he has to drive home and get a gun, in the mean time he is thinking about how he is going to shoot everyone in site back at the job, just then he passes an officer, he starts to think about consiquences, then he pulls into the driveway and see's his kids playing and laughing, he starts to think rationally even more (if he is any kind of father) and decides to sit down, take it easy, and collect his thoughts, time to find another job, things will be hard, but he still has freedom and family.

    Maybe, just maybe, if that guy had a gun in car at the time of termination, he may have done things a little differently, and regreted it.

    Havn't you ever had a situation where you got irate and wanted to take a certain action whether it be punching someone or whatever, but didnt, because someone pulled you aside to talk you down, and in the mean time you actually started thinking instead of reacting.......just a thought;) ......Jason
     
  2. Skip OK

    Skip OK Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,541
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Location:
    Oklahoma, USA
    It seems to me that the real question here is not whether or not the government (State, federal or local) may require an employer to allow guns on their property.

    I suggest, rather, that the question is "Does the government have the power to regulate the possesion of firearms on private property?"

    I see this as a vital distinction. If the Government may regulate such actions, the regulation that come from Big Brother is AT LEAST as likely to be that such possession is prohibited.

    I believe that the govenment has no right to demand that a landowner either allow, or to prohibit firearm possesion on their land. I particularly think that the Federal goverment lacks the power to regulate firearm possesion any time, anywhere for any reason.

    As far as the Phillips/Conoco parking areas, I have worked for Phillips and lived in the town where Conoco was founded. I have never seen any company owned parking areas that were open to the public. Most offices don't have company owned parking, and the refineries, chemical plants, etc. have only restricted access. The security may not be too good, but it is there. One the bigger plants, the security IS very good.
     
  3. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    15,508
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
    tule,

    I was unable to follow your logic. sorry.

    Skip OK,

    The question being addressed is indeed, if a company can forbid a person to carry a firearm in their car on public access private property. By it's very nature the broader question is "Can a company forbid you from possessing any item that is legal elsewhere while on public access private property?" If the answer is yes, then shopping malls can forbid you to park in their lots while you have cigarettes or beer in your trunk, or even diapers or ballpoint pens. Your employer could forbid you to bring magazines, newspapers, sunglasses, or ANY other item to work in your car. That could include the Bible.

    The government has the legal authority to require many things of businesses, including requiring them to protect the civil rights and liberties of persons on their property.

    There is no evidence that the rules regarding firearms improves safety, as those who shoot up people generally do not follow other rules. If tule, who asserts that there is a benefit, knows of any such evidence I would love to hear about it.

    David
     
  4. tule

    tule Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    2,967
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2000
    Location:
    Livermore, CA
    David, i'll do my best to find some cases for ya!:tu ;)
     
  5. Skip OK

    Skip OK Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,541
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Location:
    Oklahoma, USA
    David,

    I almost entirely disagree with your stance here.

    As I understand the Constitution, particularly the Tenth Amendment, the Federal Government has those powers that are either: (1) Expressly granted to the Federal government in the Constitution; or (2) those powers that are expressly prohibited to the States. This is my basis for believing that all Federal gun control laws are blatantly unconstitutional.

    However, by the same token I do not see any Federal power covered by the the paragraph above that would serve to allow the Feds to demand a landowner to allow people using their land to carry firearms.

    I don't think that the position taken by Conoco Phillips is right, or even makes sense as a general rule. I can certainly see restricting posession of incindiaries, including firearms ammunition, when we are talking about certain facilitine such as natural gas plants or refineries, strictly on the basis of safety, but as far as an office setting, I can see no real advantage for the company in this retriction.

    Even so, I feel strongly that by demanding the government require this, we are laying the groundwork to allow the government to require landowners to prohibit the possesion of firearms. Right now we could still argue that the government lacks the power to interfere, but that argument won't be available once we DEMAND that they take that power..
     
  6. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    15,508
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
    Skip,

    It is the STATE government involved in this case, not the Feds.

    David
     
  7. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    15,508
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
  8. Skip OK

    Skip OK Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    1,541
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Location:
    Oklahoma, USA
    That's what I get for not reading closer; this is a State law that is being challenged.

    That said, it doesn't really change my position. If a government has the power to decree that lanmdowner's MUST allow certain activities on their land, it follows that the same government has the power to decree that landowner must NOT allow the same activites. I don't want my state governmentor the Federal government to have that power, whethewr we are talking about firearms of a collection of Remington bronzes or having brass band concerts on Saturday nights Unless the activity is otherwise illegal, the government should take the heck out of my business on my land.
     
  9. tule

    tule Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    2,967
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2000
    Location:
    Livermore, CA
    Thanks for the reading material David, good reading.

    I dont know about "studies" which seem to be taking place over common sense.

    How about the study about the decline of the pintail, maybe in the central and eastern states, but here in California, they are like the mid-continental snow goose population, i can kill my ONE bull sprig and watch hundreds more pour into the decoys at 15-20 yards and just enjoy the beauty.

    Trust me, i am an avid hunter and would hate to see my gun rights be taken away as much as you would, and believe me, i am on your side, im just making and participating in a debate with you that both of us could be right or wrong on.

    I havnt had time to research into theory's that support my opinion, but i will this weekend!!!!:tu

    Take care buddy and goodluck with the rest of the season!!!
     
  10. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    15,508
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
    tule,

    Good luck this weekend! I'm sitting this one out.

    David
     

Share This Page