I still maintain my opposition to this course of action, and I say that as someone who is prohibited from having firearms on company property myself, but my opposition is mostly due to property rights concerns. Looks like they are trying to same tact that worked in Georgia, where the bill will be limited to concealed weapons licensees.
Employers are nonetheless hysterical on the issue of guns, and I think there’s things we can do to encourage the change. There was an approach, I think it was in Arizona, to create a civil action against employers who forbade firearms, essentially making them liable for the safety of their employees. To me this is a far better way to deal with the problem, but I suspect, politics being politics, it’s a more difficult political course for many legislatures.
What if your employer said no bibles on company property?
Does your employer have the right to deny Fords from being parked on his property?
Are his property rights more important than your rights, are you any less American when you are on his property?
I really don’t see how his property rights can trump your “Life” rights, as in the Bill of Rights
My employer has the same policy, including knives not over 2 inches in blade length, BUT, my employer offers me no security at the workplace, nor in my daily commute.
Only a rule on paper stops anyone from doing wrong? Well we all know how well restraining orders work, & all those “No Gun” signs stop crime.
Each has to make his or her own choice, & mine is to have the means of self defense at hand, besides I was looking for a job when I got interupted with this one 27 years ago.
I have read conservative opposition based on property rights arguments on this issue. However I just can’t agree. My reason really has nothing to do with guns but that my personal property rights inherent in the car trump business property rights to the parking lot. For example, say I have books in my car and this may be literature banned by the business. Do they have the right of search of my car since it is parked on their lot? No of course not.
Do malls have the right to banned people leaving guns in their cars? After all how else people can obey the restriction if it is a gun free mall?
Commercial businesses have many restrictions on their rights. This would just be another. But I do not think the business property right extends to the interior of my car. They can require parking stickers to make sure only the people the parking lot is for is parking in the lot. But their right ends at the tires of my car.
I just can’t see how any business has property rights to my car and the interior and any property I may have in the car.
If I am using a company car, then they do have a right to restrict what I carry in the car.
They can restrict what I carry into the building and the office. Same as if they restrict if I bring alcohol to the office. But the ability for a business to restrict unreasonably what I carry on my person is limited. The office may be non-smoking but they cannot prevent me from carrying cigarettes or matches. Both which I may not use in the building.
They can reasonable restrict items that are illegal or can be reasonably shown to damage the business. Like clean rooms where clothing and everything has to be changed. That is a reasonable restriction. But they can’t restrict that in an office environment. So business authority to restrict what people carry is limited.
If safety were the standard of reasonableness, having a weapon in the car would prevent someone pulling the gun in the office since it is not on them. Yes, a worker going postal can get the gun and just walk in, but they can do that anywhere.
A company could argue that is reasonable to keep dangerous weapons away from workers to deter sudden rages. The argument is weak since they could probably find something else, but a gun or knife is an easier weapon than a chair, that may be nearby.
I think a large part of the argument here is that my car is not company property, nor do they suddenly own it because I parked it in the company lot. I think a company should be free to prohibit guns on their property…but my car isn’t their property.
What if your employer said no bibles on company property?
Perfectly OK for an employer to do if it interferes with job performance. Religious discrimination is unlawful, however, so the employer has to make reasonable accommodations your religious beliefs. Of course, religious discrimination laws in employment aren’t something I agree with either.
Does your employer have the right to deny Fords from being parked on his property?
Yes, in fact a lot of automakers do this.
Are his property rights more important than your rights, are you any less American when you are on his property?
I really don’t see how his property rights can trump your “Life†rights, as in the Bill of Rights
The Bill of Rights protects infringements of fundamental liberties by the state, not by private parties. If that was the case, I’d have no power to control the content of my own blog.
I think a large part of the argument here is that my car is not company property, nor do they suddenly own it because I parked it in the company lot. I think a company should be free to prohibit guns on their property…but my car isn’t their property.
I agree with you on this. As I’ve said before, no employer will ever search my vehicle. They have no power to do this unless you let them. This is really more an issue of employment law. The employers have property rights, which includes the ability to exclude. Their property rights don’t trump your automobile, but they can exclude your automobile from their property, and exclude you.
What this really comes down to, is these bills are essentially anti-discrimination laws, and I believe strongly in freedom of association.
My employer forbids me to have alcohol in my car on company property; and de facto prohibits smoking since a personal automobile is not a designated smoking area… (I find these mildly distasteful, but the filthy lucre makes up for it).
For all of you who go on about the property rights stop at the car – what do you think about the offices that maintain the right to search bags on the premises?
(Not sarcastic, a real question).