Senate Bill 321

[C-dub]

It was the next part that I thought would cover those carrying under the MPA.

Sec.A52.061.AARESTRICTION ON PROHIBITING EMPLOYEE ACCESS TO
OR STORAGE OF FIREARM OR AMMUNITION. A public or private employer
may not prohibit an employee who holds a license to carry a
concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully
possesses ammunition from transporting or storing a firearm or
ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked,
privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or
other parking area the employer provides for employees.

Is this not the case?

[Keith B]

It was the next part that I thought would cover those carrying under the MPA.

Sec.A52.061.AARESTRICTION ON PROHIBITING EMPLOYEE ACCESS TO
OR STORAGE OF FIREARM OR AMMUNITION. A public or private employer
may not prohibit an employee who holds a license to carry a
concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully
possesses ammunition from transporting or storing a firearm or
ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked,
privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or
other parking area the employer provides for employees.

Is this not the case?

Sorry C-dub, this is correct. I see you quoted canvasback in the previous post. His post deals with general employers, and they can't prohibit those carrying under MPA. I thought we were still talking about the petrochemical plant, and you must be a CHL to be exempt there.

[Stormwatcher]

No, you are not excluded if you are and employee, have a CHL and park in an unsecured parking lot that does not meet the restrictions listed in the statute.

My company and others just like it would argue that it IS a secure parking area. Even though security is actually 200 feet further into parking area. They do have a remote gate that could be closed.......now mind you it is never closed during the day and only sometimes very late at niight.....and the guards are never able to monitor every vehicle that enters......they generally only interact with traffic wanting to enter the secure area of the plant.

I understand what you are saying but what I am saying is.......this bill does not really protect me. I get caught with my constitutionally legal handgun in my car while in the parking lot. They fire me....cause they can. I loose my house........kids have to drop out of college cause I can't pay anymore. Then 10 years after the oil company stalls and stalls my case finally comes to trial and I win. Maybe. If I do win.......how much do I win. Will my kids be willing or able to attend college after trial? That's my dilemma.

My point is....my company will NOT protect me going to and from work and they institute policies that prevent me from protecting myself.......then to top it off, they pay off legislators to pass a bill that is so vague.....employees are intimidated into giving up their rights in order to stay employed.

EDIT 9-2-2011 When I made this statement I was uninformed. Please read the following...

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=46515&start=30#p589360" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[C-dub]

It was the next part that I thought would cover those carrying under the MPA.

Sec.A52.061.AARESTRICTION ON PROHIBITING EMPLOYEE ACCESS TO
OR STORAGE OF FIREARM OR AMMUNITION. A public or private employer
may not prohibit an employee who holds a license to carry a
concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully
possesses ammunition from transporting or storing a firearm or
ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked,
privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or
other parking area the employer provides for employees.

Is this not the case?

Sorry C-dub, this is correct. I see you quoted canvasback in the previous post. His post deals with general employers, and they can't prohibit those carrying under MPA. I thought we were still talking about the petrochemical plant, and you must be a CHL to be exempt there.

Nope. My bad. We quoted different sections of the same law. I see the section you quoted now. That's strange that there is that difference.

[Stormwatcher]

What is MPA?

Also. Keith are you a lawyer? Just curious...don't intend to offend.

[C-dub]

What is MPA?

Also. Keith are you a lawyer? Just curious...don't intend to offend.

MPA, Motorist Protection Act, I think was passed 4 years ago that allows anyone legally able to possess a gun to carry one concealed in their vehicle anywhere not otherwise prohibited by law.

[Keith B]

What is MPA?

Also. Keith are you a lawyer? Just curious...don't intend to offend.

No, I am not offended you want to know if I am a lawyer, but maybe I should be.

I am not lawyer, but I do a lot of interpretation and compliance oversight on rules, codes and laws for my real job, and even have to write standards at times. And, I used to be a police officer, so state laws and statutes are not unfamiliar to me either. In the case of this statute, I followed it VERY closely as it morphed into the final version, because it impacts me, so am very familiar with it and what it does and doesn't do.

[canvasbck]

It was the next part that I thought would cover those carrying under the MPA.

Sec.A52.061.AARESTRICTION ON PROHIBITING EMPLOYEE ACCESS TO
OR STORAGE OF FIREARM OR AMMUNITION. A public or private employer
may not prohibit an employee who holds a license to carry a
concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully
possesses ammunition from transporting or storing a firearm or
ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked,
privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or
other parking area the employer provides for employees.

Is this not the case?

Sorry C-dub, this is correct. I see you quoted canvasback in the previous post. His post deals with general employers, and they can't prohibit those carrying under MPA. I thought we were still talking about the petrochemical plant, and you must be a CHL to be exempt there.

Nope. My bad. We quoted different sections of the same law. I see the section you quoted now. That's strange that there is that difference.

Actually the policy that I was having to develop is for a petrochemical plant. So, the unlicensed possession can be prohibited even in the parking lot by the company.

[Hkfan]

Senate Bill 321
by PArrow » Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:54 am

New law goes into effect tomorrow, I asked about AT&T's stance and my boss told me "Company policy is no firearms on Company propery. If you are cought you will be terminated."

I too, work for AT&T. Someone else on my crew talked about SB321. Our boss came back with this reply, " While the law says it's okay to have a gun in your locked vehicle in the parking lot, the Company's Code of Business Conduct says that it's not. Possessing said gun would therefore be a violation of the COBC and punishable, up to and including termination."

This is how I've decided to deal with this wrench in the works.

I know that the company has an army of lawyers. Fighting the company would probably just end up send an individual spiraling into bankruptcy. Well, fight fire with fire. The NRA has an army of lawyers as well. They have heard of some companies who have blatantly decided to ignore this law. They are up for the fight. They want to know of companies that are not following the law. They have asked for employees who work for these companies to report to NRA-ILA at 800-392-8683.
While it's probably not the fastest solution, I personally feel, it's the safest for my personal employment security.
I would also suggest that you donate a few bucks to NRA-ILA, because the work they do for our freedoms, doesn't come free.