Please reread the post. I did not sue in court. I threatened to sue so that they'd at least hire the security guards for me.sunny beach wrote:That's a new one for me. What's the average judgement in these lawsuits?drjoker wrote:Do keep in mind that if a situation were to come up where you'd have to defend yourself and they had this policy in place, you could sue because they would be endangering your life.
Search found 2 matches
Return to “Work and Right of Protection”
- Fri Jul 05, 2013 10:19 am
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Work and Right of Protection
- Replies: 28
- Views: 5211
Re: Work and Right of Protection
- Fri Jul 05, 2013 2:18 am
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Work and Right of Protection
- Replies: 28
- Views: 5211
Re: Work and Right of Protection
Do keep in mind that if a situation were to come up where you'd have to defend yourself and they had this policy in place, you could sue because they would be endangering your life.
For example, I fired this employee who was not following directions and threatened me with a knife. After I fired him, he then treatened to come back to go postal and shoot me and his former coworkers. I went to corporate and demanded that I be given special permission to carry past the 30.06 sign and not get fired for bringing my gun to work. They refused. I hired a lawyer and threatened to sue. They ended up hiring a team of 6 unarmed security guards to walk me to my car. I asked why SIX unarmed security guards and the corporate administrators replied, "Well, we can't have armed guards because we don't believe in guns, but we figure since guns carry 6 bullets, 6 unarmed guards should be enough to keep you from being shot."
Wow. The depth of their libtard ignorance really amazes me. I didn't even bother replying to that.
For example, I fired this employee who was not following directions and threatened me with a knife. After I fired him, he then treatened to come back to go postal and shoot me and his former coworkers. I went to corporate and demanded that I be given special permission to carry past the 30.06 sign and not get fired for bringing my gun to work. They refused. I hired a lawyer and threatened to sue. They ended up hiring a team of 6 unarmed security guards to walk me to my car. I asked why SIX unarmed security guards and the corporate administrators replied, "Well, we can't have armed guards because we don't believe in guns, but we figure since guns carry 6 bullets, 6 unarmed guards should be enough to keep you from being shot."
Wow. The depth of their libtard ignorance really amazes me. I didn't even bother replying to that.
mnewlander wrote:Waiting on the mail today for my CHL i thought of this.
I work in a place that has a no weapons policy and is stated in the handbook. now on days i drive this is no problem for i can leave my weapon in the car, but my wife and i only have one car we share and every other week i have to rely on city transportation to get home from work.
My question is this, If policy is i cannot have a weapon at work is this in violation of my right to protect myself to and from work? i know that there is some law about this.