mr.72 wrote:Trying to avoid hijacking a thread here... this was in the other thread:
Lodge2004 wrote:CompVest wrote:I hope that the parking lot bill passes because I don't think anyone should be able to tell me what I can have in MY bought and paid for car. It is my property and I should be able to have my gym bag and/or my range bag in my car.
That's why I have trouble understanding the "property rights of owners" argument as it relates to parking lots.
Just because they may not be appropriate IN the workplace does not mean a person should be terminated because they have a box of bibles in the trunk of their car. The property owner's rights do NOT extend INTO
my vehicle or my body.
Let it be known that I am highly in favor of less restrictive gun laws.
However this is a tenuous argument and puts us on a slippery slope that might end in a non-defensible argument.
For example, if they can't tell you what you can and cannot have in your car, which is clearly your property, then why can they tell you what you can and cannot have in your pocket? Certainly your own clothing is as much your property as your car, is it not? Well if they can't tell you what you can have in your pocket, they definitely cannot tell you what you can have in your waist band, right? Definitely "on or about your person" is about as much "your property" as you can get. I don't think your car is some special thing.
So if they can tell you what you cannot carry on your person, they certainly can tell you what you can carry in your car, I would think.
Anyway, I think there is another tactic to take regarding this issue, which is one of disarmament when leaving the company property. By preventing you from safely storing your firearm in your own car, they are effectively preventing you from carrying it from your home. Likewise for those who ride a bicycle, ride the bus or walk to work, they are depriving you of your right to carry from your home by not offering any sort of storage alternative for your firearm when on the company premises. Certainly you can go get a different job. However at some point this is not a "gun rights vs. property rights" issue, it is a property rights vs. right to self defense issue. As long as we continue to frame this as a gun rights issue, we are going to lose. Nearly everyone agrees with private property rights. Not everyone agrees with your right to own a gun. But most will agree with your right to self defense, certainly when you are not on private property. So I hope we can begin to craft our side of the debate in terms of our right to self defense while en route to our employer's property.
In short, I think if my employer wants to post a 30.06 sign, they need to provide employees the right to store their guns on site safely. They need to allow the employee to bring in their own locker or safe, and then allow the employee to store a secured firearm on the premises.
Maybe it should be that the 30.06 should be amended to include the "unsecured" possession ...
Just a thought.
