Proof Read - Letter to Employer

[chuckybrown]

I read the OP entry, expecting at least some of you (us) to come forward in support. However, it seems many are too worried about standing for what's right in fear of the unknown...at least in the form of providing advice.

Davey Crockett and William Barrett Travis wouldn't have opened the doors to the Alamo for the lot of you/us.

Before you do, I too am trying to find a way, (and I will) to cover this same issue with my employer. It's a constitutional right, not an EMPLOYER GIVEN PRIVILEGE. By our acquiescence, we allow them to govern that which they are not LEGALLY entitled to govern.

Chucky-B

[wgoforth]

Here is a letter I am sending to the editor of the local newspaper who has agreed to print what I will write on it. I am still in draft mode on this as well, but thought you might find something in it usable for your effort as well.
Best wishes
Wayne

***************************************
The US Bill of Rights, second amendment, says I may own a firearm. The Heller case decided before the US Supreme Court in 2008 upheld that amendment as an individual right. The state of Texas in passing the "Castle Doctrine" law in 2007 says I may defend my home with one. Another law passed in 2007 (HB 823) the state of Texas said one may legally carry a firearm in their vehicle for self defense (though must be out of plain sight) without having a concealed carry permit. Another law that is set to take effect February of 2010 will make it legal for concealed carry holders to carry in National Parks

In Texas (along with other states) with the proper training, the passing of a background check and receiving of a Concealed Carry License, the state of Texas says I may carry a firearm in a concealed manner on my person, except in certain types of events and buildings (i.e., bars, schools, school events, Federal Buildings, restricted areas of an airport, and businesses which display proper signage forbidding such). Wisconsin, Illinois and DC are the only areas not permitting concealed carry. Wisconsin does not have concealed carry laws, because like 31 other states, they allow for open carry (but not concealed like the other 30). The question of allowing for open as well as campus carry remains a debate in Texas and will likely come up for a vote in the next year.

In the US alone, Americans protect themselves some three million times a year. Reading newspapers from Abilene, San Antonio and the DFW area regularly tell of homeowners who thwarted a home invasion or saved a life through the lawful ownership of a firearm.

In Texas, as in most other states, there is required training involved in becoming a concealed carry holder. It is with good reason that a Concealed Handun License (CHL) is sometimes called a "Good Guy Card." Citizens who do not care about the law simply are not interested in going through such a program.

1. A CHL holder has no felony convictions on his/her record.
2. A CHL holder has not had a class A or B misdemeanor within five years of the original issuance of the license.
3. A CHL holder is not mentally incapable.
4. A CHL holder is not permitted to be chemically dependent.
5. A CHL holder has received training in the law of self-defense.
6. A CHL holder has passed a handgun qualification exercise.
7. All CHL holders are 21-years-old or older.
8. CHL holders do not have outstanding child support payments and are not in default on student loans.

Statistically, one in every hundred persons in Texas is a concealed carry holder, with 220,000 such permits being granted since the beginning of the program and an estimated 500 in Brownwood alone.

Sounds like people that would be model citizens and law abiding customers that everyone would welcome into their stores. After, as Robert Heinlein said, "An armed society is a polite society." It is no wonder that a bank in San Antonio has a sign which says "CHL holders are welcomed and appreciated."

With all of this in favor of law abiding citizens legally carrying a hidden self defense weapon (which is ONLY to be drawn when there is imminent fear for one's life) when authorized by the state to do so, it has to be wondered why one can legally carry a concealed weapon into the Texas State Capitol building (except in the galleries or meeting room during a meeting), but so many of our local businesses in Brownwood do not permit such? From banks to quick marts, signs are displayed which range from "no guns, legal or illegal" or the infamous "gun buster" sign. We have to wonder, just who are such signs for? Is a criminal going to say "I can't rob this store, they have a sign!" This simply disarms the law abiding, and the criminals now know they have a "target rich environment" since the well-meaning sign disarmed the law-abiding and the criminal knows that. It is understandable that we want to be able to have laws to prosecute the criminal element, and this can be achieved with the "No unlicensed firearm" sign just as easily. It is already illegal for anyone to carry an unlicensed firearm publicly on their person in Texas, so that is a given, according to Sec. 46.02 of the Texas Penal Code.

Some signs on our local businesses claim it to be a crime to carry a licensed firearm when it is not. I appreciated that one local business, when I pointed this fact out to them, changed their sign to reflect "no UNLICENSED firearms." I also appreciate such businesses as Wal-Mart that has the "No Unlicensed firearms" sign. While it is required for any business selling alcohol to display a "no unlicensed firearm" sign, only bars or an establishment that derives 51% or more of its revenue from the sale of alcohol are required to display a sign to ban both unlicensed AND licensed.

CHL holders are not seeking to be vigilantes in any way. We fully respect and appreciate our law enforcement of all types, but it surely we can agree that when seconds count, help is minutes away, even when trying their hardest.

For me, I refuse to be where I cannot protect my family. While a store may (or may not) be safe inside.... can my safety be assured while walking through the parking lot to and from my vehicle? The news is filled with stories of abductions, robberies and rapes occurring in lit public parking lots. Obviously I cannot walk to and from the store without also having it IN said business (unless they wish to provide lockers in which to check weapons at door).


Most CHL holders are by nature very law abiding citizens, so that we would be more likely to honor your "no LICENSED handgun" sign by NOT entering your establishment. Therefore, for me and my family, "no gun" = "no money."

[surprise_i'm_armed]

idrathernot:
Many others on the forum and myself implore you not to
send this letter.

What's the point? You already have been granted permission
to store your gun in your vehicle. If you send this letter to the
Republic of Kalifornia, you will get a negative response, since their
gun control mentality is non 2A friendly.

Educating your employer on CHL and 30.06 is not going to help
anyone. If you really want to carry at work, get something small
enough to conceal on body, or if they don't X-ray briefcases, you
can bring in something bigger. You won't be breaking the law,
since a gunbusters sign is not proper notice under Texas CHL law.

If you never send this letter, you can gamble on carrying on the sly
at work, but keeping your job.

If you send the letter, expect to be fired. Then you can carry any-
where as you ride around looking for a new job, or anchor yourself
to your PC looking for a new one.

In Japan, where conformity is the norm, they have a saying:
The nail that sticks up will be hammered down.

If you want to go on this Don Quixote quest to get a Kalifornia
company to see things your way.....

Let us know how that works out.

I'm just sayin....

SIA

[KC5AV]

First paragraph where you say

The laws pertaining to possession of firearms by licensee holders on private property are very clear, unfortunately, company policy and written notice posted on company premises are not.

This should probably be

The laws pertaining to possession of firearms by license holders on private property are very clear. Company policy and written notice posted on company premises are not.

Toward the end, you say

provide legal notification so as to fully educate other employees whom are

should be who.
I'd agree with the others who have said don't, or at least don't mention 30.06. If you insist, those changes need to be made.

[5thGenTexan]

Wayne nice letter but a tad long for most "Letters to the Editor". I would find a way to slim it down before the Editor does a slash and burn job that will leave it unrecognizable to you.

To the original post good luck, I also work for a company that bans employee "unauthorized" carry of a weapon. Can't find out who or how you can get authorized so it goes in the trunk when I arrive and back in the IWB when I leave or before if I am the only one there after hours. I've already given my notice to these guys not because of that but other issues in the realm of archaic systems in place.

My wife works for a company that does allow for concealed carry and one of their guys dusted a dude that couldn't understand stop I have a gun while removing tools from their company trucks and continued over a fence toward him. My soon to be former employer has 5000+ employees hers has 150 my gut is to get back to a smaller locally based employer.

[srothstein]

I would not normally recommend sending a letter like this. I usually try to leave a plac eon good terms where possible.

But I have to admit that I am also not sure that there will be as bad a reaction as some here forecast. We just may be jumping at shadows in fear of a response. It is much more likely that the letter will just get filed and no one will ever notice or care. If anything, the mailing of it to the CEO without giving the lower level management a chance will get them more irritated at you for jumping the chain of command than I think the gun issue will. My experience is that managers tend to get much more irritated at jumping the chain than at the issues raised themselves. They will understand appealing their decision but they really want their chance to solve the problem before it goes higher.

So, if you have already lined up another job and want to send this letter, I say more power to you. But do it smartly. Send it to one manager at a time, starting with the HR manager, then after you get a response from him send it to the legal division. Only after you get unsatisfactory responses from them would I move it up the chain to the COO or CEO. And I would also put the local manager somewhere in that chain before it goes to the top. You might get a favorable response earlier than you would think. It is not probable but it might happen.

EDIT: One other thought came to me as I hit enter. Are you prepared to stay if you do get the response you want? Raising the issue and getting a good answer then leaving anyway might really cause some problems in your reference letters later.

[The Annoyed Man]

I read the OP entry, expecting at least some of you (us) to come forward in support. However, it seems many are too worried about standing for what's right in fear of the unknown...at least in the form of providing advice.

It's not fear of the unknown. It's common sense advice to not unnecessarily risk losing a job during an economic slowdown in which new jobs are harder to come by. It's easy for you to chide others when it's not your job on the line, so maybe you should lighten up a little bit.

Ok, flame me now......I expect it.

Nah... unlike some folks, I'm not a hothead. Maybe a little introspection is in order.

Before you do, I too am trying to find a way, (and I will) to cover this same issue with my employer. It's a constitutional right, not an EMPLOYER GIVEN PRIVILEGE. By our acquiescence, we allow them to govern that which they are not LEGALLY entitled to govern.

Chucky-B

That argument doesn't really address the issue. You're employer can infringe your freedom of speech if they want to. Go ahead... try to make sexually inappropriate comments to one of your female coworkers and see what happens. They'll fire you in a New York minute... ...but, but, but... what about your freedom of speech rights? They can't do that, can they?

Another example... ...you have a right to insist that any stranger who enters your home (electrician, milk man, cable guy, whatever) not be armed. Now, most of us would argue that you have little to fear in your own home from a fellow CHL holder, stranger or not. But if you are exceedingly paranoid, and you really don't know anything about a stranger's character, then you could begin insisting that anyone who enters your home leave their weapon in their vehicle, and forbid them to park that vehicle on your property as long as there is a gun in it.

Now, substitute "your company's name" for "your home." It may not be morally defensible, and from our standpoint it is not, but your company has every right under the law to insist that its employees not carry a weapon into the building. We are an at-will employment state. You won't go to jail for carrying into the building in contravention of the employee manual, but you will get fired. Companies do this because they can.

The answer isn't to write letters to your HR department and anger succeeding levels of management, all who have some say in your continued employment — because they don't care about whether or not it inconveniences you. The answer is to write letters and apply any other pressure necessary to your elected state representative and state senator to ensure that the "parking lot" bill gets passed in the next legislature. You'll never be able to take away a company's right to insist that the employees not bring a weapon inside (because they have certain property rights which trump your rights when you are on their property) — any more than you could take that right away from a home owner on his/her own property. BUT, you can get legislation passed adding a "parking lot exception" to the CHL law which would protect CHL holders from being fired for securing their weapons in their vehicles before going inside that will at least ensure that you are not forced by company policy into being disarmed while traveling to and from work.

That would be far more profitable than urging someone to take actions which might result in his dismissal at worst, and at the very least educate his employer in proper 30.06 signage so that you and I would also be prevented from carrying inside — even though we don't work there.

[havoc]

wgoforth,

I think you have a good, albeit lengthy, letter to the editor. However, I believe there are many more than 220,000 chl holders in Texas currently. I believe there were over 258,000 in 2006 and maybe close to 450,000 - 500,000 now. Best of luck!!!

[chabouk]

At the very least, some of your future former colleagues who are quietly carrying are going to be pretty ticked off when the 30.06 notices go up.

[Dragonfighter]

That argument doesn't really address the issue. You're employer can infringe your freedom of speech if they want to. Go ahead... try to make sexually inappropriate comments to one of your female coworkers and see what happens. They'll fire you in a New York minute... ...but, but, but... what about your freedom of speech rights? They can't do that, can they?

I agree with the thought in essence but the difference here is that sexually inappropriate remarks infringe on their rights. Even if we restore the republic, your rights end where my nose begins...or something to that affect. I would say what is more along the lines I think you were trying to convey was when an employer says "no political discourse". It is your right, it doesn't affect anyone negatively (irrespective of whether or not they get upset) and yet many employers do just that.

Now, substitute "your company's name" for "your home." It may not be morally defensible, and from our standpoint it is not, but your company has every right under the law to insist that its employees not carry a weapon into the building. We are an at-will employment state. You won't go to jail for carrying into the building in contravention of the employee manual, but you will get fired. Companies do this because they can.

There ya go. I can allow or deny entry to anyone I want and for any reason. I can also place conditions on it. It's that simple. If you enter my home and I discover something about you I disdain, I WILL kick you out...maybe literally.

The answer isn't to write letters to your HR department and anger succeeding levels of management, all who have some say in your continued employment — because they don't care about whether or not it inconveniences you. The answer is to write letters and apply any other pressure necessary to your elected state representative and state senator to ensure that the "parking lot" bill gets passed in the next legislature.

Amen.

[Dragonfighter]

Add another one to the 99%+ crimes that are prevented by firearms being prevented without a shot fired. Outstanding.

Added in Edit: Ooops, wrong thread...can a moderator move it to the Attempted Carjacking Thread.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

wgoforth,

However, I believe there are many more than 220,000 chl holders in Texas currently.
I believe there were over 258,000 in 2006 and maybe close to 450,000 - 500,000 now. Best of luck!!!

Your post shows interesting data. "220,000 currently" but also "450,000-500,000 now".
Isn't "currently" equivalent to "right now"?

The latest figures provided by DPS, as of 12/31/08 were approximately 314,500 CHL's.

The figures as of 12/31/09 will not be provided until well after 1/1/10, but should show
a nice bump up in the number of CHL's.

SIA

[The Annoyed Man]

There ya go. I can allow or deny entry to anyone I want and for any reason. I can also place conditions on it. It's that simple. If you enter my home and I discover something about you I disdain, I WILL kick you out...maybe literally.

See that? You managed to restate my thought in a much less convoluted fashion. You're makin' me look bad, man!

[wgoforth]

Wayne nice letter but a tad long for most "Letters to the Editor". I would find a way to slim it down before the Editor does a slash and burn job that will leave it unrecognizable to you.

To the original post good luck, I also work for a company that bans employee "unauthorized" carry of a weapon. Can't find out who or how you can get authorized so it goes in the trunk when I arrive and back in the IWB when I leave or before if I am the only one there after hours. I've already given my notice to these guys not because of that but other issues in the realm of archaic systems in place.

My wife works for a company that does allow for concealed carry and one of their guys dusted a dude that couldn't understand stop I have a gun while removing tools from their company trucks and continued over a fence toward him. My soon to be former employer has 5000+ employees hers has 150 my gut is to get back to a smaller locally based employer.

Thanks...I had already considered asking the editor if I can do a 2 parter, this cinches it for me. One of their reporters (when I asked them if they had considered doing a piece on CHL told me in clear language that she was not sympathetic, was against guns cuz her daddy was a deputy shot by an illegal because her daddy had left his gun home and was off duty. I reminded her THAT is what her kind wants to do to all of us. She said there is a whole book about her daddy http://www.booksurge.com/The-Gun-That-W ... 628178.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; That is very sad, but it illustrates the fact the illegals are going to get them even when otherwise doesn't.

[Oldgringo]

Wayne nice letter but a tad long for most "Letters to the Editor". I would find a way to slim it down before the Editor does a slash and burn job that will leave it unrecognizable to you.

To the original post good luck, I also work for a company that bans employee "unauthorized" carry of a weapon. Can't find out who or how you can get authorized so it goes in the trunk when I arrive and back in the IWB when I leave or before if I am the only one there after hours. I've already given my notice to these guys not because of that but other issues in the realm of archaic systems in place.

My wife works for a company that does allow for concealed carry and one of their guys dusted a dude that couldn't understand stop I have a gun while removing tools from their company trucks and continued over a fence toward him. My soon to be former employer has 5000+ employees hers has 150 my gut is to get back to a smaller locally based employer.

Thanks...I had already considered asking the editor if I can do a 2 parter, this cinches it for me. One of their reporters (when I asked them if they had considered doing a piece on CHL told me in clear language that she was not sympathetic, was against guns cuz her daddy was a deputy shot by an illegal because her daddy had left his gun home and was off duty. I reminded her THAT is what her kind wants to do to all of us. She said there is a whole book about her daddy http://www.booksurge.com/The-Gun-That-W ... 628178.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; That is very sad, but it illustrates the fact the illegals are going to get them even when otherwise doesn't.

{SIGH}