Need a more clear understanding please...

[recaffeination]

My only reservation is that sub section iii says that if the ingress is constantly monitored then they CAN restrict you from bringing a gun on the property. Is that the correct understanding? If so, then their being nice by allowing it as long as you register with them, because there are sensors that alert guards when people pull into the parking lot.

I don't mean to sound repetative, I just want to have a clear understanding before I get in that situation.

Sensors are not enough. There are three parts connected with AND.

The secured area has to be monitored, not open to the public, AND contain the physical plant.

[Wisewr]

Sensors are not enough. There are three parts connected with AND.

The secured area has to be monitored, not open to the public, AND contain the physical plant.

That is a good point. I guess I didn't read it like that, but your saying to qualify, the parking lot has to meet ALL of those requirments, not just one. I like it.

The Annoyed Man, I will try and get a copy of the policy tomorrow as well as the registration page. Funny side note, I was talking with few of the other CHL'ers there at work and one guy said after the raid he went to turn his registration paper work in. He said the policy said to turn it into security, so he did. Security's question was, "What's this??" He had to explain to them what the form was. Next question, "Well, what do you want me to do with it?" Called someone else from the security department, someone who actually works for the company not just a contractor, and even that fella didn't know what to do with it.

At least someone there still knows how to direct deposit a check.

kjolly, they supposedly used the dogs and searched the entire parking lot. But, I hear what your saying.

It also sounds like something Alice Tripp might want to hear about. Pretty sure she's expressed interest in hearing the ways different corporations are trying to get around the spirit of the new parking lot law.

http://www.tsra.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't know who Alice Tripp is, but I'm going to attempt to get acquainted. Thanks for that.

[Wisewr]

Just wanted to give an update of what I've found out. I wrote Alicia Tripp an email and almost instantly she wrote me back, on a holiday weekend! What a dedicated person! I explained everything I've said here and she responded with "They are not prohibited by statute to require you to register and make other storage requirements. I'm told by NRA this has been true in every state. I appreciate the info. Its being "worked on" but will take time. Be careful. ....If its not prohibited by law they can do it and fire you for any reason." So, there ya go. If I don't wanna get fired, better register the weapon. It's unfortunate, but I'd rather register with them than be caught without my weapon when I need it.

If anyone wants the email conversations between me and her, let me know, I'll forward it to you.

The Annoyed Man, I looked up the policy for all this and it stats on every page that it is confidential. I would love to share it, but don't feel like doing it at the risk of losing my job passing out confidential company documents.

[Songbird]

I had the same question, because I'm a teacher. My CHL instructor told me that I WAS allowed to have my firearm secured in my car. When I asked my school administration though, they told me no. I spoke to the CHL instructor as well as a lawyer who was at my husband's CHL class, and he did a great job of explaining the bill that went into effect in 2011 regarding employers prohibiting firearms on the premises. Below is a link that is a pretty good summary of Texas Senate Bill 321. Bottom line is, I'm not protected during the workday because I run the risk of being fired if I'm caught with a firearm in my car. That's what I get for trying to do the right thing. I should've just kept my mouth shut.

http://www.haynesboone.com/texas_employ ... un_rights/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;