What's your thoughts on companies banning guns?

Rank Amateur · 08-31-2005, 09:58 AM

For you NRA members I assume you have seen they are going after the companies who are making it a policy to NOT allow firearm possesion on company property that is open to the public. For the rest of you the issue mainly revovles around the fact that some big companies, including one I work for, have passed policies that state you may not bring a firearm onto their property at all, with a few exceptions for hunting, ect. What this means is, even though the parking lots are basically open to the public, an employee or public individual is forbidden from bringing a gun to work. For the employee the punishment is a loss of a job. For the public, it is a banishment from the company property. They do not care if you have a CHL.

While on the surface it seems reasonable for a private employer to restrict guns on the work site, it also appears that these restrictions impair the workers rights. The thing that caught my eye was the question of, what if this spreads to other companies, say the stores and gas stations, does this not in effect create a gun ban?

How do you get to E. Or and back if you can't bring a gun onto the property of the major gas stations?

I can understand where the companies are coming from, the solution is to absolve them of all liability with the exception of gross negeligence. But for them to restict my second admendment right or a state statute that gives me a right to carry concealed, should be illegal, when it is on property open to the public.

Irish Pennant · 08-31-2005, 11:29 AM

I think this is not a hunting topic and needs to be moved to a different forum.

Fish Wheels · 08-31-2005, 11:34 AM

PRIVATE property open to the public. The 3 companies I have worked for in the last 15 yrs all had this policy, and one was a manufacturer of hunting and outdoor products. Companies are allowed to hold employees and vendors to these restrictions upon entering the property they own.
Many establishments have this policy in effect right know, such as bars and nightclubs for example. If you recall, this was not even allowed on totally public property during the Rose Festival in the year or 2 after 9/11.

Ni! · 08-31-2005, 12:31 PM

I don't like it when companies do this, but I think they should be allowed to do so by law. I think they should suffer in the marketplace however, either through boycotts if people feel that's appropriate, or through losing good employees due to the rule.

For a gas station to enact this policy would be ridiculous. If they ever tried to enforce it they'd lose business so quick they wouldn't know what hit 'em.

Ni!

Salmo trutta · 08-31-2005, 01:12 PM

Here one for you. The company I work for doesn't allow any firearms on company property including in your personal vehicles parked in their lots. But they sponsor an employee trap shooting night at the local gun club. You are encouraged to participate in the shoot but you cannot store your shotgun in your vehicle while it is parked on company parking lot.hmmmmmmmm!!!

kodiakfisher · 08-31-2005, 01:15 PM

This is really a moot point because a company does not have the right to randomly search your vehicle. You would have to do something that would allow a reasonable person to discover the weapon without searching the vehicle.

The issue I raised is when I pack to leave for a hunting trip after work I "may" have weapons. The above is the response I received.

The reason I know this is I was showing off a barrel (pipe with sights)with fiber optic sights for my shotgun

that I picked up during lunch. The barrel was mistaken for a shotgun/rifle and then the stock was discovered. The thing that saved me was there wasn't any ammunition in the vehicle anywhere and I was never suspected of any questionable activities before or after.

Management came to my defense

and all was well but this was pre-9/11.

Kodiakfisher

sunshinefisherman · 08-31-2005, 02:43 PM

My company has this policy and I have stopped carrying because of it. I have violated it a few times for hunting and target practice etc but mostly I comply. They ban all weapons and it is the companies perogative to decide what is or is not a weapon. Guns are always weapons but knives, bats, etc generally have to be used as a weapon to be defined as such.
I think that it is a wrong-headed and ineffective policy at best. If someone is going to "go postal" does anyone really think that they having a rule in place is going to help anything?
I have to wonder if these rules are created to provide the company with a defense in the event that relatives or survivors sue for damages. The company could not then be held to be negligent for allowing (not forbidding) firearms. The problem is that once a policy (or a law) is in place, it is hard to get it reversed and is just one more step down the slippery slope.

Just this morning I was thinking about the Clinton era law prohibiting persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence from firearm ownership. It is a bad law but now that it is in place, it will never be reversed. Nobody wants to be perceived as "being for domestic violence." Likewise nobody at a corporation will want to be seen as being for guns at work. This is not a battle that could be won except by someone at the highest level.

Snakebite · 08-31-2005, 03:24 PM

If it's out of sight or not, somebody needs to have a search warrant to prove you have a gun in your vehicle. Don't tell anyone. If you have a gun in sight, in a gun rack for example, they actually need to prove it is a working firearm and need to have a search warrant to establish the fact...or not. Put a POP gun with a cork in it in your gun rack. See what happens...?

Rank Amateur · 08-31-2005, 04:41 PM

Sorry, our company says they have the right to search our vehicles randomly. Of coarse anyone of my co-workers could tell a manager that they heard me talking about a gun in my rig and surprise, I get searched. I don't take a gun to work, but I have in the past when they were allowed if locked in a vehicle. It made for a deer hunt on the way home from work.

If all the gas stations placed the ban at the same time, do you think they would be out of customers, yeah right, I see us having an effect on high prices too. I guess you could make sure that you had a hunting buddy to stand in the street to hold the guns while you fill up.

Understand that many people have now lost employment because of this issue, simply because they had a gun locked within there vehicle in parking lots open to the public.

This is an interesting debate, because companies are banning a constitional right. Yet most of us would say you don't have the right to bring your gun in my house, but that does not extend to the public street, but what about my driveway? Its my property, but by me denying your right in my driveway, I also deny your right on the public street. Very interesting and I predict this may go to the supreme court.

Is gun ownership the same right as breathing air?

Mad Mikey · 08-31-2005, 05:05 PM

Quote:

How do you get to E. Or and back if you can't bring a gun onto the property of the major gas stations?

I rather doubt we'd see that scenario, at least much East of Hood River anyways. Fall is a real boon to the smaller towns in E and NE OR, big bucks coming through and any business owner(with respect to gas stations) who would adopt a policy like that won't be in business too much longer.

Quote:

I think this is not a hunting topic and needs to be moved to a different forum

And yes, this is very appropriate for the hunting forum because stuff like this AFFECTS hunters, at least within the context of the original post. If someone wanted to ban fishing rods in private/public areas would it be better to put it on LIG or the fishing forum? Maybe not the best analogy but my point is the original poster is targetting an audience.

Sadly, if a disgruntled worker decides to go postal one fine day, do you think they would give the policy any regard???

Someone with a CWP could stop em' but, of course, that's against the rules. From my experiences in the classes, the type of folk who get CWPs DO follow the rules so in a sense the companies may be relieving themselves from certain liabilities but at the same time attaining a higher risk for the rare nut-job to do more damage. But I'm preaching to the choir here..... :grin:

Rank Amateur · 08-31-2005, 05:17 PM

Maybe if somebody goes postal, all the CHL holders should sue the company, BECAUSE they denied there rights and placed them in harms way.

I often think about this while at work, if somebody really intended to do harm, they would have free reign for up to an hour before any law enforcement would get there.

We are out in the boonies.

The company is currently on a big kick about homeland security, they say they have to fence the whole perimeter, most of which they have already done, except for the river. The thinking is that terrrorists will invade from the river. Yep, that fence is sure to stop them, as will the old grey haired UNARMED security guards and all us sheep. I'm sure we will play dumb on this issue until it becomes a common event, then we will get smart like Israel.

Swamp Puppy · 08-31-2005, 05:34 PM

what about the rights of the employees to expect that their employer is taking all the necessary precautions to provide them with a safe, or at least, as safe as possible work environment?

I also work at a company that has a "no firearms on site" policy. I am a strong supporter of firearm rights and I have no problem with it at all.

duckboy · 08-31-2005, 06:45 PM

I feel that the second ammedment is pretty clear, and that a law abiding citizen's rights (Constitutional Rights for that matter) should never be overridden by Some Company Policy.

The fact that Law abiding men and women have lost their jobs/benefits/way of life because of a private companies polcies having greater weight than the Constitution of the country involved is the most bass ackwards thing I have ever heard of. Really sickens me. What is this country coming to?

Rank Amateur · 08-31-2005, 08:26 PM

I don't disagree with you at all, but what is so safe about being at a company that is totally disamrmed and at least an hour away from an effective police intervention? Would you go unarmed to Portland, if there was no police? It sounds like leading sheep to the slaughter to me. The whole problem that I see is if a disgruntled employee really does go postal, there is nothing in between him and me.

I work at a place where there are upwards of 500 people during a weekday almost a small city, but no police force. We have our own fire department. You would think we would have a incident response team and a locker of guns.

Its interesting how guns are just plain being branded as bad and we accept it, yet what is the first thing we all go for when it hits the fan. So why is it fair for us to be denied that right at our work places, at least locked in a vehicle.

Another aspect is your commute to and from work, doesn't anybody feel the need for protection? What if your life has been threatened? Your company could deny your right to protect yourself.

lor · 08-31-2005, 09:51 PM

Not a problem.
All the companies I've work for have had this policy.
In fact, during hunting season they post up flyers to remind people.
Since my job is generally the opposite direction of my hunting spot, its not a big deal to pick up a weapon after work.

Irish Pennant · 09-01-2005, 06:45 AM

I stated that this was not a hunting issue and that it should be moved to another forum. Here is why.
But for them to restict my second admendment right or a state statute that gives me a right to carry concealed, should be illegal, when it is on property open to the public.
The Supreme Court has already decided that the Constitution is a contract between government and the citizenry and that private business is selectively exempt from that contract. It seems like the only area that nongovernmental business has to comply with is the civil rights aspect of the constitution and bill of rights. Firearm possession is not a civil right; neither is smoking, drinking, drug use, bad mouthing your boss, your DNA, your urine, the way you dress, your weight, hunting, privacy or search and seizure. A business will decide what is in its own best interest and act upon it. You can connect hunting to it but its so insignificant to the question that was asked.

I was raised to believe that we were a government of the people for the people by the people and that the protections guaranteed by the constitution applied to all. I have learned thru life that this is not true. Government is a separate entity and when there is a need to violate the constitution, they hand it over to private business.
:depressed:

Elkhunter · 09-01-2005, 10:43 AM

I'm thinking the Insurance Companies have a little something to do with this?

baltz526 · 09-02-2005, 05:43 AM

Quote:

I think this is not a hunting topic and needs to be moved to a different forum

weapons are used to hunt, hunting is done with weapons. from every direction this is a hunting issue.

baltz526 · 09-02-2005, 06:05 AM

the main legal point of these restrictions is that, on the travel to and from the workplace, these restrictions being put in place by employers, are taking away your right to protect yourself.if a company puts this gun ban policy in effect, they should be required to suppy an entry gate onto their property with a gaurded weapons locker, or a fenced parking area set up for non weapons free vehicals.

Swamp Puppy · 09-02-2005, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Another aspect is your commute to and from work, doesn't anybody feel the need for protection? What if your life has been threatened? Your company could deny your right to protect yourself.

you scare me dude...i can see it now. driving down the road with one hand on the wheel and one on the Glock just in case you suddenly have to defend yourself from some other commuter.

P-A-R-A-N-O-I-A

you people have been watching too many re-runs of Red Dawn.

and furthermore..if some guy comes into your office and starts shooting the place up..what good is it going to do you to have a gun out in your truck in the parking lot?

after reading some of the "logical" reasons why people should have guns at work..i am convinced now more than ever that it is a good policy that they are NOT allowed. some of these posts remind me of something Takleberry from police academy might say.

Rank Amateur · 09-03-2005, 08:15 PM

So you point is?
1. Bad guys are not in our commute.
2. We are all paranoid.
3. Bad things only happen in the movies.
4. Out of 500 people, nobody will be able to get to their rig and retreive a weapon during a office attack.
5. We can't trust law abiding citizens to pack guns.

Are you a relative of Sarah Brady?????

Maverick Maxcat · 09-03-2005, 09:49 PM

Just to present a different view; Every competent adult on the Ranch is REQUIRED to keep a rifle in their vehicle AT ALL TIMES, with the magazine LOADED!!! On the Ranch 4-legged varmints are shot on sight. The 2-legged version is given the chance to surrender.

Question of the day: What do you call an armed society?
Answer: Polite

If everyone is packing, and everyone knows it, crime will drop to nothing. The criminals dumb enough to keep stealing are naturally selected out of the gene pool---quickly!

Swamp Puppy · 09-04-2005, 09:44 AM

Quote:

So you point is?
1. Bad guys are not in our commute.
2. We are all paranoid.
3. Bad things only happen in the movies.
4. Out of 500 people, nobody will be able to get to their rig and retreive a weapon during a office attack.

yeah...that's about it.

Rank Amateur · 09-04-2005, 10:09 AM

What happened to #5?

Hey guys, I can see a bussiness oppurtunity here. Secure gun locker facility in a nearby bussiness.

Swamp Puppy · 09-04-2005, 11:23 AM

#5 had no real bearing on anything. therefore it was ommitted.

8-guage · 09-07-2005, 09:03 PM

"Question of the day: What do you call an armed society?
Answer: Polite
If everyone is packing, and everyone knows it, crime will drop to nothing. The criminals dumb enough to keep stealing are naturally selected out of the gene pool---quickly!"

I dissagree Maxcat. I've never agreed with that statement. Tempers always flare and when they do, Wally and CT will pull their guns out over the smalliest issue.
Protecting ones pride these days seems to be HUGE and people pull out guns because someone cut them off or flipped them off. Every dissagreement and argument in the world would be solved with ones gun and I thank GOD that that kind of thinking will never come to be.

Norm · 09-08-2005, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Question of the day: What do you call an armed society?
Answer: Polite

If everyone is packing, and everyone knows it, crime will drop to nothing. The criminals dumb enough to keep stealing are naturally selected out of the gene pool---quickly!

I couldn't agree more!

Swamp Puppy · 09-08-2005, 06:16 PM

Maxcat..i do believe that back in the ol' wild wild west just about everyone was packing.

and yet crime still existed...

it's a catchy little statement, but not an ounce of truth in it. you might do well turning that into a bumper sticker though. probably sell alot of them to the survivalists and wanna-be mercenary crowd. LOL!!!