mapsjanhere said:
If you go by SCOTUS, you have no right to conceal carry to begin with,
Um, no. Actually, prior cases have dealt with State regulation of concealed carry, and not carry (bearing) in a general sense. Add to this, that such cases were all before
Heller and (the current) incorporation (case).
The current legal landscape. as regards gun rights, is in flux.
you barely have a right to own a gun for home defense, and that only since Heller.
Barely? Hardly.
Heller's central holding was unequivocal. People have the unadorned right to keep firearms, within their homes
for all lawful purposes, including self-defense. Included in that class of arms, firearms, was the subclass of handguns that a government could not ban, as handguns are demonstrably the weapon of choice for self-defense.
With
McDonald being granted cert, the question is now broadened to include all people, not just those who live in Federal enclaves.
The question is not if the 2A will be incorporated, but by what manner the incorporation takes place (there is another thread that this aspect can be discussed,
here).
Bella said:
Some of you here mention that there would be no financial risk to a business owner by allowing employees to carry guns.
Any such liability is actually a two part question. What liability if the employee is allowed only to store her arm(s) within her vehicle? as opposed to carry within the workplace itself. Add in that the State has mitigated employer liability in the former case, and the employer is still allowed to restrict personal carry within the actual job.
An employee may still leave the workplace, get a gun and return to cause havoc. That scenario has not been eliminated. It can not be foreseen and the employer's liability is the same, guns in the parking lot or not.
The fact that insurance companies might raise rates do not necessarily make a valid claim by the employer. Especially since insurance companies are want to raise rates at any pretext (seemingly real or not).