There goes our rights again!
http://www.occupationalhazards.com/articles/14725
http://www.occupationalhazards.com/articles/14725
Court Rules in Favor of an Employer's Right to Ban Firearms
- Thread starter MoW
- Start date
well, I agree it is stupid on the part of businessmen to ban guns, but they have rights too. It's called property rights. Which is supposed to mean what they say goes.
That being said, I have the right to not patronize their business and not work for them (which I fully plan to do so)
Katy Mills mall in Katy Texas has 30.06 sign up (saying no guns). I NEVER shop there.
That being said, I have the right to not patronize their business and not work for them (which I fully plan to do so)
Katy Mills mall in Katy Texas has 30.06 sign up (saying no guns). I NEVER shop there.
I Agree
I agree with that ruling, believe it or not. If I owned my own business, I should be allowed to run it as I see fit. Let market forces determine wether I succeed or not.
Here in California they have banned smoking in all restaurants and bars. In other words, you own a bar, and the state tells you that you can't allow smoking. That is an intrusion into private business. If one bar owner allows smoking, and someone opens a smoke free bar across the street, and that bar causes the other to shut down, oh well. That is how businesses should run.
If a business prohibts guns then the market place should determine its future.
I agree with that ruling, believe it or not. If I owned my own business, I should be allowed to run it as I see fit. Let market forces determine wether I succeed or not.
Here in California they have banned smoking in all restaurants and bars. In other words, you own a bar, and the state tells you that you can't allow smoking. That is an intrusion into private business. If one bar owner allows smoking, and someone opens a smoke free bar across the street, and that bar causes the other to shut down, oh well. That is how businesses should run.
If a business prohibts guns then the market place should determine its future.
I totally disagree, for a variety of reasons.
Can a company ban people from bringing other safety equipment onto company property? Can a company ban employees from driving cars with air bags or ABS brakes? Can a company ban pocket knives in cars in the parking lot?
Banning items in cars on company lots does more than simply dictate what can and cannot be brought onto the company's property. It effectively prohibits the carrying of arms not only at work, but also on the way to work. It means from the moment the employee steps out of his home in the morning until the employee gets back inside his home after work, he is unarmed. That is totally unreasonable and unacceptable. Employees are then at greater risk during driveway robberies, carjackings, muggings and robberies at grocery stores or restaraunts they stop at after work, etc.
Furthermore, a company's physical control over its parking lot is sufficiently attenuated that I don't think it should be able to tell any legitimate employee or visitor what they can bring onto the lot. 99% of companies don't even check parking lots for unauthorized cars, because that requires an employee vehicle registry and extra security guards. So how is it legitimate for a company to ban guns in cars when gang bangers can hang out in the company's parking lot and be left alone unless they do something outrageous that draws the attention of arriving and departing employees?
I also don't agree with company policies regarding guns in the workplace. Can a company in a high-rise ban employees from bringing 1000yds of rope and gloves in case of another 9/11? Can a company require employees to wear blindfolds around the office? Can it also then claim immunity if an employee puts an obstacle in a thoroughfare and someone else trips? Can a company refuse to hire employees who have a certain level of proficiency in self defense?
If a company is going to ban any safety equipment that can be easily concealed (for aesthetic reasons or whatever), it should have to provide equivalent security/safety measures and accept full liability for bad situations that might have been mitigated by the banned items. Merely accepting liability isn't enough, because liability is an after-the-fact remedy. Millions of dollars going to relatives will not bring a slain employee back to life.
Can a company ban people from bringing other safety equipment onto company property? Can a company ban employees from driving cars with air bags or ABS brakes? Can a company ban pocket knives in cars in the parking lot?
Banning items in cars on company lots does more than simply dictate what can and cannot be brought onto the company's property. It effectively prohibits the carrying of arms not only at work, but also on the way to work. It means from the moment the employee steps out of his home in the morning until the employee gets back inside his home after work, he is unarmed. That is totally unreasonable and unacceptable. Employees are then at greater risk during driveway robberies, carjackings, muggings and robberies at grocery stores or restaraunts they stop at after work, etc.
Furthermore, a company's physical control over its parking lot is sufficiently attenuated that I don't think it should be able to tell any legitimate employee or visitor what they can bring onto the lot. 99% of companies don't even check parking lots for unauthorized cars, because that requires an employee vehicle registry and extra security guards. So how is it legitimate for a company to ban guns in cars when gang bangers can hang out in the company's parking lot and be left alone unless they do something outrageous that draws the attention of arriving and departing employees?
I also don't agree with company policies regarding guns in the workplace. Can a company in a high-rise ban employees from bringing 1000yds of rope and gloves in case of another 9/11? Can a company require employees to wear blindfolds around the office? Can it also then claim immunity if an employee puts an obstacle in a thoroughfare and someone else trips? Can a company refuse to hire employees who have a certain level of proficiency in self defense?
If a company is going to ban any safety equipment that can be easily concealed (for aesthetic reasons or whatever), it should have to provide equivalent security/safety measures and accept full liability for bad situations that might have been mitigated by the banned items. Merely accepting liability isn't enough, because liability is an after-the-fact remedy. Millions of dollars going to relatives will not bring a slain employee back to life.
Tyme
What part of private property don't you understand?
Here in California, our state has piled up mountains of regulations about what private companies can and can not do. The result has been a booming economy in Nevada. Many of our businesses have moved there to escape our laws.
If I opened a store and I did not want any kind of weapons on any part of my property, that wish should be honored. If you decided to take your business elsewhere, that is your right. If you want to work for me and don't like my rules, you should go work somewhere else. Why on Earth should Big Brother tell me what I can do on my property.
What part of private property don't you understand?
Here in California, our state has piled up mountains of regulations about what private companies can and can not do. The result has been a booming economy in Nevada. Many of our businesses have moved there to escape our laws.
If I opened a store and I did not want any kind of weapons on any part of my property, that wish should be honored. If you decided to take your business elsewhere, that is your right. If you want to work for me and don't like my rules, you should go work somewhere else. Why on Earth should Big Brother tell me what I can do on my property.
Marko Kloos
Inactive
Yes, yes, and yes again. Their property rights override my rights in that case. I have the option to not patronize and/or not sign an employment contract with them if I dislike their rules.
Can you ban visitors to your house from bringing any of these items onto your property? Absolutely...although you probably won't get too many visitors.
If enough people dislike the company rules, then the company will sooner or later have problems attracting employees or customers, but that's up to the market, not the legislature or the judiciary.
It has nothing to do with your rights or mine, and everything to do with the rights of the property owner. I don't have freedom of speech in someone else's living room, or the right to carry a weapon into someone's house without asking for permission.
But the employee is master of his fate and captain of his soul once he sets foot off of company property, no?
The company's policy about items in cars not only affects what happens on company policy, but also what items are available to employees between the company's property and their homes.
Even a die-hard libertarian should be able to arrive at some balance between the absolute property rights of an employer and the absolute right of an individual to have with him any legal items he wants when on public roads. Either the company should have a security gate with a guard and lockers to check evil, dangerous items, or the company should just leave the contents of employees' cars alone.
The company's policy about items in cars not only affects what happens on company policy, but also what items are available to employees between the company's property and their homes.
Even a die-hard libertarian should be able to arrive at some balance between the absolute property rights of an employer and the absolute right of an individual to have with him any legal items he wants when on public roads. Either the company should have a security gate with a guard and lockers to check evil, dangerous items, or the company should just leave the contents of employees' cars alone.
Or people will become more and more conditioned to be serfs, and companies will impose stricter and stricter policies. Pretty soon you'll have people living in corporate apartments, and every part of their day will be dictated by their employer, the great benevolent corporation. Things will get worse and worse, and you'll keep saying that anyone who doesn't like it can, what, move to podunk, Idaho and start his own company from scratch?
If you don't want any kind of weapons on any part of your property, you had best not open a store, because people are going to bring weapons in whether you ban them or not. Some such items you might not even recognize as weapons.roy reali said:
.