I was suspended from my job for having a gun.

If you're old employer is contacted by a prospective new employer for a reference check, the old employer may bring up the firearms incident as being the basis of termination. Something like this placed upon your employment record can follow you with negative results.

Here are two illustrations (the first one is true).

1. On both my wife's and mine credit report (I don't remember from which credit bureau, maybe all three) it is noted that we are active military. Neither one of us has ever been in the military. How they got that idea is beyond me. Have you ever tried to get information changed on a credit report? We have and and trying to get this erased is not worth the hassle.

2. You're at a doctor's office answering routine questions. And they ask if you've ever used drugs? Or have a firearm in the house? By innocently answering the questions truthfully without thinking too much about, ("yeah you smoked marijuana when you were a teenager") or ("yeah I have a pistol"), they'll be furiously writing down that you have a drug problem or that your a danger to your children and society at large - before you even realize that you shouldn't have truthfully answered the question in the first place. Once this gets into your record it's like the internet - you can't take it back.
 
I had a similar incident, though I was not actually working for the company (I was hauling product to them), I got out of the truck with my pistol on my hip and another trucker saw it and apparently felt the need to tell someone, who proceeded to pitch a hissy fit... I, in turn, told them to go jump off a cliff. I have better things to do than deal with morons and their policies, I suspect you do as well.
 
Ok, lets clear something up right here. These are the questions asked 95% of the time.

A. Did so and so work for you from these dates.
B. Is so and so eligible to be rehired.

If the previous employer volunteers anything else they can be sued for libel, therefore most won't risk it. Also some states have laws about what information they can ask for.

If you want to find out what they are saying, have a friend call them and pretend to be checking employment history and see what they are telling people.

Here's a good reference. http://career-advice.monster.com/jo...d/what-can-employers-legally-say/article.aspx

Your REFERENCES however can say whatever they want, so choose carefully.


The original poster showed an amazing lack of good judgement going out to his car to show off a gun to some guy he just met. I mean really... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
dakota.potts said:
Any employee or even a regular volunteer with regular duties is consider to be "at their place of business" and can carry open or concealed without a license.
Click to expand...
Wrong, wrong, wrong, how is a VOLUNTEER an EMPLOYEE.

You have posted similar thoughts before and were proved wrong and now here doing it again. Musician/bar comes to mind:rolleyes:
 
dakota.potts said:
In Florida, I can open carry or concealed carry a handgun at my place of business, including limited places you couldn't otherwise carry (being a bar owner comes to mind). Any employee or even a regular volunteer with regular duties is consider to be "at their place of business" and can carry open or concealed without a license.
Click to expand...
I'm sure we've covered this before. A place of business is "your" place of business ONLY if you are the owner. If you are an employee, it is NOT your place of business and any laws allowing firearms carry "at your place of business" do not apply to you. Same for volunteers -- a place where you volunteer, even regularly, is not your place of business.
 
We decided that a one-off night at a bar may not be a place of business and that there was no evidence to support that and anyone wanting to do so would risk being the first case.

The case (which I'll find) was provided to me by the legal team at Florida Carry, Inc. It decided that a person regularly volunteering at a city hall without pay was considered at his place of business because he had to show up on a regular schedule and perform specific regular duties. I've talked it over with 2 different Florida firearms lawyers who have shown me the the statutes and the case law supporting this reading. Unfortunately I neglected to keep it.

My ultimate point being this: in some states, you may have very strong protection from the law but if the business decides to fire you, they can do so in an instant.

If you want to debate the laws I've stated, perhaps a different thread or a PM would be better and I can send you the case through PM when I get such. I think my point remains that in my state, you may not be covered from an employer where you would be from prosecution. You can expect to lose your job for a legal activity.

ETA: case http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15001995866506477466
"This Court, in Rinzler v. Carson,[5] noted that:

"[T]he Legislature in adopting the Revised Statutes of 1969, which includes Chapter 790 dealing with the subject of 67*67 weapons and firearms, has declared (Section 790.25(1)) it to be the policy of the Legislature not only that it is necessary to promote firearm safety and to curb and prevent the use of firearms and other weapons in crime and by incompetent persons, but also that the lawful use in defense of life, home and property and for other lawful purposes is not to be prohibited."[6]
If we upheld the lower court's verdict, we would be saying that a person, in defense of his home or place of business, is not permitted to conceal his possession of a firearm. This would mean that:

1). An owner of a business, or his employee, could not carry a concealed weapon on or about his person i.e., on his person, or in a drawer next to the cash register). He would either have to risk a loss of business by offending customers, or give up his only means of self-defense.

The Legislature could not have intended a result so inconsistent with its Declaration of Policy in Section 790.25(1), the Exceptions to said Section in Section 790.25(3)(n), and the Construction in Section 790.25(4). We must, therefore, reverse the verdict of the trial court and find the defendant not guilty of a violation of Florida Statute 790.01, F.S.A.

"(1) Declaration of policy. — The legislature finds as a matter of public policy and fact that it is necessary to promote firearms safety and to curb and prevent the use of firearms and other weapons in crime and by incompetent persons without prohibiting the lawful use in defense of life, home, and property, and the use by United States or state military organizations, and as otherwise now authorized by law, including the right to use and own firearms for target practice and marksmanship on target practice ranges or other lawful places, and lawful hunting and other lawful purposes.

* * * * *

"(3) Exceptions. — The provisions of sections 790.05 and 790.06, Florida Statutes, shall not apply in the following instances, and despite said sections it shall be lawful for the following persons to own, possess, and lawfully use firearms and other weapons, ammunition, and supplies for lawful purposes:

* * * * *

"(n) A person possessing arms at his home or place of business;

"(4) Construction. — This act shall be liberally construed to carry out the declaration of policy herein and in favor of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes. This act shall be supplemental and additional to existing rights to bear arms now guaranteed by law and decisions of the courts of Florida, and nothing herein shall impair or diminish any of such rights. This act shall supersede any law, ordinance, or regulation in conflict herewith."
Click to expand...

I hope this is on-topic as it deals with carry in the workplace. In this case, the defendant was not fired and his employer even paid for the firearm he carried.

I think it's important to note that in a similar case, while I could do such, I could expect to be fired on the spot without notice in my state. OP had mentioned he was worried about both criminal and civil repercussions.
 
Last edited:
Kansas law

Can't say about company policy as to whether or not they'll can you for that .

Now as far as the "jail time " goes , doesn't Kansas have the Castle Law?

Most States now have it . Missouri does . This basically says that your car is extension of your home as far as guns go. You can have them hidden,loaded in your vehicle and in reach in case of an emergency. You don't even have to tell a cop you if he stops you unless he asks. If he asks you have to tell him . I thought Kansas has adopted that law. Worth checking out. Funny though . most people don't even know it exists in thier state . I didn't know until 3 years after it was activated .
 
Does Castle Doctrine protect keeping your gun in your car? My understanding is that you may still need a license to keep a gun in a car, but criteria for using it in a defensive standard are the same as for your house i.e. you may not have a duty to retreat where you would in public.

Missouri may allow you to keep a gun in your car AND extend Castle Doctrine to your car as Florida does, but I don't know if it's the castle law that allows you to keep the gun in your car. That may also be a state by state decision so I'd be caution against telling it to somebody as a blanket statement.
 
dakota.potts said:
ETA: case http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...95866506477466

...

I hope this is on-topic as it deals with carry in the workplace. In this case, the defendant was not fired and his employer even paid for the firearm he carried.
Click to expand...
If this is now binding in Florida, I would say it puts Florida squarely at odds with other states. (I was going to write "most other states," but I don't know that.) What I do know is that in my state, and in all other such cases I have read, a clear distinction has been drawn and, where the law refers to one's place of business, it has been interpreted to mean that the person must have an ownership interest in the business. In other words, if you're an owner it's your place of "business," but if you're only an employee it's a place of "employment."

So you may be right about Florida, but please don't extrapolate from that and advise people from other states that employees are automatically entitled to carry at work even without a license/permit. We have fifty states plus the District of Columbia, which means you have to be mindful of fifty-one sets of laws (excluding federal) when giving advice.
 
The legal protection probably depends whether the employee (or regular volunteer) is carrying the weapon as an agent of the business owner, or against the wishes of the owner.
 
Aguila,
I apologize if I didn't make it clear enough that I meant in my state only.

What I said was "There is some protection in Florida, in different ways. I can't be fired for having a gun in my car. In Florida, I can open carry or concealed carry a handgun at my place of business, including limited places you couldn't otherwise carry (being a bar owner comes to mind). Any employee or even a regular volunteer with regular duties is consider to be "at their place of business" and can carry open or concealed without a license. ... So, in many ways Florida has more protection than it would seem in the OP's state."

I wouldn't hope to know or give advice on 50 states plus D.C., only to say that depending on state law you can be doing something completely legal yet still be fired on the spot for it. Or, conversely, that even though your employer may (rightfully) fire you for something, you needn't necessarily worry about jail time for doing so, as the OP was concerned about.

I am curious to know how things have played out.
 
While this is certainly an interesting side trip, it really has little to do with the OP and the status of law in Kansas.

Let's stay with Toto, shall we? ;)
 
Going back to the OP, it will be up to his employer if he is allowed to return to work as a normal employee. He joined into the agreement when he went to work there, so time will tell if it works out well for him. Perhaps it is a lesson learned instead that others should not repeat.
 
The original poster showed an amazing lack of good judgement going out to his car to show off a gun to some guy he just met. I mean really...
Click to expand...

I agree. Showing off a gun is a sure way to become the target for a thief and possible law enforcement. Whether I have a gun with me or where it is nobody else's business. I don't feel a need to carry when our little group rides our motorcycles because I know the Special Forces Veteran behind me has his and knows how to use it.
 
NJgunowner said:
Ok, lets clear something up right here. These are the questions asked 95% of the time.

A. Did so and so work for you from these dates.
B. Is so and so eligible to be rehired.

If the previous employer volunteers anything else they can be sued for libel, therefore most won't risk it. Also some states have laws about what information they can ask for.
Click to expand...

Some states may or may not have laws about what you can say but I think you're wrong here. What you can't say is anything related to the skills or abilities of the employee or anything that can relate to their suitability or fit for the new job. Pure facts, such as, "We fired him for having a gun on the premises," can't lead to a lawsuit.

For the OP, I don't know if KS has a parking lot law. Oklahoma does and I fully support it. But you're not following the letter, the intent, or the spirit of the law when you take the gun out of your glove box or storage and hand it or show it to another person.

Sorry I don't remember who said it and don't want to scroll back through pages to find it but whoever said that the OP needs to learn how to get along and get ahead in the world. It took me way too long to learn not to burn bridges at work and I've paid for it. Get smart. It really is true that you catch more flies with honey. Learn to build relationships rather than go through life fighting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top