Ruling on Oregon teacher handgun carry

Individual rights are not the same as employer/employee rights. The ruling basically falls in line with the aspect that the employer has the viable legal position of controlling various aspects of an employee's life while the employee is on the clock or within the workplace.
 
And I think herein lies the problem with the government running the schooling system. Here the line between what government can't do (encroach on rights, etc) and what employers can do is blurred. Is the district part of the government or a private employer?

If the district can dictate what the teachers can and cannot say based on 'separation of church and state', then shouldn't the district be bound by the same laws governing municipalities and other government entities within the state? It was my impression that the dispute isn't wheather private employers have the right to ban firearms from workplaces but that only the state can create laws regulating the possession and carry of firearms - no lower government bodies can.

Anyway, it's a very interesting case - it seems like a version of having your cake and eating it too. :-) Somewhere one side is going to have to give.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top