Unloaded handgun in CA in a lock box in a car trunk at work.
- Thread starter gdeal
- Start date
grymster2007
New member
He was serious! But legal or not, I didn't really relish the idea of driving a hundred miles up Hwy 5 with truckers and families in Winnebagos calling the CHP on me.
specoperator
Inactive
My company had the same policies in their area until an incident occurred where me carrying a weapon inside my vehicle helped to alleviate an incident before it cost my company money. So basically, get some guys to pretend to want to vandalize your store late at night. Walk out to your car, drive around and find them, pull out your handgun, and then have them run away. Make sure this is all on CCTV so that the higher ups can see the benefits. Then this problem will all go away
Doc Intrepid
New member
somehow I doubt that doing what you describe is going to make it 'all go away'!
This was the status and predictions six months ago:
http://workplaceviolencenews.com/2008/11/27/dealing-with-new-guns-at-work-laws/
And here is the focus today from those fun-loving folks who love to hate you:
http://www.bradycampaign.org/action/workplace/
Not feeling the love? You'll love this! --
http://www.workforce.com/section/03/feature/25/92/11/
Another example of how anti-gun laws create still more anti-gun laws (obviously, disarming the work force will create a situation where, should a gunman enter the premises, there is no one there to stop the gunman...)
Spending some time scanning this site will -
a) raise your blood pressure; and
b) illustrate the manner in which a "coalition of the willing' is being created to slowly, incrementally, step by step, create a situation where gun ownership is simply going to be broadly considered "unreasonable" within most environments.
And in case you hadn't noticed, God is on their side!
http://www.godnotguns.org/
Not so really funny. In the 70's CHP Officers told me to carry the empty handgun on the dashboard, so that it could be seen from outside the car, while going to the range. This was before the Newhall incident. After that incident the advice has been, "In a locked box, in the trunk, separate from the ammunition."
As BIllCA indicates this might not be according to law, but I really do not like getting into a hassle with LEOs ... it can ruin an otherwise nice day.
This is NOT advancing responsible firearms ownership and is therefore not TFL material.
The way to handle this issue is to push your state legislature to pass a law similar to the one that has stood up to challenges in OK and the one recently passed in UT.
While searching for a job after I was laid off I put "Avid Target Shooter" on several applications. In two interviews as I recall I was asked about owning firearms... Never heard back from them.
Quite sad really. I mean I offered to teach my girlfriends friend to shoot, I've never seen someone get that upset and pale, Terror would've been a good descriptor.
Sadly yes gun ownership now labels you "dangerous, deviant, and an outcast."
Miss (granted I wasn't alive) the old days were every honest man carried a gun on his hip.
An armed society is a polite society!
Quite sad really. I mean I offered to teach my girlfriends friend to shoot, I've never seen someone get that upset and pale, Terror would've been a good descriptor.
Sadly yes gun ownership now labels you "dangerous, deviant, and an outcast."
Miss (granted I wasn't alive) the old days were every honest man carried a gun on his hip.
An armed society is a polite society!
WRT a locked container in your vehicle that you do not own or is not your personal property:
It also defies common sense on company property. If the employee cannot open the container, then he cannot open it to either (a) hide stolen company property or (b) retreive any prohibited item.
In theory a company agent could demand to see your wallet and leaf through all its contents to "check" if you're taking any company info out of the building. But you also have the right to refuse to allow them to see anything that is not company issue -- credit cards, your ID, your CCW permit, your AAA membership card, photos, personal notes, etc.
Really? A legal entity resorting to extortion to force someone to commit a crime of unlawfully opening or damaging the property (locked luggage) of others? Consipiracy to commit "theft" (pre-supposing they "seize" a firearm in your girlfriend's locked luggage as proof for your termination).JohnKSa said:
It also defies common sense on company property. If the employee cannot open the container, then he cannot open it to either (a) hide stolen company property or (b) retreive any prohibited item.
In theory a company agent could demand to see your wallet and leaf through all its contents to "check" if you're taking any company info out of the building. But you also have the right to refuse to allow them to see anything that is not company issue -- credit cards, your ID, your CCW permit, your AAA membership card, photos, personal notes, etc.
Before I type anything else let me go on record saying I believe anyone who can legally own a firearms should be able to safely secure it in their vehicle while at work.
That said, I don't think the locked box that "belongs to someone else" is an out either. What's to keep you from saying your gun box belongs to someone else to avoid having it opened? It seems to me a bag in your vehicle that you didn't pack could be treated that same as they do at an airport. Open it up for inspection or pack it off to never-never land.
(No sane person pre-supposes everyone else is totally honest)
That said, I don't think the locked box that "belongs to someone else" is an out either. What's to keep you from saying your gun box belongs to someone else to avoid having it opened? It seems to me a bag in your vehicle that you didn't pack could be treated that same as they do at an airport. Open it up for inspection or pack it off to never-never land.
(No sane person pre-supposes everyone else is totally honest)
And I would respond that at an airport, ample warning exists that federal law mandates certain requirements, including baggage searches. Not so if you're transporting something in your car.
Granted, it may be an unusual case where you're carrying a 3rd party's locked container (camera case, guitar case, luggage, etc.) but still probable.
Again, we return to the common sense argument that if the employee does not have access to the container, he cannot use it to store company property nor retreive from it any item that may be prohibited.
The company is interested in either (a) security of its assets or (b) investigating a complaint against the employee. In (a) that interest is met with the search of the vehicle, regardless of whether or not the container can be opened. In the case of (b), forcing the employee to open the container of a 3rd party can be refused based on the principle that it may be a crime to do so. Forcing the situation beyond this point my open the corporation up to charges of conspiracy to commit a crime (if one exists) or extortion (forcing another to commit an unlawful act via threat).
Even if the company has your consent to search a vehicle, that search must still be reasonable. If you are accused, for example, of having a rifle in your car, no reasonable expectation can exist to allow opening a glove box or center console.
You have every right to refuse, they have every right to fire you UNLESS there is some law limiting the employer/employee contract with respect to the particular situation at hand. At least that's how it is in TX.
If my company asks to search my car and I say no (which is my right) they fire me. If they find a locked container and tell me to open it and I don't (for whatever reason) they fire me. In other words, if I prevent them from completing their search of my vehicle then they fire me. I seriously doubt that they would, for even a second, be deterred by claims that I couldn't open the container. It's not their problem.
They want to search and I'm supposed to help them get it done if I want to keep my job. If the search doesn't get done or they find something I shouldn't have in the parking lot (firearms, illegal drugs, alcohol, tobacco products) then I'm fired. And no, I'm not kidding about the tobacco products.
And what assurance is there that you don't have access to the container? Just because you told them so???
Maybe you're willing then to let them search for the key that might fit the lock. That would expand the search to every little nook and cranny in the vehicle (and on your person).
With regard to searching for a key... if they believe the key is on my person, like some item of contraband, they can demand I empty my pockets. But they could do that anyhow, based on most security principles, right?
If your employer demands you commit an illegal act and threatens to fire you if you don't do it, they can be charged with extortion and conspiracy to commit the unlawful act. Of course, the problem is proving it in court.
The issue here is that the typical boilerplate agreement says the employee must allow a search of his vehicle. This means the empoyee must cooperate by allowing access to the vehicle. If a locked or sealed container exists inside the vehicle that is not the employee's property, the employee has still fulfilled his obligation to allow the search. He is under no obligation to commit an act of vandalism by breaking the locks on the container. If the agent wants to see the contents, he can take the responsibility for damages and the risk of criminal charges.
Firing the employee for refusing to vandalize property that is not his, but under his care, may be extortion under some state laws. It is certainly consipracy to commit vandalism.
If your employer demands you commit an illegal act and threatens to fire you if you don't do it, they can be charged with extortion and conspiracy to commit the unlawful act. Of course, the problem is proving it in court.
The issue here is that the typical boilerplate agreement says the employee must allow a search of his vehicle. This means the empoyee must cooperate by allowing access to the vehicle. If a locked or sealed container exists inside the vehicle that is not the employee's property, the employee has still fulfilled his obligation to allow the search. He is under no obligation to commit an act of vandalism by breaking the locks on the container. If the agent wants to see the contents, he can take the responsibility for damages and the risk of criminal charges.
Firing the employee for refusing to vandalize property that is not his, but under his care, may be extortion under some state laws. It is certainly consipracy to commit vandalism.