Should an employer be allowed to extend a CCW ban to include employee vehicles?

[Green Lantern]

Please explain if you like, but I was hoping the options of the poll would break down the views by any impact the practice has on us personally.

My view is simple - I'll gladly respect an employers request that I not have a loaded gun on my person within easy reach while inside the four walls of their business. Since it is inside of his property, he calls the shots.

In return, while it may be sitting on his property, the interior of my vehicle is MY property. Thus I feel I am fully within my rights to keep what I please in there, including a firearm - as long as it is legal, safe, and SECURE.

I've heard the argument that sounds valid at first, that if the law decides that your car is your property and thus immune from unreasonable restrictions from employers, what about the clothes on your body?

But anyone should be able to see that, as I said, a loaded gun within arms reach inside a building with your coworkers and/or customers is totally different than a gun locked up inside of your car. Part of me wants to over-complicate matters by looking at special cases like indoor/enclosed parking lots and places that actually have metal detectors and armed protessional security. But, no...what's it matter?

People like me are NOT trying to trample private property rights, as the nay-sayers claim. We're actually trying to preserve them.

If employee vehicle protection laws are forced, then a person's right to deny CCW (that's CARRYING a Concealed Weapon!) on his property will not be destroyed, or be in any risk of it.

On the other hand, if these laws are shot down in every state...if employers realize that there's no legal recourse to be sought against them for saying what legal property an employee may or may NOT keep in his/her on personal vehicle? Well, use your imagination...!

 

[EddieCoyle]

I voted Yes. My car is on their property so they can make the rules. I expect to be able to make the rules regarding my property; so they should be allowed to do the same.

If it bothered me a lot, I could find another job.

My employer makes these restrictions and I often bring guns to work -my range is close by and I can go there at lunch. I respect their right to make rules regrading their premises by parking in lot that is off company property.

the interior of my vehicle is MY property

By this logic, the interior of my pocket is MY property, therefore....

 

[TheShadow]

My car MAY be on their property, by the car is still MY property, I make payments on it, I make repairs on it, I maintain the insurence on it. Ergo, If my property (gun) is housed within my property (my car), parked in an open unsecured area (their parking lot) why does their property rights trump mine?

 

[tenbase]

nope. if my employer wants to take over my car payments, then they can start making rules about what I keep inside of it.

 

[Green Lantern]

"By this logic, the interior of my pocket is MY property, therefore...."

A-chem:

(from OP)
I've heard the argument that sounds valid at first, that if the law decides that your car is your property and thus immune from unreasonable restrictions from employers, what about the clothes on your body?

But anyone should be able to see that, as I said, a loaded gun within arms reach inside a building with your coworkers and/or customers is totally different than a gun locked up inside of your car.

Ahhh...compromise!!!

 

[Thefabulousfink]

I voted NO.

I respect that the property owner should be able to make the decision to ban ccw on their property, however, I feel it is unreasonable to extend that ban to the contents of your car for a couple reasons:

1. Many States view the car as an extention of the home and I feel the the owner would have no control over what was in your car as long as you are not violateing his rights (i.e. not breaking the law).
2. While it may seem resonable to simply park off the property, it is not allways possible.
3. It seems unreasonable and possibly dangerous for a business owner/employer to demand that customers and employees secure their weapons in an off-site location before entering the property.

It boils down this IMHO: My car is my property, I will honor the owner's request by leaving my weapon in my car. As long as I do not break the law there should be no reason to search my car. If I am comming to/from the range, I am not going to drive all the way across town to take my gun home before going to the store that is across the street. Nor am I going to put my gun in a locker at the bus station (plus I think that is illegal), and I don't think a Police Officer will let me walk up to him with a gun and say, "Hold this for me while I go into that store and shop"

 

[wuchak]

Let's extend it beyond firearms. Same principle just different objects.

Employer decides:
-fishing is cruel to fish and bans fishing poles and tackle boxes
-heavy metal music is the work of devil so heavy metal cd's are banned
-nobody but certified mechanics should be allowed to work on cars so all tools are banned
-employees playing sports are at risk for injuries which will make the company's insurance rates go up and they will miss time at work so all sports equipment is banned
-listening to music while driving is distracting and causes accidents so no car stereos are allowed on company property

 

[fixyurgun]

I feel that what's in my car and/or my pockets is my business.
I thank God i'm self-employed.

 

[bluecowdawg]

My company does

I was "forced" to sign a paper that stated i would not bring any firearms on there property and would be subject to a vehicle search,allthough none have ever been done.This rule went into effect about 3 yrs ago with them.I did my own research and found out that if an employer has a gated entrance to their prop.and mine does and we also have armed guards then they can do this.However they do not search employees cars when they enter the gates,sooooo theoretically a dissgruntled employee would be able to come into work some morn. with whatever he wanted to bring with him/her (pistol,sg,rifle,bazooka ),park his vehicle get out and go into anyone of the buildings on the premises and start shooting,and by the time security got there it would be too late for some.Example; several yrs ago,maybe 15 or 20 a man came to this place i work and drove through the gate,waved to the guards they let him in because his wife was an employee and so he had a parking sticker on his car and met his wife just inside the gates got out of his vehicle and shot her in the head killing her.The guar at the gate pulled his sidearm and shot and killed the man,however IT WAS TOO LATE FOR THE WOMAN!!!:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: I dont understand what is so hard to understand why rules ,regs.,laws like this DO NOT MAKE SENSE

 

[JJY]

Consistency is important. Support and respect for rights should extend to all rights, not just the ones you like the best. Property rights are a very important principle upon which our economy and country are based.

I am an employer with a handful of employees. The office we all work in is mine – I pay the overpriced rent. I don’t own the parking lot, but if I did, just like in the office, I have the right to say what / who is allowed in. Anyone who disagrees is free to find a different job.

No matter how we disagree with the underlying logic, property owners are and should be free to decide who/what is on their property.

Of course, I allow employees to (legally) carry their guns. I don’t think any do (I don’t think any even own guns), but, if they carried concealed, I suppose I probably would not know.

 

[SkunkApe]

Let's extend it beyond firearms. Same principle just different objects.

Employer decides:
-fishing is cruel to fish and bans fishing poles and tackle boxes
-heavy metal music is the work of devil so heavy metal cd's are banned
-nobody but certified mechanics should be allowed to work on cars so all tools are banned
-employees playing sports are at risk for injuries which will make the company's insurance rates go up and they will miss time at work so all sports equipment is banned
-listening to music while driving is distracting and causes accidents so no car stereos are allowed on company property

Fine with me if an employer prohibits these things on his property. If this costs him good employees, that's fine too.

To me, this is one of those issues that show the hypocrisy of many gun owners. Your gun right trumps my property rights? That's how you stand up for freedom and individual rights? It's my property, and I'll make whatever rules I want, thank you. If you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to come onto my property.

 

[bluecowdawg]

It's my property, and I'll make whatever rules I want, thank you. If you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to come onto my property.

My car is my property and i have a family too support,I cannot afford to just get another job.I am not talking about wearing it on me i just want to be able to leave it in my vehicle if need be.So i guess by yer logic yer property rights over rule my property rights, you shouldn't be so concerned with whats in my vehicle,it's none of yer bisness.The way i see it when my employer hired me they promised to pay me a weeks pay if i give them a full weeks work,thats the deal we made and thats all they should be concerned with.

 

[Thefabulousfink]

JJY

I am an employer with a handful of employees. The office we all work in is mine – I pay the overpriced rent. I don’t own the parking lot, but if I did, just like in the office, I have the right to say what / who is allowed in. Anyone who disagrees is free to find a different job.

I agree JJY, and I would not walk through your parking lot carrying a gun, however, I don't see how having a gun locked in my car is violating your rights.

Do you feel that, as a property owner, you can say, "No 'Kerry '04' bumper stickers"? How about no religious symbols? Their comes a point where your rights as a business owner start to violate the rights of your employees and customers.

If you had absoulute control over you property then Segregation would still be legal. Just being a property owner is one thing, but when you own a business you also have to respect the rights of your empolyees and customers.

 

[tenbase]

To me, this is one of those issues that show the hypocrisy of many gun owners. Your gun right trumps my property rights? That's how you stand up for freedom and individual rights? It's my property, and I'll make whatever rules I want, thank you. If you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to come onto my property.

there's nothing hypocritical about it. it's simply, given two equivalent but "competing" rights, favoring one. that's all.

and if you (generic "you", not you specifically) are so concerned about your property, don't build a business on it that your employees (who have rights as well) will need to park their personal vehicles on. either give them company cars and forbid weapons in them, or let it go.

 

[wuchak]

I understand about private property issues but it's the double standard that most employers have in this policy that bothers me. Employees, who the company has economic power over, are made to follow a ban on firearms in the parking lot, but it doesn't seem to be a problem if customers have them since the customer is putting their cash into the pockets of the people making the rule. This tells me that it's not a matter of principle or any deeply held conviction that not having firearms in the parking lot is making the workplace safer. If employers truly felt strongly about firearms in the parking lot they would put up large signs that say, "Do not park here if you have a firearm in your vehicle." Of course they won't because doing so would mean they would lose customers.

I think a ban on employees having firearms in their vehicle also ignores the fact that while the ground under the vehicle may belong to the company the vehicle itself and its contents are the property of the employee and they have rights regarding their property too. This should include the right to have anything they can legally possess in their vehicle if they choose.

 

[bluecowdawg]

I think a ban on employees having firearms in their vehicle also ignores the fact that while the ground under the vehicle may belong to the company the vehicle itself and its contents are the property of the employee and they have rights regarding their property too. This should include the right to have anything they can legally possess in their vehicle if they choose

AHEM YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Been Over This Before

People have rights, corporations have powers - even when it comes to property.

More tonight.

Woody

 

[SkunkApe]

My car is my property and i have a family too support,I cannot afford to just get another job.

Can't you see how this sounds just like the hated "liberals"? It's all about you and what you want.

Do you feel that, as a property owner, you can say, "No 'Kerry '04' bumper stickers"? How about no religious symbols? Their comes a point where your rights as a business owner start to violate the rights of your employees and customers.

I know you were asking JJY here, but I'll answer anyway. Yes and yes. I think a business owner has the right to make whatever rules he wants regarding his private property. There is no infringement of rights because there is no force involved. Nobody uses force to make you come onto an employer's property. A business is private property, just like a house is private property. The owner makes the rules.

 

[JJY]

I am not sure there is a double standard – in Virginia many business have signs posted that say no firearms are allowed. That is because Virginia is a “must issue” and an open-carry state.

I don’t agree with the logic of not allowing employees to have guns in their cars or carry them. But private property is private property.

My office is not open to the public. If you are dealing with a place that is open to the public and the business owner allows members of the public to enter with guns, then that seems inconsistent. However, it is most likely a liability issue. If a customer does something with a gun it is not the employer’s responsibility. But, if an employee, whom the employer allowed to carry a gun, did something, you have a potential lawsuit against the business owner.

 

[PinnedAndRecessed]

Here in Oklahoma, state law specifies that parking lots are exempt from such bans.

I heard somebody was contesting that, though. I never found out which way it went.

 

[50caliber123]

I work retail at a large store. The rule for employees is no weapons on premises. I assume that extends to the parking lot. I would respect the rule, if two criteria could be met by the corporation: 1) Customers still can and probably do leave weapons in their vehicles or carry themselves. 2) If something happens to my car, even parked on the corporation's property, I'm liable because the car is my property. One co-worker's vehicle had been vandalized not too long ago, but the company would not even assist with the insurance claim or take responsibility. We lose all of our rights with regards to what's in our vehicles, so you think there would be a pay-off. It seems that the car is their property when I park there with regards to weapons, but my property when something happens to it. Can't have it both ways. If my car can't be guaranteed to be safe because its "personal property", then I should be able to store what I want in it.

 

[mljdeckard]

This has been discussed extensively in another thread.

I worked for America Online (hold your boos, I don't work there anymore, and we hated each other,) I started immediately after the site in Ogden fired two employees for excnagning firearms from their trunks on property. (It was caught on film.) Because this had happened recently, they made a pointed explanation, telling us not to have guns in our cars. The parking lot is controlled and marked as company property, but there is also plenty of space AROUND this space and on the street to park. (That's what I did.) All these guys had to do was park off property, and they would have been fine. They sued, and I contacted their attorney, Mitch Vilos, who is a bit of a gun icon in Utah, and asked him what the basis was for the lawsuit, if the company had the policy, they knew it when they were hired, and violated it on camera. He replied, (I'm paraphrasing here,) that bearing arms in a vehicle is private and can't be controlled by an employee. They lost the case, but they are appealing and lobbying the state legislature to clarify the law.

I have seen employee guidelines that prohibit carry in vehicles. The only times I have seen or heard of an employee giving them the right to search were at facilities where national security was at stake. (Hill Air Force Base and ATK Thiokol come to mind.) I seriously doubt that any employer could otherwise get away with searching or dismissing for refusal otherwise.

Here's my take. My employer could care less whether or not I have a gun. All they are concerned about is, limiting their liability from any incident that happens on their property. They don't care if you defend yourself, they only care if they get sued for it. However, their interests don't extend to the convenience store I stop at on my way home. And what if you work in a place where there is no feasible way to park off property? Your employer isn't going to take responsibility for your safety going to and from work. YOU have to. Their liability is their problem. Your safety is YOURS. So, keep it under the seat, and keep your mouth shut. If something happens on property which would prompt you to use your gun, remember that doing so will likely cost you your job. This also applies to moving OFF the property to use your gun, if they have video surveilance which would document this. If you don't know if they have cameras covering you, presume they do.

 

[bluecowdawg]

Skunkape

Since you seem to know so much then what would you suggest i do,put my family at risk and carry on my employers prop.anyway and take a chance on getting fired,or put my family at risk by not carrying when i go to work ,which is 6 days a week,and take a chance on being injured or killed if some situation comes up and i am unable to protect myself and then not be around for them.HUH Skunkape i dont mean any offense to you by my choice of words,or conversation or whatever but i am not very tactful when it comes to saying whats on my mind.


look he said tactful

 

[wuchak]

I think a business owner has the right to make whatever rules he wants regarding his private property. There is no infringement of rights because there is no force involved. Nobody uses force to make you come onto an employer's property.

Whatever rule? Really? How about no Blacks or Jews or Islams or Hispanics allowed? How about a no wheelchairs policy? Or no eyeglasses? Private property rights for the home are not the same as those for a business that has opened up the property to the public for commerce. As soon as the property is opened to the public the property owner's rights end where they infringe on the individual rights of the people entering the property.

 

[JJY]

As for the bumper stickers and religious symbols -

I can’t tell employees not to have something. I can just restrict them from bringing it into my office. If you bring a legal object into my office, like a coffee maker, that I don’t want there, I can tell you to leave, if you don’t, you are trespassing. The object itself does not matter.

With respect to the religious symbols, some would call that discriminating. That is a whole different conversation … private v. public issues. People on both sides of the political spectrum have lots of inconsistency in their positions.