Disney Employee Suspended For Bringing Gun To Work

[bubba1]

you can't change your skin color

Tell that to Michael Jackson.

 

[divemedic]

It is from a constitutional viewpoint. Carrying a weapon, "bearing arms" as it were, is a right under the second amendment, not a choice, a right. As is the right to equal protection under the law (the basis for anti discrimination) under the fourteenth amendment:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The only time property rights are mentioned in the constitution is in the fifth amendment (repeated by the fourteenth):

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Note that the COTUS allows private property to be taken as long as just compensation has been made. This has been well settled already.

 

[FCFC]

The only time property rights are mentioned in the constitution is in the fifth amendment (repeated by the fourteenth):

So, if I'm a homeowner with little children running all about, I cannot keep anyone, such as a meter reader, maintenance person or delivery person who is armed from my property?

If I am a business owner, I cannot establish an operating policy on my property that would prohibit employees from carrying a gun when serving my customers? Even when my customers would object and refuse to enter my business because of it?

That's pretty interesting.

 

[divemedic]

So, if I'm a homeowner with little children running all about, I cannot keep anyone, such as a meter reader, maintenance person or delivery person who is armed from my property?

Yes and no. There have been many cases where homeowners have attempted to keep meter readers, utility workers, and mail carriers off their property, and they have failed to do so. There have been other cases where they have been successful in doing so. It is case dependent, and depends on the laws in your state/ locality.

If I am a business owner, I cannot establish an operating policy on my property that would prohibit employees from carrying a gun when serving my customers? Even when my customers would object and refuse to enter my business because of it?

Under the law the way it is now, you can establish such a policy, but you cannot prohibit them in an employee's car. The funny thing is, all of these arguments are identical to the ones used during the segregation days in the '60's. Business owners used to say the same things about those darned negros.

that is not a valid argument... you can't change your skin color, carrying a weapon is a CHOICE

So is the 2A a right that the government cannot take away, or is it a choice that is subject to "reasonable restrictions?"

 

[TAB]

1st carrying concealed is not a right. Let me say that again, carrying concealed is not a right.

In the US you have a choice on rather or not you choose to express your rights. No one is forcing you to put a gun on in the morning, that is a choice you make. Just as this guy has a choice on rather he works for the mouse or not, he also has a choice about where he parks his car. He does not have to park it on his employers property.

 

[divemedic]

It does not matter, say it as many times as you want. The courts have ruled that property can be taken for public use. Regulations that remove property rights, like handicapped parking, utility easements, and fire codes have been ruled by the courts to be a "taking of property" and the courts have also ruled that a regulatory taking does not require compensation unless the taking removes all economic benefit of the property. Since such a regulation does not do so, they have been ruled as constitutional for YEARS.

Let me say it again- COTUS allows private property to be taken as long as just compensation has been made. This has been well settled already.

 

[Xzyl]

1st carrying concealed is not a right. Let me say that again, carrying concealed is not a right.

In the US you have a choice on rather or not you choose to express your rights. No one is forcing you to put a gun on in the morning, that is a choice you make. Just as this guy has a choice on rather he works for the mouse or not, he also has a choice about where he parks his car. He does not have to park it on his employers property.

The owner of a business has a choice of not hiring employees in the first place and there by not having to worry about any rights that come with them. It may not be terribly practical depending on the type of business but its still a choice. For that matter having a business in the first place is also a choice. Nobody is forcing you or the owners of Disney to have them.

 

[Boomer]

Why not?

1st carrying concealed is not a right. Let me say that again, carrying concealed is not a right.

Why not? The Constitution does not give us rights. It acknowledges and guarantees rights we already have -- rights that people had before the Constitution was written.

Note that the Ninth Amendment says:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."​

 

[divemedic]

The ninth amendment has been ignored for a long time. Many attorneys joke that a case relying on the 9A is a sure loser. Fair it is not, but that is life.

Heller pretty much killed concealed carry as a right.

 

[dalepres]

3. Any vehicle used by an employee to come to or leave Company property, wherever located, is subject to search.

4. An employee’s refusal to permit a search pursuant to this policy is grounds for discipline, not excluding termination.

I wonder, if I rent an apartment, does the apartment owner have the right to search it? Does the owner have the right to prevent me from owning a firearm in the apartment though it is my home?

The Florida law is based on the private and locked vehicle being an extension of the home. I agree with that. The vehicle can be used to store personal property just like in the home. All those who think that private property rights trump here, miss the point of home. I hope they all own their homes because if they rent, they are saying they have no right to privacy in their homes.

 

[Jimmy Dean]

dale, in most places, if you sign a contract for a lease/rental saying no firearms in the rented apartment/home, then, no firearms.



In regards to this issue, we recently passed a law so that employers cannot fire those of us who carry in our vehicles.

It is a two sided argument, but I feel for the employees, not the employers the most, since we do have a right to self defense on our way to and from work

on this specific case, he shoulda let them search his car, I agree

 

[FLA2760]

The cult of the mouse has stopped getting my money years ago. The cash I previously used to buy the 4 Disney annual passes with now goes to my gun hobby and NRA.

 

[divemedic]

on this specific case, he shoulda let them search his car, I agree

Why?

 

[Jimmy Dean]

because by refusing search, he is opening himself to getting fired, could be admitting guilt in any number of infractions, drugs, theft, etc etc,

But by letting them search they would have had to fire him specifically for the handgun, which means that he would then have the opportunity to challenge that firing against the new law, and their suposed exemption from it.

 

[bubba1]

because by refusing search, he is opening himself to getting fired, could be admitting guilt in any number of infractions, drugs, theft, etc etc,

Not really - and his refusal to allow the search is consistent with EE's rights under the new law. Employers are prohibited from searching private cars for firearms, that's why Disney had the sheriff on hand:

A search of a private motor vehicle in the parking lot of a public or private employer to ascertain the presence of a firearm within the vehicle may only be conducted by on-duty law enforcement personnel, based upon due process and must comply with constitutional protections.

The sheriff is bound by constitutional protections against search and seizure.

 

[divemedic]

because by refusing search, he is opening himself to getting fired

Not under the new law, he isn't. Anyway, since Disney is choosing to ignore the new law, he would have gotten fired when they found his pistol.

could be admitting guilt in any number of infractions, drugs, theft, etc etc,

Refusal of a search cannot be taken as an admission of guilt, just like pleading the fifth cannot be taken as an admission.

that's why Disney had the sheriff on hand:

Actually, the Sheriff cannot search your car either, as long as he does not have reason to believe that you have committed, are committing, or are about to commit a crime. Violating your employer's "no guns in the workplace" policy, or any other policy, is not a crime, and would not be sufficient for the police to search you or your vehicle.

 

[k_dawg]

You know.. if Disney wishes to claim the entire property is engaged in the business of explosives.. wouldn't then all the regulations of OSHA/etc apply to everywhere?

 

[XD_fan]

You know.. if Disney wishes to claim the entire property is engaged in the business of explosives.. wouldn't then all the regulations of OSHA/etc apply to everywhere?

Would that mean hard hats and safety glasses on all the rides? No minors on site? Hmmmm...

 

[bubba1]

Disney Worker Fired Over Gun Files Lawsuit In Attempt To Get Job Back

Disney Worker Fired Over Gun Files Lawsuit In Attempt To Get Job Back

He is being represented by Jon Gutmacher, probably the best firearms law atty in the state. Looks like Disney has a good chance of being handed their own ass.

 

[divemedic]

I greatly respect Gutmacher. He may well hand Disney a stompin'.

 

[k_dawg]

Jon Gutmacher is a good man. Now that I know this is "legit and serious", I intend to help support this cause.

Anyone know of a fund setup ?

 

[Art Eatman]

This has gotten way off into dead-horse country. The issue is whether or not Disney is somehow exempt from the new state law. Since there is now a lawsuit, all we can do is sit back and wait.