Does a "No Weapon" policy mean no CCW?

[Jbar4Ranch]

"No Weapons" is pretty damn vague. We've all seen the cop shows where some yahoo runs from the law and bumps the fender of a cruiser in the process, then is charged with "Assault on a police officer with a deadly weapon", or somesuch. Does this make all cars/trucks deadly weapons? Of course not. I also don't apply a blanket definition of "weapon" on a piece of metal and plastic just because it will eject a projectile from a grooved tube. A set of keys can be used as a weapon. A purse can be used as a weapon. A shoe can be used as a weapon. Personally, I've never used a firearm as a weapon, as likely 99.999%+ of the population never have either, so why are all firearms arbitrarily considered to be weapons? I've seen the signs, "No weapons (or firearms) on company property", and yet, as a customer, I can park my truck in the parking lot with a couple rifles in the rifle rack with no problem. As an employee at a couple of places, I've made a point of leaving a junk shotgun in the rack, and have been "counseled" over it, but they never pushed it to the point of dismissal. I think most employers don't want to find out whether or not they can legally dictate what you can or cannot have in your personal vehicle. If you don't want to challenge things you consider to be unjust, well, that's your decision, and you need to adapt to what they tell you. I won't. My freedom was paid for with the blood and fortunes of many great men only 230 short years ago, and I won't sell it back over a mere job.

 

[Jerry Morris]

Jbar4Ranch wrote:

My freedom was paid for with the blood and fortunes of many great men only 230 short years ago, and I won't sell it back over a mere job.

This is your choice to make, just as it is my choice to not risk my job, when it is not necessary. You're a big boy, I imagine unemployment is no problem.

Myself, I will not sign onto employment and accept the limitations the employer demands and then ignore them. That is nothing other than a lie.

BTW, they fought for larger issues than employment.

Jerry

 

[birdv]

Concealed means CONCEALED

 

[Sean Dempsey]

dude, they aren't gonna fire you, you've got a *gun*

 

[Green Lantern]

I think most employers don't want to find out whether or not they can legally dictate what you can or cannot have in your personal vehicle.

Most don't, but some do. Some do for different reasons. It's in the book that the company can only search your person or vehicle if they think you're working while on drugs. But I wonder just what they could use as a valid excuse to "think" you were on drugs.

Either way, I've heard of no cases of them invoking that clause locally. I do think you're right that a lot of employers TALK about all the 'control' that they apply to the wage slaves, but a lot of them don't want to see how far they can push it. It looks pretty bad on them, after all, for crying "property rights" as an excuse to violate their employees' property rights!

As for weapons, my place says no weapons on company property, including the parking lot. Which I comply with 100%. Because while locked away inside my car, my gun does not come anywhere close to contacting the parking lot!

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

I'm with you on that Green Lantern, unfortunately the laws says that when you own the real estate, you also own the space above the real estate to the outer atmosphere, although the full extent of that has been modified since the advent of heavier than air flight. They still own a good bit of the space above the land, including the space occupied by your glove compartment, unfortunately.

If I were king, your private space would extend to the interior of your car, and to whatever you would like to carry concealed on your person. This space would be considered the same as the space inside your home, no matter where you take your body or car. Private property rights of land owners are not violated by this policy because they are always free to order you off their property for whatever reason, but they do not also possess the right to search your car or person, i.e., this could not be a condition of employment. I think that's the perfect balance of competing property rights. But, unfortunately, I am not king.

 

[Green Lantern]

Actually, in some states your car is considered an EXTENSION of your home.

The NRA is trying to pass laws on a state level that I think would protect EVERYONE from this invasion of privacy from employers (unless the laws they pass only specify firearms that is...). Naturally the Brady Bunch is spinning this to make it sound like the NRA is trying to pass laws to do away with ANY kind of "no guns" policy in the workplace: http://www.bradycampaign.org/action/workplace/ :banghead:

 

[Kentak]

Also, keep in mind, realistically, you are probably hundreds of times more likely to be "made" and fired than you are ever to need your gun. Graveyard shift 7/11 clerks excepted, maybe.

K

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Really, hundreds of times more likely to be made wearing a keltec P32 in thunderwear? Hard to believe.

 

[Green Lantern]

No...on second thought I can't agree OR disagree with ya, kentak. Just too many variables involved to make a statement that you're FAR more likely to get made than need your gun. Namely, the choice of gun and your job.

In the case of someone with a Desert Eagle who works at a business with an armed, trained, and GOOD security force, you'd be right.

In other cases, I think not.

You don't HAVE to be a "stop and rob" clerk to find yourself in a situation where a CCW would be more than a little useful! AFAIK, there were no things like jewels, huge quantities of cash, or prescription drugs present in the Illinois office where the recent shooting took place.

And, there are some great little "deep cover" guns out there...

 

[BigBlock]

I respectfully disagree. I have lots of rifles, shotguns and handguns. I use them for sporting purposes, therefore they are all "sporting arms".

So if I get caught with a sawed off shotgun I can just say "no officer, I shoot cans with that, there fore it isn't a weapon."

I'd love to live in your fantasy land...

 

[Czar]

Weapons is a subjective term. I know several people who have knives on their belts (generally less than 2 inches in length) at my "no weapons" company and management knows about it and isn't really concerned.

 

[Jerry Morris]

Czar wrote:

Weapons is a subjective term.

We all know what it means and we all know all it takes is a few incidents to widen the meaning. Box cutters almost did it. In fact, it did do it for one industry.

Jerry

 

[Kentak]

Yes, I'll grant the nature of the job is a big factor. I'll backtrack on my statement and simply say that it might be prudent to ignore the work rule if you feel your job's location, nature, or whatever puts you at more risk than working at a big office building in a suburban location.

It's a risk/benefit assessment.

K

 

[biere]

I worked in a factory about a decade ago.

They had a handbook and its "no weapons" policy was something along the lines of, "no weapons to be brought into the plant" or something like that.

As a newb I left my pocket knife in the car that first day. I did not want a weapon to be brought into the building.

At break I went to my car and got my pocket knife so I would have it on the floor while working. Everyone else had a pocket knife or multi-tool for use on the floor and I felt silly knowing I left mine in the car and had to ask to borrow someone's knife when something needed cut.

That experience taught me that while I had signed a paper saying I had read the handbook and would follow its rules meant very little in the real world.

If management was going to enforce the rules or get more specific about a pocket knife or multi-tool being ok then maybe I would give it more credit.

But when the guy helping go through the handbook in the orientation course has a pocket knife on him on the floor I just kind of give that handbook a lot less respect than I did that first day.

Basically I rank handbooks up there with speeding limits. Sometimes consequences can be serious and sometimes they are nothing.

I will accept the consequences for my actions and not get worried about it.

If I ever got a super duper amazing job I did not want to lose, I would make sure I followed all the rules to an extreme.

But for the jobs I do and the way the bosses treat the rules I treat that handbook like a speed limit and will deal with the consequnces if I ever have to do so.

As always, your opinion may differ and that is fine with me since my opinion comes from my experiences at a few different jobs and I am comfortable with the choices I have made.

 

[carpettbaggerr]

Ignorance is bliss until they fire you outright and you need to look for another job.There was no ignorance here, the policy clearly states no weapons and the thread starter knows it. Ignorance is bliss indeed, that was great advice to give to someone else!

He knows it says no "weapons". What management means by that phrase is subject to speculation -- after all, a 'weapon' may include everything from steel-toed boots, to automobiles, to broomsticks, to a cup of hot coffee.

If he plans to carry a firearm, with a legal CCW permit, then there is no point in asking for the management's definition. If they mean only illegal weapons, then there is no harm in carrying a legally concealed handgun.

If they meant to include legally concealed firearms and you are caught, you will have a better chance at retaining your job, since you can plead ignorance of their exact definition. However, if you have previously received clarification of their policy, you would not have the defense of ignorance, as flimsy as that defense may be.

Remember, it's easier to obtain forgiveness than permission.

 

[deadin]

Oh come on, now we're arguing nit-picking semantics. The rules say "No Weapons" , not "No Illegal Weapons". No Weapons means just that. Without a descriptive, limiting adjective it would include ALL weapons. Now I don't think there is anyway to argue that a firearm is not a weapon, so they are all out. (I know, I now, they're just tools. But they also lead the weapons list. Steel toed boots don't.) There may be some wiggle room in whether or not a pocket knife could be considered a weapon and this is what could be asked about for clairificaton. As for "steel toed boots" and other such claptrap, nice attempt to cloud the issue. If you truly feel that your belt or ballpoint pen is a weapon, ask about it. That shoud get you labeled as either a crackpot or a troublemaker. Not good things when applying for employment.

This is starting to remind me of the little kid who argued that no one told him not to paint the cat.