employer "no weapon" policies

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mek42

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
354
Location
upstate NY
If an individual works for an employer with a no weapons at work policy (including in the vehicle on work premises, i.e. the parking lot), has a valid CCW permit, complies with the policy and is then subjected to a violent crime against his person while commuting to / from work, would it be possible to sue the employer for damages due to the policy rendering one unable to prevent themselves from becoming the target of a violent crime?
 
Uh, yeah, good luck with that.

Unfortunately, you'd have to prove that you wouldn't have suffered the damages had you been armed and able to defend yourself. Unfortunately, that requires a bit of speculation. It may or may not get by a judge, then you'd have to convince a jury.
 
I'm not a lawyer but I doubt that you could make a case.

My reasoning? They aren't forcing you to work there. It's not like you have no choice. You're not even legally barred from arming yourself - you just might lose your job if you get found out. Not to mention, I'm fairly sure that most companies have policies like that. I've never worked for a place that didn't have a no-weapons policy.

Crappy situation but it's just my 2c.

Dope
 
You can pretty much sue anyone at any time for any reason. If a judge believes your suit has merit, he'll allow it to continue.

The real question is whether you can convince a jury that the employer is at fault and award damages. That's where you're going to have a problem...
 
You'd probably be better off carrying at work, getting fired, and suing for wrongful termination if you can prove that the workplace is located in an unsafe environment.

Maybe get a lawyer, have him write up the complaint in advance, then hand it to your boss and declare that you're going to carry and here's the lawsuit I'm filing if you fire me.

Much easier than trying to sue when you're dead.
 
Remember Luby's cafeteria in Texas. A woman had a CCW and left her gun in the car because of the no guns sign. A guy shot up the place and killed her father. Texas later changed the law.
 
The company I work for is Canadian owned. They have terminated 3-4 people for having firearms in thier vehicles. It was opening of goose season and they had been talking about going hunting after work. They were asked if they had firearms in thier vehicle, and when they confirmed that they did they were terminated, with no rehire.:mad:
There was a shop meeting the next day and the NO GUNS policy was read to everybody, in english and spanish.

Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
 
Could you sue? Sure. A legislator somewhere is currently suing God.

Would you win? Depends where you are. I know in Ohio, lawsuit immunity is currently written into the law saying something to the effect of, "the private property owner will not be liable for any injury regarding their decision to post or not post a sign prohibiting weapons...."
 
My boss has a CCW and I asked him about coming to and from work, I know I can't carry in the building but what about putting it in my truck. He said "hell I know I have guys who head out of here and go hunting have shotguns and rifles in their cars, the official company line is prohibited on the property, but no one is going to search your vehicle, so just keep it on the downlow." I work for a huge multi national company.... and my boss is cool :)
 
I am a community college teacher in Michigan.

By state law I cannot carry in the classroom. If I am injured or killed before I have a chance to rearm, there is no one to sue. My wife -- and I if I survived -- could, however, use that death or injury Suzanna Hupp style to get the law changed. Changes in the law concerning no gun zones have already been proposed in Michigan and are being worked on in the state legislature.

My wife, on the other hand works for a company which prohibits guns in the company buildings. If she is injured or killed while disarmed by company policy, we will sue with the primary intent of getting the rules changed. Companies including the insurance companies need to be taught that disarming prospective victims is not good business.

I suspect that personal injury lawyers are already sharpening their knives in preparation for a feast.
 
I doubt very seriously that NY has the same law as Oklahoma. Oklahoma law protects your rights by allowing to have your weapon in your vehicle in anyone's parking lot, whether they forbid guns in their buildings or not. But if the building is posted no firearms, you have to leave you gun in the vehicle. It's against Oklahoma law for owners of businesses to forbid firearms in vehicles in their parking lots open to the public.
 
Remember Luby's cafeteria in Texas. A woman had a CCW and left her gun in the car because of the no guns sign. A guy shot up the place and killed her father. Texas later changed the law.
Click to expand...

That's not quite accurate. Texas had no concealed carry law at all at the time of the Luby's shooting (1991); afterwards, the legislature passed the law allowing concealed-carry permits (effective in 1996).

As for the original question, people working on Department of Defense sites (like, say, defense manufacturing plants) are forbidden to possess weapons on the property.

It's not only a condition of employment, but even for entering the site. In some areas, even possessing a camera can land you in the slammer. I had to do a lot of explaining to Security once because my car was searched and a they found a gas can with about half an ounce of gasoline in it (I'd run out of gas the day before). It's a straightforward enough policy--if you don't like it, don't set foot on the property.

To take a gruesome example, when the Lockheed Martin plant in Meridian, Mississippi had a mass shooting in 2003, the victims' families sued, but it wasn't for failure to allow employees to defend themselves. It was (as I recall) for the company's failure to respond to the existing situation of a clearly unstable employee, which would have prevented the shooting. (I don't know who won the suit.)
 
Remember Luby's cafeteria in Texas. A woman had a CCW and left her gun in the car because of the no guns sign. A guy shot up the place and killed her father. Texas later changed the law.
Click to expand...

That's not quite accurate. Texas had no concealed carry law at all at the time of the Luby's shooting (1991); afterwards, the legislature passed the law allowing concealed-carry permits (effective in 1996).
Click to expand...

Right, and not only that, but Luby's didn't have a no guns sign. Susanna Hupp didn't carry inside Luby's because she had stopped carrying on her person out of fear of getting caught breaking the law. She claims that she thought the law against carry inside the car was a grey area, which was a bit of a fib for a lawyer type person since carrying in the car where you could get to the gun would be concealed carry and the only grey area would be "traveling" which she was not doing.

If an individual works for an employer with a no weapons at work policy (including in the vehicle on work premises, i.e. the parking lot), has a valid CCW permit, complies with the policy and is then subjected to a violent crime against his person while commuting to / from work, would it be possible to sue the employer for damages due to the policy rendering one unable to prevent themselves from becoming the target of a violent crime?
Click to expand...

Work is voluntary and you agree to said parameters as a condition of work. Plus, you would have to substantiate the claim that the policy renders one unable to prevent themselves from becoming the target of violent crime. Having a gun will not prevent you from becoming the target of violent crime, especially if it is being carried concealed. You will be targeted and attacked before the attacker ever knows you have a gun. As such, the suit would be pretty naive.

You'd probably be better off carrying at work, getting fired, and suing for wrongful termination if you can prove that the workplace is located in an unsafe environment.
Click to expand...

Bingo. Just be prepared to be fired if you opt to carry at work. It is much easier for you to sue for being fired after being discovered than it is for you to sue after being killed.
 
"including in the vehicle on work premises"

Although you can't carry one on the job who cares what their policy is regarding carrying it in your car that's YOUR personal property....they have NO LEGAL RIGHT TO SEARCH YOUR CAR so go ahead and carry it in your car just don't tell them.

BTW, If I ever get attack at work you beat your ass I'm suing the company for taking away my Second Amendment (and licensed CCW) Right.
 
"including in the vehicle on work premises"

Although you can't carry one on the job who cares what their policy is regarding carrying it in your car that's YOUR personal property....they have NO LEGAL RIGHT TO SEARCH YOUR CAR so go ahead and carry it in your car just don't tell them.
BTW, If I ever get attack at work you beat your ass I'm suing the company for taking away my Second Amendment (and licensed CCW) Right.
Click to expand...

Whoa there cowboy.

When you sign your name on the dotted line, you have to abide by your company's policies and procedures. If random vehicle inspections is one of those policies, then they most certainly can search, like it or not.

While I agree with your sentiment in principle, in practice it is incorrect.
 
Maybe get a lawyer, have him write up the complaint in advance, then hand it to your boss and declare that you're going to carry and here's the lawsuit I'm filing if you fire me.
Click to expand...

I don't know if that would be wise... But I'd be interested to hear if anyone tried it out!

There are a lot of variables, as has been said repeatedly...

I think one thing that MIGHT help a LOT would be pointing out that the "no guns" sign in places that don't let employees *or* customers carry invites a visit by a criminal that should be able to see the sign and KNOW it's a good place to do HIS 'business.'

This would not be an option for me, as employees can't carry but customers CAN.

So, while I'm stripped of my firearm while at work, at least the bad guys do not KNOW that for SURE. Which, IMO, puts me ahead of those that work inside a "gun-free zone."

I would seriously think that there should be some documented caselaw on this by now, if suits like this have been successful. 'Cause surely the OP can't have been the FIRST one to think of it.

Maybe we need to contact lawyers left-and-right. In an ideal world, instead of generic "have you been hurt on the job" lawyer commercials, we'd have something like:

"Have you been injured on the job because company policy left you defenseless to criminals that DID NOT play by YOUR boss' rules? If so, call Harvey Lantern, attorney-at-law! If your employer won't protect you and won't let you protect yourself, this Lantern's light will shine some JUSTICE on him!"
Click to expand...

.....ok, got into 'character' a bit there! You get the idea. We'd need to really hammer the point home that there's a market for this kind of thing for lawyers. And one decent sized victory should bring more running!
 
How would they know that you are carrying a concealed weapon unless:
A. you actually use it to defend yourself, in which case losing your job is secondary in importance to losing your life.
or
B. You tell people about it.


Keeping you mouth shut is an easy solution to a lot of problems.
 
Well, I have heard lots of talk that RETAIL establishments that bar CHLs here in Texas might be liable if you get injured on their grounds, since they stopped U from carrying your weapon.

I haven't seen a case yet in the courts - but this is the same concept...
 
"Waaaaaaah"

Get over it or get another job. I view suing an employer under these conditions with about as much disdain as I do cities suing gun manufacturers for gun crime.

If it's that important to you, keep the gun concealed and keep your mouth shut. And don't whine if you get fired.

K
 
BTW, If I ever get attack at work you beat your ass I'm suing the company for taking away my Second Amendment (and licensed CCW) Right.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that. The Second Amendment does not apply. If you think it does, you need to bone up on the Constitution.

K
 
Generally, an employer is not responsible for the unforeseen criminal acts of a third party. I have never heard of a successful case that dealt with the OP's scenario.

You'd probably be better off carrying at work, getting fired, and suing for wrongful termination if you can prove that the workplace is located in an unsafe environment.
Click to expand...

I would have to say that this case has an even lower chance of success. You are going to sue for wrongful termination after violating a company policy that you knew about? It makes no difference how dangerous the area is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Weapons Policy
Replies
23
Views
1K
Aguila Blanca
A
D
  • Locked
Anyone here a lawyer (or even just play one on teh intarweb)?
Replies
6
Views
317
jlbraun
J
L
  • Locked
  • Poll
Does your company policy prohibit you from carrying in your private vehicle?
2 3
Replies
59
Views
2K
JohnKSa
JohnKSa
M
  • Locked
Canon's Policy on CHL
Replies
17
Views
966
Old Fuff
O
T
  • Locked
Company Weapons Policies
Replies
10
Views
624
Big_R
B
Back
Top