Florida Bill 503 passes the House!

[TX1911fan]

We have long held in this country that once private propery becomes a public accomodation then constitutional rights have to be observed. I can tell a black man that he cannot come into my home simply because he is black. I cannot tell a black man he cannot come into my business simply because he is black. I would think the same would hold true here.

 

[gym]

I don't see how anything changed, I was told by an employer 10 years ago that I couldn't have a weapon in my car, they ran a background check, I asked him if they owned the parking lot, he said no, but that had nothing to do with it, I said you better call legal because there isn't anything you can do about it as long as I have a license. This was after he told me they were going to randomly going to search cars, it was all bull, he knew it and I knew it.Nothing ever happened. If you already have a license, you have the right to carry or have a gun in the car especially if you are going to the bank or post office which don't allow firearms in federal state buildings etc. So if you are out running errands, lets say, and you gave to stop at the post office, what are you supposed to do with the gun, other than leave it in the car.

 

[F4GIB]

Minnesota has had a law better than this since 2003.
A few employers still whine but insurance premiums haven't gone up, no business has closed (although many have lost customers because of restrictions IN their buildings), and none has moved away. National companies, such as retail stores and banks, continue to construct new facilities (even anti-gun Costco) with open parking lots.

 

[sm]

Standing Wolf wrote:
Not only is my car my private property, so is my life.

This is the bottom line.
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness...

I applaud Florida, and wish to see this set a precedent all over the USA, not only for business settings, for everywhere including school campuses.

Supreme Court has already ruled police don't have to protect you.

So in order to have life, liberty, happiness, which to me means being safe in my travels and daily activities, I need to be able to protect myself, I have a right to my human rights, one being - staying safe and secure.

Re: Insurance

I do not know of any businesses that will pay me if I am a victim of crime, on my way to , or from work.

I do know of businesses that do not care about inclement weather, safety of employee, or the vehicle and threaten them if they do not show up.
If the employee does indeed have an accident in trying to come in, and messes up a car, it is the employee that is out of pocket for medical bills and vehicle repairs /replacement.
Business then usually does a false face of sympathy and tries to change the tone of what happened.

If the employee does not come in, they are docked, have to take sick time, are written up and notes put into personal files.

Florida is doing the correct thing.
Folks do not always drive straight to and from work.
Some take kids to school first, attend college first, run errands...
In the same token after work folks have activities, such as evening classes, shopping, going out to eat, etc.

Criminals are aware of target rich zones.
They know if a person is parked on a NO GUN lot, they can follow them, and take advantage of them . Criminals use cell phones to communicate, and they may set up a bump and grab, coordinate what they have already cased someone doing, like going to work out at the gym after work.

I know, I know this happens...

I have been in the ER when the rape kit was administered...
I have been in on the organ harvest of the mom that died...
I have been in OR 18 with the deceased husband/father we could not save and had the family come in to view.

All because these law abiding folks did not want to break any rules about having a gun where they were not supposed to.

Rules criminals do not obey.

 

[230RN]

But blood will run in the parking lots!

I think I heard a mantra similar to that once.

 

[Guitargod1985]

..especially if you are going to the bank...

In Florida it's perfectly legal to carry in a bank.

I'm very happy about that, too. A "gun-free" zone in a bank makes even less sense than a "gun-free" zone at a school.

 

[gym]

When did they change that? It appears you are correct, I used to make deposits for my business about 10 years ago, and I remember it not bieng allowed back then, I don't see anything on the state web site saying it's not legal so I guess it is, thanks for the heads up.

 

[Werewolf]

I fail to see how it is excellent at all. You're forcing business owners to allow guns on their property.

Gun rights are ground into property rights. I am disappointed that some in the gun rights community support this.

Hmmm... lets see?

There's the artificial social construct called property rights - of a property owner inviting people onto his property that says he can tell the invitees that they cannot carry the most effective tool available for self defense and who then tells the invitees (with the agreement of the courts) that, "NO, I won't be responsible for nor held liable for your safety".

OR!​

There is the Invitee's GOD given/Natural right to protect their lives from predators where ever they may be.

Which one trumps the other.

Life, dirt, life, dirt... Tough choice, huh?​

NO - WAIT! Not a tough choice at all!​

I choose life - you property rights guys are WRONG and the courts are WRONG - AND - that's all there is to it.

NOTE: business owners invite both customers and employees onto their property. It is the invitation that makes the difference. Obviously one can choose either to not enter the property or to enter the property. However, having to choose is ludicrous in the extreme.

I can't imagine anyone here would argue that the business owner is making it safer for his employees or his customers by prohibiting firearms on his property, he isn't. He knows it and all you property rights guys know it.

BUT!
The business owner is counting on all the sheep to come on in anyway.

What excuse are you so called pro-gun guys gonna use?

 

[Robert Hairless]

Great news! Florida has too damn many employers anyway. Who the heck needs jobs?

When an employer has to pay higher insurance in Florida because of this law, the pesky employer will move to some other state! Or better yet - out of the whole country.

Hooray for the NRA! Great job.

I hadn't thought of that. You're right. It's an excellent reason to ban guns altogether.

I'd sooner die than expect any business to pay higher insurance rates just so I could defend my life or the lives of my family. And I don't know any real American who wouldn't feel the same if you put it to him that way. We're all put on Earth by a loving God so that business owners can maximize their profits.

Thanks for the reminder. The 5% of us who belong to the NRA should quit, join the Brady Campaign and the Million Moms March, and help elect Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton as president in the next election. Nobody can make a buck as long as there are guns in this country.

It's time that the NRA stops trying to keep employees alive. That costs businesses money, and it's just wrong.

Incidentally, a real Libertarian would say something like: "If an insurance company charges more than an insured wants to pay, the insured should go elsewhere." But I understand that this principle doesn't apply where guns, ordinary people, and businesses are concerned. It's the ordinary person--the employee--not the employer who should go elsewhere. That's the fun of being a Libertarian. You get to take liberties.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

I am growing very weary of these "property rights vs. personal rights" debates.

Businesses believe they have the right to decide every item that is brought onto their "open to the public" parking lots by virtue of their owning the property.

Individuals believe they have to right to decide what items are stored in their vehicle, wherever that vehicle may be parked, by virtue of them owning that vehicle.

The State already says it is legal for an individual to store a firearm in their vehicle whenever that vehicle is parked in a public parking area. Therefore the State is already "violating" the "property rights" of the company that allows public access to their parking lots.

The issue under consideration is whether that business has the right to perform disciplinary actions against an individual should that individual happen to have a legally stored firearm in their vehicle by virtue of that individual being employed by the company that owns the parking lot.

In my opinion, it is discrimination to prevent those employed by the company from having a firearm in their vehicle while those that are not employees may park in the same parking lot with a firearm without consequence.

It is discrimination for an employee, which may be a victim of a crime on their travels to and from work, to be forced to travel without the option of a firearm for protection while the "corporation" is not subject to any similar threat.

And if you want the final kicker, individuals vote, corporations don't.

 

[Robert Hairless]

In my opinion, it is discrimination to prevent those employed by the company from having a firearm in their vehicle while those that are not employees may park in the same parking lot with a firearm without consequence.

This is not a big problem. Many businesses are eager to exercise the same control over their customers by prohibiting them from having a legally owned gun in the customer's car while it's on the business's parking lot.

Businesses like that are non-discriminatory. They look at everyone as food.

As for votes: there are many gun owners who think it's right for businesses to behave that way. They argue on their side and presumably vote on their side too. Think of a cow arguing for the right to be somebody's hamburger.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Many businesses are eager to exercise the same control over their customers by prohibiting them from having a legally owned gun in the customer's car while it's on the business's parking lot.

That may be true, but the business has no way to enforce that policy. They cannot search a customer's vehicle. If they can see a gun visible in the vehicle, the most they can do is require the customer to leave their property. Even posting a "no guns" sign on his door does not legally prevent me from carrying a CCW on his property in Florida. Again, the most he can do if he discovers my gun is ask me to leave.

As for votes: there are many gun owners who think it's right for businesses to behave that way.

That is also true as can be seen by the number of people here defending corporations. Let the politicians decide which side they agree with and we will decide if they keep their job.