Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Texas - Proposed Legislation Alert

Discussion in 'Legal' started by rbernie, Feb 21, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,450
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    From TSRA:
     
  2. Thain

    Thain Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Location:
    Lansing, Michigan
    Here you go Texas, just have your government call my government:

     
  3. ball3006

    ball3006 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    2,874
    Location:
    Texas
    Both of these law proposals...

    are good but the company I work for states that even though it is legal, if you have a weapon in your car on our grounds, you will be fired, period.....Good thing I am retiring in one year, 43 days.....chris3
     
  4. Rob G

    Rob G Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    770
    Location:
    Cypress TX
    These "paking lot" laws first cropped up in Oklahoma not too long ago in response to several employees who's company (I don't remember which) fired them for having legally owned and lawfully carried firearms locked in their cars on company property. They are specifically designed to address your employer's regulations on the matter. In other words, if they pass, your employer would be in violation of the law if they fired you for having your gun in your car, regardless of what company policy might be. I'm not sure if violating that law opens them up to any criminal prosecution (I sincerely doubt it) but it would open them up to civil penalties.

    Personally I can't wait for this to pass. My employer has the same policy and if these pass then on the first day they're active I'm going to print out a complete copy of the law and put it on my boss's desk. :neener:
     
  5. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,450
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    We've talked about this issue here a whole bunch in the last couple of years, and I'm still I dunno if I like these laws or not.

    In my mind, they tread on private property rights something fierce, by appearing to stipulate that some part of private property isn't exactly private and has quasi-public status. While this particular flavor of that attitude works in our favor, that sounds like a very slippery slope in general and I'd hate to see where it could possibly wind up (e.g. no open carry on private land).
     
  6. Deavis

    Deavis Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2003
    Messages:
    1,424
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    I agree that property rights should not be eroded. In this case, I think they are strengthened. My car is my property. Everything within it is mine and I am the sovereign. The moment I step out, I'm on their property and need to respect their rules. The moment I get into my car, they need to respect that it is my domain. If my carry weapon is locked in my car, that is my business, not theirs.
     
  7. Sam Adams

    Sam Adams Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2003
    Messages:
    2,035
    Location:
    South Texas
    I'll 2nd what Deavis said.

    In addition, I don't like the implication that a private company can effectively override state law and your right to self defense. Texas law allows any adult who isn't a criminal or isn't engaging in a crime (and I'm simplifying here) to carry a handgun concealed in their vehicle - with or without having a CHL. So how is one to protect one's self on the way to and from work if you cannot leave your firearm locked in the car in between those trips? No one is trying to force companies to allow workers to carry on premises - but, again, YOUR car is YOUR personal property, not that of the business.

    BTW, answer me this: can a private company enslave someone on its property? Can it inflict cruel and unusual punishment upon them on its property? Can it say "No Blacks, Jews or Dogs allowed" on its property? I think not - because basic rights are protected against private action in many cases. Self-defense is the single most basic human right - if "they" can ban it, they can ban anything.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page