...And if people don't want to work at places that don't pay for birth control, then they can also work somewhere else. Right?If people don't want to work at places that don't allow guns, then they can work somewhere else.
On the other hand, If I start and run a business, don't I have the right to ask employees to follow my rules? I can order them to please NOT espouse their extremist political views to my customers (true story), but then I'm violating their civil rights, right?
The CO shooting is exactly why I carry into businesses with posted 'no-firearms' signs. Zombies love to attack gun-free-zones.I like Jerry's answer best. Don't ask, don't tell.
You won't know I have it until I have to use it, and then you'll be damn glad I had it.
I disagree. I think they would rule it based on property rights vs 2nd Amendment rights. Reason being, the private property is still in the US and Americans are working there. Those Americans have rights. Owners of private property can't take away Constitutional rights can they? I'm being the devil's advocate btw. Personally, I believe the property rights should hold sway. I'm just thinking out loud.
If you don't mind I'd like to explore this a little bit.My property, my rules. Unless the business is breaking some sort of law by restricting people from owning guns on his property, then there is no issue here. It's a false dichotomy.
A property owner can disallow you on their property at their own digression. Nothing overrides the rights of the property owner period. But a vehicle is the employees private property so the fire arm within it is not legally on the business owners property. But again the property owner can through off their property for suspecting you have something they do not like in your vehicle. If they fire you for having a firearm on their property there are many elements that would determine if you could bring legal action against the property owner. Logically you would really not have a leg to stand on.
But the employer can object to your presence on the property. The employer can fire you for nothing at all really as long as they do so within the limits of the law. As a property owner they can choose what you can and cannot bring onto their property. And if they believe that you might be bringing something they do not want they can throw you off of their property.We start with the individual's right to be secure in their person and papers, which is where the right to private property comes from.
The car, SCOTUS ruled, is an extension of the employee, and that's why the employer may not regulate it. Since the car is protected because it's an extension of the employee, then logically the employee herself is protected, since she is the principal source of the right which is protecting the car. An employee in the building is identical to a car in the parking lot, so if an employer can't object to a gun in the car, neither can they object to a gun on an employee's person.
If I'm just some Joe-Schmuck passing through, yeah, they can kick me off for any or no reason. Once they've hired me, however, they have to show cause or I can file a complaint and get them cited, fined and/or I get to collect on their unemployment insurance.But the employer can object to your presence on the property.
Ultimately, everyone can do absolutely anything they want. But be ready to accept the consequences. Sure, an employer can fire me for no reason at all, but I would then get to collect a check from their unemployment insurance, and I think Democrats just extended unemployment benefits again.The employer can fire you for nothing at all really as long as they do so within the limits of the law.
As a property owner they can choose what you can and cannot bring onto their property. And if they believe that you might be bringing something they do not want they can throw you off of their property.
If their is a rumor that someone you know is a thief, you do not need proof to throw them off of your private property.
As an employee you may have a contract or there may be certain laws that give you a little more rights on private property of where you work but at any moment they can throw you out the door.
You seem to think you can just use and abuse people who are on your property without consequence. One day you're going to have a very rude awakening.You would have to go to court to address anything that you feel violated your rights. After the fact you could try to present a reason for carrying a firearm somewhere where the property owner forbid the possession of a firearm.
A better source: http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/newmexico.pdfIn New Mexico the law says this: Pursuant to Subsection C of NMSA 1978 Section 29-19-12, any person lawfully in possession of private property may prohibit the carrying of concealed handguns on such private property by posting notice in accordance with NMSA 1978 Section 30-14-6 or by verbally notifying persons entering upon the property.
If I'm just some Joe-Schmuck passing through, yeah, they can kick me off for any or no reason. Once they've hired me, however, they have to show cause or I can file a complaint and get them cited, fined and/or I get to collect on their unemployment insurance.
Ultimately, everyone can do absolutely anything they want. But be ready to accept the consequences. Sure, an employer can fire me for no reason at all, but I would then get to collect a check from their unemployment insurance, and I think Democrats just extended unemployment benefits again.
Depends on the item, depends of the reason. They can not like my father's ring all day long, but as it's in the same type of classification as the wedding rings they do allow, should they fire me for it I'll get free money from them for a while.
And if the employer can't prove their a thief when the unemployment caseworker calls the next day, the employer will have to pay. Likewise, if the employer can't prove they're a thief when the lawyers calls, the employer will have to pay even more when the slander suit comes down.
The moment they put their hands on me to 'throw me out the door', they're committing assault, so we'll just add that to 'slander' and 'wrongful termination'.
You seem to think you can just use and abuse people who are on your property without consequence. One day you're going to have a very rude awakening.
When you hired the employee, in the interview...did you ask if they had any formal hand-to-hand combat training? I mean, if you looked at my resume, the military service is hard to miss, so if you plan on retaining some 'right' to assault me ("throw me out the door", at it were) you may want that information before you do something stupid and your arm goes in a cast. Also, in such a confrontation, were you to ever try and disarm me, that's 'reaching' and will justify my using lethal force to stop you. As a civilian you must have a Guard Card and be employed as a 'guard' in order to take a weapon off of anyone. Do you have a Guard Card?
So, think about it.
A better source: http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/newmexico.pdf
...though I don't see why your stating this. I already know about the laws I'm arguing to overturn.
So, you believe a lawfully carried firearm by a trained person with a clean criminal history on your property is a threat, and your reaction is to use tuff-guy talk thinking everyone will 'understand'. Good luck with that. If you're right and the person is a threat, you're more likely to get shot because you couldn't control your mouth. Something tells me this wouldn't be the first time your mouth got you into trouble, though.Throwing you out the door was figurative not actually physically handling the person.
They can even call law enforcement if you refuse.
Of course as I said after the fact you may have a case against your employer depending on various laws. But the property owner can legally demand that you leave the property for no reason other than they don't want you there.
That being said though I think that there should be a compromise. I think that it is understandable that a gun carrier obviously has the legal right to carry a gun. And even the NRA is not asking to let employees sport a gun inside the work place (if the work place does not require it) but if one wants a gun for the commute or whatever they do traveling to the work place where else would they store the gun but in their vehicle. Personally I see no problem with storing a weapon in a vehicle. Most work places only check the employees after they have exited the parking lot anyways. Well some have guards when you enter the parking lot but they mostly just check if you should be there at all.
See that's where the rub is, because if they're an employee, the do have a right to be there. If they're not an employee then yes it's merely a privilege.But if you remove the weapon from the vehicle on the property I believe that property rights wins in that case. Being on someones private property is a privilege not a right.
That agreement wouldn't be legal. No private contract can otherwise brake the law, or it is void. If an employee signs such a contract and has a gun in their car anyway, there's nothing the employer could do about it since the contract itself brakes the law.Even if you work on the property that doesn't change the the laws for private property. I dont believe that the employer though can legally ask the employee if they are a gun owner though. So unless the gun is visible no one would really know unless the employee was stupid enough to announce it. Also in play would be any agreement signed by the employee that would make it legal for the employer to ban guns even in a vehicle.
If you follow this logic then the WBBC would be allowed to set up on your front lawn and protest and you couldn't call the cops to get them off of your property because that would be the government infringing their right to free speech.
I obviously disagree with this logic.
Since I've made some arguments based on my being in a residence as a hired contractor, please let me clarify that if I'm just a regular person there fore the BBQ, if you don't like my religion or my deodorant, out I go.I was of the same mind as you, but Jerry's comments have kind of given me a bit pause when it SPECIFICALLY comes to employers, not simply any kind of private property.
Simply becaues it's your business and property doesn't give you the right to have policies that discriminate against a persons religion or sex or race and even in some places sexual orientation. We clearly have laws in place that prevent businesses from doing whatever they want with their private property.
Like it or not, the right to own a firearm is a Constitutionally protected right as it's interpretted currently under the law, and the ability to carry is law in many states. So it's one of those things where you have to ask why private property rights of business owners can be infringed when discriminating against an someone wearing a Hijab or is black but not when it comes to having a gun.
No I do not believe your strawman argument thank you. You seem to have taken mere conversation personal for some strange ass reason that I do not care to know. Perhaps you are having a bad day?So, you believe a lawfully carried firearm by a trained person with a clean criminal history on your property is a threat, and your reaction is to use tuff-guy talk thinking everyone will 'understand'. Good luck with that. If you're right and the person is a threat, you're more likely to get shot because you couldn't control your mouth. Something tells me this wouldn't be the first time your mouth got you into trouble, though.
I am not for gun control even though you seem to think so.There is a scope of correct actions, ranging from politely pointing out the sign and asking the person to leave, to quietly calling the police and letting them handle it, even pressing charges if you wish.
Yes that all can happen after the fact. But no law enforcement officer can make a private property owner let a person that they wish not to be on their property stay against their wishes. As I said later there may be legal issues for the property owner but still it is the property owners right to throw you off their property against your will, especially if they view you as a threat to thier safety or the safety of other people. It would be unconstitutional otherwise.Well, in your state, you can press charges even they made an honest mistake, immediately fully comply and sincerely apologize.
Again they can fire you on the spot and have you legally removed from the property at their order. Yes later they may be in court over it but immediately you were no longer on the property.Not when you're an employee, they can't...at least not without also suffering legal consequences.
What would happen is that an employer may require the potential employee to disclose if they own a firearm or have a CCW making it a potential reason for not hiring a person. or if they do hire you they would then have to keep a very close eye on you. If they view that you require too much observation for whatever reason they can decide that it is not worth having you work there. Plus you are forgetting about insurance companies that would probably charge the owner of the property higher premiums considering the potential danger of a firearm discharging accidentally.I love compromise, I actually look for opportunities to compromise on every issue.
I offer that employees only be allowed to carry concealed, not open, just like a dress-code. I offer that employers have the right to make a photocopy of the employee's CCW for their files, just like a driver's license and social security card. I also offer that employers should receive special legal protection in the federal code against liability for damage, injury or death should an otherwise legally carried firearm be used on their property.
And in return for these infringements on the individual's privacy, the individual has the right to carry a gun in the building, while employed, while on the clock, just like they have the right to be black, a woman, or gay, and not discriminated against.
You have permission as an employee to be on the property. You do not have permission to do whatever you want whenever you want just because you are a employee. In fact to counter what you are asserting a gun could be considered part of the dress code and legally be banned. There is legal power to make a employee where certain clothing and cut their hair and be clean and so on.See that's where the rub is, because if they're an employee, the do have a right to be there. If they're not an employee then yes it's merely a privilege.
How exactly would such an agreement break the law? An agreement to not bring an object on the property is not breaking the law. Asking an employee to leave their gun at home is reasonable request. If you feel that it is not reasonable get a different job, its that simple. I have worked places that I did not like their rules so I simply stopped working there. An employer is not required to hire you or keep you on the payroll unless a contract is in play. if you have no contract an employer can fire you for no reason or perhaps not fire you but just tell you that you are no longer needed.That agreement wouldn't be legal. No private contract can otherwise brake the law, or it is void. If an employee signs such a contract and has a gun in their car anyway, there's nothing the employer could do about it since the contract itself brakes the law.
If you follow this logic then the WBBC would be allowed to set up on your front lawn and protest and you couldn't call the cops to get them off of your property because that would be the government infringing their right to free speech.
I obviously disagree with this logic.
The difference is that I haven't invited people on to my private property with the purpose to employ them. My private property is mine and I have not invited the WBBC onto my front lawn. Therefore, they would be trespassing. When you open up your private property for the purpose of employing people, does that mean those people submit to your rule and the Constitution means nothing now? I don't believe so. Of course, that's why I started this thread, to see what others thought.
If you follow this logic then the WBBC would be allowed to set up on your front lawn and protest and you couldn't call the cops to get them off of your property because that would be the government infringing their right to free speech.
I obviously disagree with this logic.
Barring legal requirements, why does a business "have" to make accommodations for employees and customers. Why can't businesses choose to make accomodations?Again, HOME is one thing, BUSINESS is a slightly different thing. A business has to make some accomodation for employees and customers.
Again, your HOME is one thing... that is TRULY private property.
Your BUSINESS where you deliberately invite others in (employees and customers) is a slightly different matter. Yes, you own it but it isn't an entirely PRIVATE space... it isn't a PUBLIC space either but it is a SHARED SPACE... if you don't share it with customers and employees you dont make any money, which is why you're there.
I own my home. My teenage son lives here with me. "My house my rules".... well yes, but I want him here with me and if I make rules that are ****ing stupid I may not be sharing my private space anymore... I'll be alone.
The business owner WANTS employees and customers to come onto his property.... well, fine, but he may have to make a few small concessions to THEIR needs if he wants to do business.
Again, HOME is one thing, BUSINESS is a slightly different thing. A business has to make some accomodation for employees and customers... like obeying OSHA rules for employee safety and comfort, yes? Like publishing HAZMAT data on any chemicals in use there, right? This is a very similar thing, but it not only affects the employees safety AT work but travelling to and from work and anywhere they stop in between.
Barring legal requirements, why does a business "have" to make accommodations for employees and customers. Why can't businesses choose to make accomodations?
Barring legal requirements, why does a business "have" to make accommodations for employees and customers. Why can't businesses choose to make accomodations?
The first part of my statement said "barring legal requirements" so none of this is relevant.Does the business get to CHOOSE whether to comply with OSHA safety regulations or not? No.
CHOOSE whether to comply with Equal Opportunity hiring and promotion practices? No.
CHOOSE whether to discriminate in serving customers based on race, creed, gender or orientation? No.
You've stated this argument, but you offer no defense. Why should businesses not be allowed to choose to ban guns off of their property? If it's just because you think such bans would affect your safety, then why do the potential threats to your safety trump their preferences for their own business. Why can't you just go work and patronize places that allow guns on their property and avoid those that don't?Therefore, IMO, do they get to CHOOSE whether I will be allowed to travel to and from work, and any stops along the way, and arrive home after work armed or disarmed? No.
The 2nd Amendment applies to government not to business, so actually it doesn't affect that at all.That affects my safety, and it impacts my 2A rights in too many ways.
I basically agree with this. I think it should be up to businesses to decide what to allow on their property and if they take a hit for that, then so be it. However, it doesn't make sense to force them to allow guns.They don't have to do anything if they don't want to.
Eh, that depends entirely on where the business is. In fact, I'm fairly certain that in certain places, businesses would attract more customers by banning guns on their property.But if they want to remain in business for any amount of time, it would be in their best interest to do so.
The first part of my statement said "barring legal requirements" so none of this is relevant.
You've stated this argument, but you offer no defense. Why should businesses not be allowed to choose to ban guns off of their property? If it's just because you think such bans would affect your safety, then why do the potential threats to your safety trump their preferences for their own business. Why can't you just go work and patronize places that allow guns on their property and avoid those that don't?
The 2nd Amendment applies to government not to business, so actually it doesn't affect that at all.
When did I say that? Are you denying that the 2nd Amendment only applies to the government?Then I suppose Federal safety regulations and bans against racial/etc discrimination don't apply to businesses either? :roll:
Again, your HOME is one thing... that is TRULY private property.
Your BUSINESS where you deliberately invite others in (employees and customers) is a slightly different matter. Yes, you own it but it isn't an entirely PRIVATE space... it isn't a PUBLIC space either but it is a SHARED SPACE... if you don't share it with customers and employees you dont make any money, which is why you're there.
I own my home. My teenage son lives here with me. "My house my rules".... well yes, but I want him here with me and if I make rules that are ****ing stupid I may not be sharing my private space anymore... I'll be alone.
The business owner WANTS employees and customers to come onto his property.... well, fine, but he may have to make a few small concessions to THEIR needs if he wants to do business.
Again, HOME is one thing, BUSINESS is a slightly different thing. A business has to make some accomodation for employees and customers... like obeying OSHA rules for employee safety and comfort, yes? Like publishing HAZMAT data on any chemicals in use there, right? This is a very similar thing, but it not only affects the employees safety AT work but travelling to and from work and anywhere they stop in between.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?