PDA

View Full Version : ND Senate: Gun owners can bring firearms to work


Southwest Chuck
03-31-2011, 9:30 AM
I have mixed feeling about this. Private property rights vs. an enumerated fundamental right, but I think this bill is a good balance. After all, an employer can't ban workers from "talking" about certain subjects (1st A.).While employee's firearms have to remain locked in ones vehicle, it would seem prudent for employers to make reasonable efforts to ensure worker safety while on the job, rather than totally disarming them. Good balance? Am I missing something here?

Business Week Article (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9M9PNE00.htm)

The state Senate voted 41-5 on Wednesday to approve legislation that says business owners can't ban someone from bringing a gun onto company property.

HondaMasterTech
03-31-2011, 9:37 AM
How does it create a safe environment to ban guns from your property? The person most likely to step up and help you will be unarmed.

Is there something in law that changes the benefit of private property when someone is employed? Meaning, since the employee has been contracted does that employee have any guarantees of his/her rights regardless of the owners wishes as long as the employment contract is valid?

Blackhawk556
03-31-2011, 9:39 AM
If a killer walks in and starts shooting people, what good is a gun in the car??? I'm not just talking about guns at work, I'm talking about other places as well. I do agree with property rights, so this is a tough one.

moleculo
03-31-2011, 9:44 AM
After all, an employer can't ban workers from "talking" about certain subjects (1st A.).


They can't "ban" you from talking, but they can sure fire you for what you say. Anything said that creates an atmosphere of hostility or that can be viewed as harassment is grounds for dismissal: Management 101.

While I would rather my employer NOT have a "no guns" policy, they do. That means if I'm ever able to obtain a CCW, I'll have to leave the gun in the car or risk being fired.

dfletcher
03-31-2011, 9:51 AM
I think guns vs private property is a PITA to deal with because as gun owners we hold each in very high regard.

There are different types of private property. Private property such as one's home is treated differently than "private property open to the public". If I want to put a sign on my front lawn (assuming I don't live in an HOA) that reads "No Women, Jews or Blacks Allowed" I can do so - I can't do it at my grocery store. If I want to post a "No Guns Allowed" at my home I believe that is an absolute, no one should be able to tell me otherwise. So far as I know, no legislature or organization has propsed otherwise.

Where the workplace falls with respect in the "private property" spectrum, I don't know. I just know it habitually leaves bad feelings between competing rights we instinctively support.

Matt C
03-31-2011, 9:56 AM
If you believe that there are no employment rights whatsoever, then it follows that this would be a violation of private property rights. If you think you have a right to a workplace that is not made unnecessarily unsafe, then you have a right to a reasonable means to protect yourself at your workplace, unless they want to provide armed guards and cameras in every room.

HondaMasterTech
03-31-2011, 10:06 AM
If an employer has a no-guns policy all they can really do is fire you. This law essentially adds gun carriers to the protected classes just like age, race etc.

Crom
03-31-2011, 10:10 AM
This to me is common sense legislation. Cars are like an extension of ones home, the lawful contents inside of the car should be the business of the owner alone. Besides, most employee parking lots are publicly accessible and as such are "public spaces." anyway...

North Dakota gun owners may soon be able to bring their firearms to work, if they're kept locked in a car or truck. The state Senate voted 41-5 on Wednesday to approve legislation that says business owners can't ban someone from bringing a gun onto company property. The law says companies can prevent employees from bringing guns inside the workplace. But they can't bar them from a parking lot as long as the gun is locked up.

Untamed1972
03-31-2011, 10:18 AM
This to me is common sense legislation. Cars are like an extension of ones home, the lawful contents inside of the car should be the business of the owner alone. Besides, most employee parking lots are publicly accessible and as such are "public spaces." anyway...

I agree. My feeling about the subject is more about the fact that telling someone they can't have a gun locked in their car at work is essentially requiring them to travel to and from work unarmed. so it's not so much about what they can/cant do AT work, its the effect that the requirement has on non-work activities/time before and after work.....which is MY time, I'm not on the employers time/dime till I cross the threshold. It would also seem to be a constitutional violation to ban employees from having guns in their car if the same restriction is not placed on customers parking in the same parking lot.

Again....it's not even really about having a gun to protect one's self AT work.....its about being able to have your gun to protect yourself while traveling to and from work.

Window_Seat
03-31-2011, 10:21 AM
IMHO... Property rights can only go so far when you're a business owner and depriving an employee from the means available for self defense.

HR is likely more "freaked out" about this subject than anything else, and they like to steer clear of it, but they know that it's a problem, especially when employees work outdoors (eg. trucking, pizza delivery, construction, etc.).

As a Class A truck driver, I've written about this subject, and believe strongly that it's overdue to get onboard with the concept of RKBA for SD/P on the job.

Employers must agree and abide with all kinds of rules/regs in order to run a business. They have OSHA. Different industries have different agencies breathing down their necks. Banks have the Comptroller of the Currency (http://www.occ.treas.gov/), FDIC (http://www.fdic.gov/), among other agencies... Trucking industry operations are FAR from their property rights... They have the FMCSA (http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/), OSHA, the state Law Enforcement agency to deal with, scale operations, etc... Then they have to deal with DOT inspectors coming ONTO THEIR PROPERTY to conduct audits. They set up offices INSIDE the company terminal headquarters and check all the log sheets of drivers. Oh that's so wonderful that they are making sure those killer truckers on caffeine and hamburgers are tamed. :rolleyes:

Restaurants have the health department(s), who barge in and do audits. We don't seem to have a problem with that.

Landlords in Oakland & San Francisco, and really... All of CA are likely to go to jail if they don't "comply" with the landlord regulations. Where are the property rights here?

Not many folks seem to have a problem with companies being told they have to provide a clean and safe, smoke free environment for employees. What is the real definition of "safe" according to the policy makers?

OH, but we're dealing with GUNS, which are DANGEROUS in the hands of those pesky disgruntled workers... :rolleyes:

They would rather make the employer clean the furnace filters, then they will have done something to make themselves look good to the public.

If employers are going to suddenly have a huge problem with employees being able to protect themselves on the job, then maybe they should think about all the other arbitrary rules that Government imposes on the workplace in the name of safety and health...

Personal safety or property rights? If you have no workers because they all got killed, then you're going to have a very difficult time arguing about property rights when the family of the dead is knocking on your door wanting an explanation as to why the boss said NO TO SELF DEFENSE, and Brady won't be there to help that boss with the right words when "NO GUNS ALLOWED" was in the policy manual before the employees were slaughtered...

Erik.

yellowfin
03-31-2011, 10:38 AM
I agree. My feeling about the subject is more about the fact that telling someone they can't have a gun locked in their car at work is essentially requiring them to travel to and from work unarmed. so it's not so much about what they can/cant do AT work, its the effect that the requirement has on non-work activities/time before and after work.....which is MY time, I'm not on the employers time/dime till I cross the threshold. It would also seem to be a constitutional violation to ban employees from having guns in their car if the same restriction is not placed on customers parking in the same parking lot.

Again....it's not even really about having a gun to protect one's self AT work.....its about being able to have your gun to protect yourself while traveling to and from work.+1. Prohibiting safe storage of guns at work basically means a huge percentage of people can't carry daily because work plus to and from work is most of their day--stopping by home afterwards just isn't practical because there goes another 20 minutes to an hour. 8-10+ hour work day plus commute then pickup and drop off...what's left? I think this may be a big factor in the single digit percentages of CCW's in shall issue states, having work making daily carry impractical for a lot of people. A right rendered useless is a right lost.

Gray Peterson
03-31-2011, 10:41 AM
I agree with the above comment. Window_Seat has made it clear about how little "commercial" property has rights.

Your vehicle is an extension of your home, as it should be treated.

HondaMasterTech
03-31-2011, 10:45 AM
I agree with the above comment. Window_Seat has made it clear about how little "commercial" property has rights.

Your vehicle is an extension of your home, as it should be treated.

All that is needed now are cars that fold up into briefcases like the Jetsons.

Southwest Chuck
03-31-2011, 11:11 AM
This to me is common sense legislation. Cars are like an extension of ones home, the lawful contents inside of the car should be the business of the owner alone. Besides, most employee parking lots are publicly accessible and as such are "public spaces." anyway...

Originally Posted by Untamed: My feeling about the subject is more about the fact that telling someone they can't have a gun locked in their car at work is essentially requiring them to travel to and from work unarmed. so it's not so much about what they can/cant do AT work, its the effect that the requirement has on non-work activities/time before and after work.....which is MY time

I agree on both counts. :thumbsup:

N6ATF
03-31-2011, 11:53 AM
All that is needed now are cars that fold up into briefcases like the Jetsons.

YES.

yellowfin
03-31-2011, 12:03 PM
All that is needed now are cars that fold up into briefcases like the Jetsons.A robot maid would make my life at home a heck of a lot easier, that's for sure.

Arondos
03-31-2011, 12:27 PM
The policy where I work is NO guns on company property. If I get my CCW and leave it in the car in the parking lot I could be fired for it. A gun with NO ammo, locked in a case (say after a range trip) will get you fired.

Now the kicker. IF a bird or bat gets in the warehouse we get called and grab the trusty (company purchased) high powered pellet rifle and eliminate the intruder...

Untamed1972
03-31-2011, 12:35 PM
The policy where I work is NO guns on company property. If I get my CCW and leave it in the car in the parking lot I could be fired for it. A gun with NO ammo, locked in a case (say after a range trip) will get you fired.

Now the kicker. IF a bird or bat gets in the warehouse we get called and grab the trusty (company purchased) high powered pellet rifle and eliminate the intruder...

you should ask them if they have a "no bibles or porn in your car on company property" policy also?

yellowfin
03-31-2011, 12:38 PM
The policy where I work is NO guns on company property. If I get my CCW and leave it in the car in the parking lot I could be fired for it. A gun with NO ammo, locked in a case (say after a range trip) will get you fired.Is there a convenient alternative parking lot nearby?

leitung
03-31-2011, 2:04 PM
Love where I work, the owner of my company is getting a CCW and prefers we carry..

Dreaded Claymore
03-31-2011, 2:10 PM
I think guns vs private property is a PITA to deal with because as gun owners we hold each in very high regard.

There are different types of private property. Private property such as one's home is treated differently than "private property open to the public". If I want to put a sign on my front lawn (assuming I don't live in an HOA) that reads "No Women, Jews or Blacks Allowed" I can do so - I can't do it at my grocery store. If I want to post a "No Guns Allowed" at my home I believe that is an absolute, no one should be able to tell me otherwise. So far as I know, no legislature or organization has propsed otherwise.

Where the workplace falls with respect in the "private property" spectrum, I don't know. I just know it habitually leaves bad feelings between competing rights we instinctively support.

This kind of thing was the problem that some people had with the Civil Rights Act (at least that's what they said, I guess they might just have been secretly racist). The argument was, "Well, people have the right to associate or not with whoever they want, and it's their own private property. Sure we might just stop them from saying "No Black Jews" today, but where will the slippery slope take us?"

I can understand this argument even though I hate racism. I wasn't alive then, but I think I probably would have said, "Even though it's government interference in private matters, institutionalized racism is killing our country and we'll just have to risk the slippery slope, because this **** has got to stop."

I might be wrong, but I think a law against "No Gun Owners" policies is pretty similar to, and will turn out to be just as harmless/beneficial as, a law against "No Coloreds" policies.

HondaMasterTech
03-31-2011, 2:18 PM
The policy where I work is NO guns on company property. If I get my CCW and leave it in the car in the parking lot I could be fired for it. A gun with NO ammo, locked in a case (say after a range trip) will get you fired.

Now the kicker. IF a bird or bat gets in the warehouse we get called and grab the trusty (company purchased) high powered pellet rifle and eliminate the intruder...

I work for a company that has this policy regarding firearms on their property. I'm currently looking for another job.

chewy352
03-31-2011, 5:25 PM
A robot maid would make my life at home a heck of a lot easier, that's for sure.

Same here. Because the wife would be a lot happier. :D