PDA

View Full Version : Do you CCWs carry at work?


ryang
10-25-2007, 8:11 PM
It seems like a (relatively) lot of people have obtained CCWs in SoCal. For those that are not self-employed, do you carry at work? (Note: this question does not apply to LEOs and some security for obvious reasons.)

Most companies have adopted as boilerplate an "employees are not allowed to bring firearms to work" policy as part of their HR guidelines. Some even go so far as to claim firearms are not allowed in the parking lot and personal vehicles are subject to search. And of course employment is "at will" and can be terminated at any time with or without cause.

It seems like CCWs have three options:
1. Don't carry at work. Maybe leave gun in car.
2. Carry at work against company policy with the knowledge you can get fired at any time if/when they find out.
3. Ask (and receive) an exemption to the policy.

Which option have you chosen? Has anyone been able to convince HR/Legal to accept #3?

As a bonus question, it seems like following #1 means the company has implicitly taken responsibility for your well-being at work. If something bad happened, could you sucessfully sue the company for failing to provide "adequate" security and preventing you from defending yourself? If the answer is yes, could you make a similar claim if you were assaulted while travelling to/from work and didn't carry due to the company policy?

It's an interesting thought, but I wonder if companies realized the potential legal liability they assume when they prevent legal firearm carry on their premises.

CSACANNONEER
10-25-2007, 8:25 PM
I work as a surveyor and, my boss has TOLD me to open carry (while in the field) on a couple of jobs. As far as having firearms at the office goes, my 1919 is sitting in my office, under my workstation.

My second job is at an indoor range/gunshop. Need I say more.

Knauga
10-25-2007, 8:40 PM
My employer forbids any weapons in the work place. I can't even have ammo in my car on company property. My boss's boss had a bit of a conniption when they got the questionaire from the Sheriffs dept telling them that they were conducting a background investigation on me because I applied for a CCW. He wanted to put special letters in my file documenting that I was aware of our policy on weapons even though they document that as part of our annual policy reviews. I finally told him that he could put anything in my file that he felt he had to, but that he had better make sure that everybody else who works for the company who has a CCW (there are a bunch company wide, several at my work location) has the same thing in their file. I also let him know that I would follow up with HR to make sure. It wasn't until our corp security folks told him that I was right and that it was nobody's business if I had one so long as I followed company policy that he backed off the issue.

My immediate boss was very cool with me getting it, he was a little jealous because he lives in LA County and will never see one unless I show him what it looks like :D

ETA, that my company will never make an exception in the policy, and I follow my company's policy always in all things. I just carry a big wrench in my pocket :D

Cola King Martini
10-25-2007, 10:21 PM
Yes.

CaliforniaCarry
10-25-2007, 10:37 PM
I don't have a CCW yet, and since I live in LA county I probably won't until I get out of CA. However, I have thoroughly researched my employer's weapons policy and the relevant laws, and I have come to a conclusion about what I will do if I obtain a CCW at some point.

It turns out that my employer (my local city government) does not have any policy whatsoever prohibiting the carry of weapons into the workplace. I found this to be quite odd at first, considering that I work in a government building (city hall). I talked to our HR manager, and she confirmed that there is no written policy at this time. They are aware of this and plan to implement a policy within the next year. I specifically asked her what she thought would happen if an employee was discovered to be carrying with a valid CCW while at work. She made it clear that the employee would most likely not be fired, but would be told not to carry anymore unless they had a very good reason (jeez, it's good cause round 2). I made sure she understood that this was an important issue for me, and that if I had a valid CCW and was told I could not carry I would be finding a new job at my earliest convenience. She asked me to inform her if I was ever granted a CCW and wanted to carry at work (yeah... right :chris:).

So, after all of this (to be honest, my mind was actually made up beforehand), I decided that if I am issued a CCW I will be carrying at work. My HR manager will not be informed about it (she can do a PRA request if she wants, it's not my duty and not in my best interests to inform her). If they fire me, then so be it. I'm in a situation where I have more than one other company that would be willing to hire me in a heartbeat, so getting fired isn't really a huge issue. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure that at least one (possibly two) of the higher-up, non-elected city officials has a CCW and regularly carries into the building. If they tell me I can't carry at work I plan to wave a PRA request in their faces and claim that the higher-ups are getting special treatment when it comes to employee policies.

For now I carry a large folding knife while in the office. I may also be keeping 12 gauge in the trunk of my car at some point.

bulgron
10-26-2007, 12:47 AM
I don't have a CCW, and I'm not LEO or a security guard, but I have a gun at work 100% of the time. Knives too. Lots and lots of knives.

No, I'm not confessing to a felony over the internet. :D

I telecommute full time.

Every company I've ever worked for had a no-weapons policy in the employee handbook. Since Silicon Valley companies have a come-shoot-me policy enforced by HR, I figure that's just one more reason to stay as far away from the office as I can be.

trever1t
10-26-2007, 1:01 AM
My employer is pro firearms and is a Life member of the NRA so no issues there but I understood (maybe incorrectly?) that a ccw was not needed on your property or place of business, no?

tenpercentfirearms
10-26-2007, 4:40 AM
It is legal to carry at my day job, they just won't let me. At my second job if I don't bring my loaded gun with me to work, there is always one there waiting for me.

As much as I like to be armed at all times, why do I keep finding jobs that won't let me carry?

Blademan21
10-26-2007, 5:24 AM
Before retiring two years ago I always carried on the job. No matter what policy stated with the company I was employed with. If it wasn't in my Eagle Industries briefcase,it was in my pocket.I had some crazy jobs over the years,but I lived to go home at the end of my shift. THATS what its all about.

guns_and_labs
10-26-2007, 5:55 AM
My company's policy is "no unauthorized weapons". But then, I wrote the policy.

Wulf
10-26-2007, 6:24 AM
As a bonus question, it seems like following #1 means the company has implicitly taken responsibility for your well-being at work. If something bad happened, could you sucessfully sue the company for failing to provide "adequate" security and preventing you from defending yourself?

I keep waiting for a suit to be brought on those grounds. Seems like a gimmie as soon as some nut job shoots up an office in the right jurisdiction.

CSACANNONEER
10-26-2007, 7:07 AM
My company's policy is "no unauthorized weapons". But then, I wrote the policy.

Great. I hope that anyone can "authorize" themself to carry a legal weapon.

ADDITUDE
10-26-2007, 10:02 AM
My CCW rules state as a condition of the permit I am not allowed to carry in any establishment that serves liquor as the main "entree", a bar per se, any liquor store, Government building or educational institution, or any location where it is posted or that I have otherwise been informed that no firearms or weapons are allowed.

Violation of these rules is punishable by law.

Let alone if I was carrying a weapon at my work against the wishes of my employer I would be fired....and legally prosecuted for violating the terms of my CCW.

Why, as a responsible gun owner and valid CCW permitted individual would a person willfully break the law, dis-obey the wishes of their employer and sacrifice their reputation just to illegally carry a weapon at their work?

Sure, one carries for protection, but just because you have a CCW doesn't mean you can make your own laws and rules.

Sorry, I just have a big problem with people breaking the law like that because it reflects on all of us gun owners....

Bishop
10-26-2007, 11:48 AM
Sorry, I just have a big problem with people breaking the law like that because it reflects on all of us gun owners....

I don't think the issue is people breaking the law, I think it's more that people don't see the law as constitutional. If they passed a law saying you couldn't speak out against the government, would you recommend people obey the law?

(btw, McCain/Feingold)

guns_and_labs
10-26-2007, 12:15 PM
Great. I hope that anyone can "authorize" themself to carry a legal weapon.

I figure a CCW IS "authorization".

packnrat
10-26-2007, 2:38 PM
i drive a class A rig, even if the company i work did not care,
i still can not due to fed regs. :43:

Wulf
10-26-2007, 2:44 PM
I've always wondered if an employer can get away with REQUIRING that you have a CCW and carry on the job.

First off, just them having the permit would great for the boss for knowing they're not hiring a crook. Then, what's the sheriff going to think when he gets people coming in saying...."I have to have it for this job"

QuarterBoreGunner
10-26-2007, 3:54 PM
Everyday. I have the 'plausibly deniable' excuse that I was never made aware of any company policy regarding lawfully carried firearms, which is true. I'm sure there may be one, but they've never made me aware of it.

ryang
10-26-2007, 7:29 PM
I understood (maybe incorrectly?) that a ccw was not needed on your property or place of business, no?Your place of business, yes. But that "your" as in you own the business. If you're an employee then you need to follow the company guidelines or risk termination. Note that CCW holders can legally carry at work even if their company has a policy against it. Carry is legal, but company policy means you'll likely get terminated if they find out.

ryang
10-26-2007, 7:31 PM
My CCW rules state as a condition of the permit I am not allowed to carry in any location where it is posted or that I have otherwise been informed that no firearms or weapons are allowed.That's an interesting rider on your CCW. It is not, AFAIK, universal for all CCW permits.

Why, as a responsible gun owner and valid CCW permitted individual would a person willfully break the law, dis-obey the wishes of their employer and sacrifice their reputation just to illegally carry a weapon at their work?In your case it's illegal. In most other cases, it's legal but against company policy. There's a big difference.

trever1t
10-26-2007, 8:49 PM
Your place of business, yes. But that "your" as in you own the business. If you're an employee then you need to follow the company guidelines or risk termination. Note that CCW holders can legally carry at work even if their company has a policy against it. Carry is legal, but company policy means you'll likely get terminated if they find out.

But if not against company guidelines than a person can carry concealed on private company property without ccw?

Turbinator
10-27-2007, 8:27 AM
Why, as a responsible gun owner and valid CCW permitted individual would a person willfully break the law, dis-obey the wishes of their employer and sacrifice their reputation just to illegally carry a weapon at their work?

Not "just to illegally carry a weapon" - if you do feel that it is possible that you'd need to use one some day to defend yourself at work, I would prefer to take that chance and risk of social harm, rather than to face possible physical harm.

I think each person obviously must make up his or her own mind as to which stance will be taken.

Turby

paul0660
10-27-2007, 9:17 PM
CSACANNONEER

Your 1919 is under your workstation............what do you do when you hit the can?

N6ATF
10-27-2007, 11:34 PM
Your 1919 is under your workstation............what do you do when you hit the can?

Taped on the underside of the reserve tank lid.

ryang
10-28-2007, 10:38 AM
if you do feel that it is possible that you'd need to use one some day to defend yourself at work, I would prefer to take that chance and risk of social harm, rather than to face possible physical harm.

I think each person obviously must make up his or her own mind as to which stance will be taken.Statistically violence at work is not a big issue. But carjackings, running store errands during lunch and just being out in public are. I would tend to think CCWers would rather not secure a weapon in their car while at work since it might get stolen and there's a greater chance of ND if you're continually removing/putting on a holster.

johnny_22
11-02-2007, 8:59 AM
Antis have tried to use this for years on keeping guns out of the workplace. Finally one judge agrees:

" [T]he Amendments [the Oklahoma weapons laws] conflict with and are preempted by the OSH Act, which requires employers to abate hazards in their workplaces that could lead to death or serious bodily harm and which encourages employers to prevent gun-related workplace injuries. The Amendments criminally prohibit an effective method of reducing gun-related workplace injuries and cannot coexist with federal obligations and objectives."

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/laborprof_blog/2007/10/osha-general-du.html

Has this been brought up by anyone's employer?

FortCourageArmory
11-02-2007, 9:57 AM
I carry a gun at work. Of course, I own the business and IT'S A GUN STORE!!! So, I guess that's cheating...just a bit. The next step is to apply for and get a CCW from Ventura County.

ADDITUDE
11-04-2007, 7:32 AM
I don't think the issue is people breaking the law, I think it's more that people don't see the law as constitutional. If they passed a law saying you couldn't speak out against the government, would you recommend people obey the law?

(btw, McCain/Feingold)

Yes I absolutely would. Now how viable do you think your analogy is that a law would be passed here in the United States that would not allow you to speak out against the US Government? I think it is nill. The ACLU would go balistic.

Agreed, some may think not being allowed to carry a CCW where ever they want may violate their 2nd. ammendant rights, but speaking out against the Government is a far cry from carrying a conceled weapon where it is a violation of law.

Either way, just because someone views a law as unconstitutional does not give them the right to break the law. We can't pick and choose and selectively decide what we think we will obey and what we wont.

If we pursue that course of thought then it's everyone for themselves and we are no longer a democratic society.

ADDITUDE
11-04-2007, 7:47 AM
That's an interesting rider on your CCW. It is not, AFAIK, universal for all CCW permits.

In your case it's illegal. In most other cases, it's legal but against company policy. There's a big difference.

Humm....so if someone enters a public or privately owned establishment that has rules posted that "No Firearms, CW's are allowed" that person has a right to ignore that posting because they were issued a Concealed Carry Permit?

If it's company policy they are on the property grounds / real estate that someone else owns and has rights to. The owners have a right to allow or disallow, permit or not permit certain actions of those "Guests" that are allowed to inhabit their personal property without trespassing.

Yea, they can tell someone "No Guns Allowed" and have a right to do so.

Just like a post on a fence that says "No Hunting"....that doesn't mean someone can hunt on that property just because they have a hunting license in their possession.

Owners of property have a right to control what happens on or in their personal property. Just as a homeowner has those rights to their property.

ryang
11-04-2007, 12:37 PM
Humm....so if someone enters a public or privately owned establishment that has rules posted that "No Firearms, CW's are allowed" that person has a right to ignore that posting because they were issued a Concealed Carry Permit?You are confusing two different issues.

What I am talking about:
The company you work for has a "no firearms" policy at work. You have a CCW. You can legally carry at work, but doing so are subject to termination if/when it's found out.

What you're talking about:
The business you shop at has a "no firearms" policy. You have a CCW. You can legally carry on the premises, but if/when it's found out the business can ask you to leave or face tresspassing charges.

At least in California, neither example is against the law. But the former scenario has bigger implications for an individual than the latter.

ADDITUDE
11-04-2007, 11:42 PM
Where I am coming from is that I am a business owner.

I say the confusion lies in the thought that a person can legally carry at work even though they have been notified by the business owners / Corporation not to have weapons.

I say the CCW permit allows a person to carry where it is permitted, not any place they decide they want to.

California has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. I can't imagine California has a more relaxed CCW program than North Carolina. I can't imagine California CCW law would disregard the rights of employers and other property owners and tell CCW's that they are allowed to carry their guns and weapons anywhere they choose, regardless of others wishes or posted rules.

So, in California, for example, if a person had notification not to have weapons at work and that person who has a CCW was caught carrying at work, even though they were notified not to and the business not only reported the instance and explained the circumstances to the local Sheriff but also terminated the employee, the only consequence to the CCW holder would be lawful termination of the employee.

The Sheriff would have to disregard the matter because no laws were broken?



You are confusing two different issues.

What I am talking about:
The company you work for has a "no firearms" policy at work. You have a CCW. You can legally carry at work, but doing so are subject to termination if/when it's found out.

CSDGuy
11-05-2007, 12:01 AM
Where I am coming from is that I am a business owner.

I say the confusion lies in the thought that a person can legally carry at work even though they have been notified by the business owners / Corporation not to have weapons.

I say the CCW permit allows a person to carry where it is permitted, not any place they decide they want to.

California has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. I can't imagine California has a more relaxed CCW program than North Carolina. I can't imagine California CCW law would disregard the rights of employers and other property owners and tell CCW's that they are allowed to carry their guns and weapons anywhere they choose, regardless of others wishes or posted rules.

So, in California, for example, if a person had notification not to have weapons at work and that person who has a CCW was caught carrying at work, even though they were notified not to and the business not only reported the instance and explained the circumstances to the local Sheriff but also terminated the employee, the only consequence to the CCW holder would be lawful termination of the employee.

The Sheriff would have to disregard the matter because no laws were broken?
The Sheriff/Chief of Police might actually do exactly that. Your example is that of an employee violating company policy, not a law. Given the totality of circumstances, it is quite possible that the now fired employee keeps his/her CCW.

attitudinal
11-05-2007, 12:42 AM
My main problem with company restrictions on firearms is that some even tell you not to bring it into their parking lot.

Even federal buildings don't have those restrictions. Federal buildings, furthermore, have gun detectors, and when they detect you have one (ie, you put it in the pot before going through the detector), you aren't treated as a "policy violator" or criminal, they just put it in storage for you until you leave.

So .. if a company wants to prevent people from bringing firearms into work, they should do the same thing: ignore the parking lot, search everyone entering, and politely collect the guns until they leave the building. If the company wants to "clear" a parking lot, then they should have a checkpoint for entering campus and that's the place where people-and-their-vehicles should be searched. If the company doesn't think it's worth the hassle and expense to enforce the policy, then the company is violating its own policy.

ryang
11-05-2007, 5:31 AM
I say the confusion lies in the thought that a person can legally carry at work even though they have been notified by the business owners / Corporation not to have weapons.

California has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. I can't imagine California has a more relaxed CCW program than North Carolina. I can't imagine California CCW law would disregard the rights of employers and other property owners and tell CCW's that they are allowed to carry their guns and weapons anywhere they choose, regardless of others wishes or posted rules.When it comes to state laws you can't assume jack. A lot of people get tripped up because they don't realize each state has their own laws which may or may not be similar to those in another state.

In Nevada, CCWs are "shall issue" and there is a state law where if a business posts a "no CCW/firearms" sign on all their public entrances then you legally can't carry in that business. California does not have such a law.

trashman
11-05-2007, 8:07 AM
My main problem with company restrictions on firearms is that some even tell you not to bring it into their parking lot.

Even federal buildings don't have those restrictions.

Not quite - I work at a Federal facility in the Bay Area, and there is a strict no-firearms/ammunition/explosive devices policy that applies to the entire property. If the Federal PD / security force pops you with a firearm in your trunk (they have random vehicle inspections on entry) then you are in for some 'splainin....

--Neill

chico.cm
11-05-2007, 9:46 AM
I can't imagine California has a more relaxed CCW program than North Carolina.


I'll give you one example:
In CA, I can lawfully carry with my CCW on any campus K-College without so much as a "by your leave". Most states CCW's can't do that. From reading the NC Policy (http://www.jus.state.nc.us/NCJA/ncfirearmslaws.pdf), pages 19 and 40, it seems that we have more leniency in a variety of areas, while certainly more stricture in others.

As to the topic at hand:
company policy states that I can't carry at work, so I park on the public street with my "go! stuff" secured inside in case I need it.

WolfMansDad
11-05-2007, 10:27 AM
This question has been occupying my mind lately, since one of our former contract employees made some threats and is now under a restraining order.

In the end I decided not to carry. I have carried on jobs in the past, but only with the blessing of my boss. Where I work now, there is a very clear "no guns" policy, and even the security guards are unarmed.

For me, there is risk either way. If I carry, there is the risk of me getting caught and losing my job. If I don't, there is a risk of the guy actually carrying out his threats. I figure the first is more probable than the second, so I don't carry.

Now, I should point out that my CCW is a Utah one and only good out of state.

Knauga
11-05-2007, 11:50 AM
California has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. I can't imagine California has a more relaxed CCW program than North Carolina. I can't imagine California CCW law would disregard the rights of employers and other property owners and tell CCW's that they are allowed to carry their guns and weapons anywhere they choose, regardless of others wishes or posted rules.

So, in California, for example, if a person had notification not to have weapons at work and that person who has a CCW was caught carrying at work, even though they were notified not to and the business not only reported the instance and explained the circumstances to the local Sheriff but also terminated the employee, the only consequence to the CCW holder would be lawful termination of the employee.

The Sheriff would have to disregard the matter because no laws were broken?

California has some of the toughest gun laws in the country, but it also has some of the best CCW laws in the country (if you can get one). There are very few places in California that you cannot carry. If I carry in a private business and they spot my gun, they can ask me to leave and that is it as long as it is not listed in the PC or the terms of my CCW that I can't carry there. If I don't leave I'm trespassing, but that has no effect on my CCW. My boss most certainly can fire me for violating my company's policy, but that has zero effect on my CCW.

QuarterBoreGunner
11-05-2007, 11:58 AM
^exactly correct.
Which is why (non-gun) people are amazed when I tell them that the "no weapons" signs at various movie theaters and such in the greater Bay Area, have absolutely zero weight of law. You can post a sign saying "no weapons allowed" all you want. But I can legally disregard it with my lawful CCW.

attitudinal
11-05-2007, 8:36 PM
Not quite - I work at a Federal facility in the Bay Area, and there is a strict no-firearms/ammunition/explosive devices policy that applies to the entire property.

If the Federal PD / security force pops you with a firearm in your trunk (they have random vehicle inspections on entry) then you are in for some 'splainin....

--Neill

Do they have a checkpoint before entering the campus? Does it include a location to hand in your goods for safekeeping during the day?

If no to the last question ... that gets me bothered because how else am I to carry a firearm "around"? Park three miles from work and walk?
If I want to go hunting later that day, or go to a firing range, or just want to keep a gun around because who knows when it may be needed ... then not providing a place to submit my firearm for safekeeping means I can't conveniently bring a firearm ANYWHERE if I plan to go to work that day.
Having to park miles from campus so I can store my firearm in my car in an unsecured lot and then walk or bicycle to work from there is an unreasonable and discriminatory inconvenience.

DigglerD
11-05-2007, 9:11 PM
Your 1919 is under your workstation............what do you do when you hit the can?

My main problem with company restrictions on firearms is that some even tell you not to bring it into their parking lot.

Even federal buildings don't have those restrictions. Federal buildings, furthermore, have gun detectors, and when they detect you have one (ie, you put it in the pot before going through the detector), you aren't treated as a "policy violator" or criminal, they just put it in storage for you until you leave.

So .. if a company wants to prevent people from bringing firearms into work, they should do the same thing: ignore the parking lot, search everyone entering, and politely collect the guns until they leave the building. If the company wants to "clear" a parking lot, then they should have a checkpoint for entering campus and that's the place where people-and-their-vehicles should be searched. If the company doesn't think it's worth the hassle and expense to enforce the policy, then the company is violating its own policy.

I know I'm on a gun site but geeze, talk about paranoia. Where do you people work!?!?! Liberia? :confused:

I don't want to run through check stations and metal detectors each day at work because one moron wants to walk around a bunch of programmers strapped.

I'm almost certain the no gun policy is an insurance / liability thing...

attitudinal
11-05-2007, 10:27 PM
I don't want to run through check stations and metal detectors each day at work because one moron wants to walk around a bunch of programmers strapped.

Hi, Trolly Doll.

I said I want to leave it in my car in the parking lot. As in not bring it into the building. Got it, yet? I don't have a CCW.

The point of lining up to pass through metal detectors and check stations is to prevent a killer from entering the building armed, not prevent a harmless CCW from doing so, though it would successfully prevent both (we could hope so, anyway). There's no need for such inconveniences if there's no policy against bringing firearms onto campus, so if you don't like the inconvenience then protest the gun ban, not the harmless, legal packers.

If your place of business has the gun ban in place, even in the parking lots, but lacks the metal detectors, what do you have then? A bunch of sheep ready for slaughter, and meek shepherds with no slings. Virginia Tech ad nauseum.

If you don't want the checkpoints and metal detectors but still want a sheepish illusion of safety, then a simple "no unconcealed carry" policy would serve everyone fairly. No one would have to see scary weapons, people would be allowed to leave stuff in their car, and only CCWs could legally bring stuff into the building. If some guy breaks concealment, he's in trouble seven ways to Sunday.

Somehow, some people get the impression that banning guns is like banning smoking. No one needs to search for cigs upon entrance because enforcement will take place as soon as someone lights one up. What the **** are you going to do when some lunatic decides to light up his illegally concealed firearm? You're unarmed, and some of your coworkers, though well-trained in firearms and who could have saved your ***, well they're unarmed, too, so you all die together. Sadly, I don't have to make this **** up.

ADDITUDE
11-06-2007, 12:04 AM
From reading the NC Policy (http://www.jus.state.nc.us/NCJA/ncfirearmslaws.pdf), pages 19 and 40, it seems that we have more leniency in a variety of areas, while certainly more stricture in others.


Chico -

I spent over an hour trying to find detailed information concerning CCW's in California yesterday morning so I could educate myself on this discussion and "read the rules".

But after all my searching I could find nothing on the Cali DOJ site that talked in detail about what and what a person is allowed to do with a CCW in California.

Do you have a reference?

Thanks.

ADDITUDE
11-06-2007, 12:14 AM
From reading the NC Policy (http://www.jus.state.nc.us/NCJA/ncfirearmslaws.pdf), pages 19 and 40, it seems that we have more leniency in a variety of areas, while certainly more stricture in others.


Chico -

I spent over an hour trying to find detailed information concerning CCW's in California yesterday morning so I could educate myself on this discussion and "read the rules".

But after all my searching I could find nothing on the Cali DOJ site that talked in detail about what and what a person is allowed to do with a CCW in California.

Do you have a reference?

Thanks.

chico.cm
11-06-2007, 1:05 PM
Additude:

I'd be happy to provide you and our fellow Cal Gunners with some leisure reading: (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=pen&codebody=12050&hits=20)

PC 12050: (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=38631915369+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

PC 626: (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=38631915369+11+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve)

Pay attention to 626.9 as it is the oft-touted "Gun-Free School Zone" language. Subsection (l) is the language that [exempts] CCW holders from the Act.

DigglerD
11-06-2007, 1:47 PM
Hi, Trolly Doll.

I'm a "trolly doll" because I disagree with you?

The point of lining up to pass through metal detectors and check stations is to prevent a killer from entering the building armed, not prevent a harmless CCW from doing so, though it would successfully prevent both (we could hope so, anyway). There's no need for such inconveniences if there's no policy against bringing firearms onto campus, so if you don't like the inconvenience then protest the gun ban, not the harmless, legal packers.

So your position is either ban the weapons (status quo) and put detectors in place or allow the weapons. This then boils down to one of two options (1) add metal detectors to the current work environment or (2) allow employees with CCW's to bring weapons to work. Correct? Essentially the metal detectors have nothing at all to do with your point which is to allow weapons in the parking lot or allow CCW's to carry at wor as we exist in the status quo without the detectors. In the real world (today) there are no "such inconveniences". My work does not allow firearms and does not have metal detectors to enforce the ban... it would seem silly if they had to state otherwise or put measures in place to enforce what seems to be a reasonable ban which is "we prefer you not to intimidate your co-workers by having holsters hanging out of your coat in meetings or while coding at your desk".

If your place of business has the gun ban in place, even in the parking lots, but lacks the metal detectors, what do you have then? A bunch of sheep ready for slaughter, and meek shepherds with no slings. Virginia Tech ad nauseum.

If you don't want the checkpoints and metal detectors but still want a sheepish illusion of safety, then a simple "no unconcealed carry" policy would serve everyone fairly. No one would have to see scary weapons, people would be allowed to leave stuff in their car, and only CCWs could legally bring stuff into the building. If some guy breaks concealment, he's in trouble seven ways to Sunday.

Which brings me to my original point... Where o where do you work!?!?! A Federal building? The Post Office? The wild west? I can see where some jobs may be safer with a CCW but I just don't get it with you average run of the mill tech firm, supermarket, tax brokerage, etc type place.

Your complaint is just not practical. You essentially want to add another set of rules, insurance policies, liabilities and oversight into the work place around who can show what when and with what government authority's approval when the whole problem is alleviated by just saying no to everyone. Don't forget, this is work, not the U.S., you are likely an "at will" employee with the option to work there with thier rules or not. There is no Constitution... only the bottom line and HR.

Somehow, some people get the impression that banning guns is like banning smoking. No one needs to search for cigs upon entrance because enforcement will take place as soon as someone lights one up. What the **** are you going to do when some lunatic decides to light up his illegally concealed firearm? You're unarmed, and some of your coworkers, though well-trained in firearms and who could have saved your ***, well they're unarmed, too, so you all die together. Sadly, I don't have to make this **** up.

So allowing CCW's allows enforcement to take place sooner? No my friend it does not. It *may* allow for an armed employees to react but then again it may not. The assailent may be better trained, more heavily armed or better protected that your fellow CCW carrying co-worker.

EVEN IF (and that is a BIG if) a CCW allowance policy was in place, I could almost guarantee loss in productivity from the extra rules, regulations, liabilities and overall distraction that must accompany having armed employees would far outweigh the 0.001% chance that "some lunatic decides to light up his illegally concealed firearm" and successfully kills someone.

Glock22Fan
11-06-2007, 1:53 PM
Diggler,

I guess you cancel your fire insurance policy when it is raining.

How can you tell which day some disgruntled employee/customer/street person is going to go off his/her rocker? Me, I wear (one of) my firearms whenever it is legal, whether I think I'm going to get mugged or not today.

Am I likely to get attacked today? no.

Is my house going to burn down today? Not likely, but I'm not cancelling the insurance.

And yes, I do carry when I'm working, except when I am at a client's site where it is not allowed.

The assailent may be better trained, more heavily armed or better protected that your fellow CCW carrying co-worker.

He'll certainly be better armed, if your coworkers aren't able to carry.

DigglerD
11-06-2007, 2:09 PM
Diggler,

I guess you cancel your fire insurance policy when it is raining.


It's not analogous. My fire insurance is something I pay to protect my home and it is done so at my discretion. If workplace needs "maniac insurance" then it would be upon the employer (not the employee) to secure it by whatever means they see fit.

What would be more analogous is if tenants where to take out fire insurance policies that covered structural damage to the apartment buildings in which they resided. For obvious reasons, this falls on the shoulders of the landlord just as "maniac insurance" falls upon the employer. If you don't like the policy, you are free to buy a house that you can then cover or in this case start your own business...

That's analogous.

Look... we all like guns but you have to understand that not everyone has your opinions and in the context of a private business, the 2nd Amendment means nothing.

Glock22Fan
11-06-2007, 3:31 PM
I'd rather have my "Maniac Insurance" on my hip than rely on the building's owners.

Ask some of the victims in recent "Gun Free" zones whether they agree with your logic.

schizrade2
11-06-2007, 3:52 PM
We are all armed.
:chris:

DigglerD
11-06-2007, 4:24 PM
I'd rather have my "Maniac Insurance" on my hip than rely on the building's owners.

Ask some of the victims in recent "Gun Free" zones whether they agree with your logic.

t's not an issue of what you would "rather" have when we are talking about private business and its right to impose rules on those who choose to be in its employ.

In addition, your assertion that CCW's will prevent victimization of people within gun free zones is just that, an assertion. You assume that a CCW will, without fail, prevent crime... this is flat out wrong.

Further, I'd say one school shooting every few years or a post office shooting every other decade is hardly a warrant to act upon those assertions. FAR FEWER people die from "maniacs" in gun free zones than those from heart attacks, car accidents, and various other activities... should prevent people from driving cars and eating Wendys as well?

Like I said, I'm all for guns but I am also for the right of the employer to dictate what they will or will not allow at thier place of business. Are you advocating that we dictate what private entities can and can not allow within the scop of thier business practices? Hardly sounds American to me...

ryang
11-06-2007, 9:03 PM
Further, I'd say one school shooting every few years or a post office shooting every other decade is hardly a warrant to act upon those assertions. FAR FEWER people die from "maniacs" in gun free zones than those from heart attacks, car accidents, and various other activities...Here's a fun little excercise for you to do: find out how many people have died as a result of a fire at school in the past fourty years. Compare that to how many people have died as a result of a school shooting in the same time period. (Quick answer for the terminally lazy: no fire related school deaths in more than four decades.)

All schools have fire alarms, fire sprinklers and conduct regular fire drills. I have yet to hear of a single school that conducts "shooting spree" drills.

Oh, and to keep on the fire insurance theme: a business can choose to have fire protection for the entire building. Personal carry is like having a small fire extinguisher to keep yourself from getting burned. It isn't intended to save everyone.

Glock22Fan
11-06-2007, 10:00 PM
t's not an issue of what you would "rather" have when we are talking about private business and its right to impose rules on those who choose to be in its employ.

In addition, your assertion that CCW's will prevent victimization of people within gun free zones is just that, an assertion. You assume that a CCW will, without fail, prevent crime... this is flat out wrong.

I never asserted that, I don't believe it either. I just believe that you have more chance of not being a victim if you are armed/


Further, I'd say one school shooting every few years or a post office shooting every other decade is hardly a warrant to act upon those assertions. FAR FEWER people die from "maniacs" in gun free zones than those from heart attacks, car accidents, and various other activities... should prevent people from driving cars and eating Wendys as well?


So, if the chances are lower, I shouldn't take ANY precautions?


Like I said, I'm all for guns but I am also for the right of the employer to dictate what they will or will not allow at thier place of business. Are you advocating that we dictate what private entities can and can not allow within the scop of thier business practices? Hardly sounds American to me...

Where did I say this crap?

DigglerD
11-06-2007, 10:09 PM
I never asserted that, I don't believe it either. I just believe that you have more chance of not being a victim if you are armed/
And you said "I'd rather have my "Maniac Insurance" on my hip than rely on the building's owners."
So, if the chances are lower, I shouldn't take ANY precautions?
Should we all carry pole vaults every day in the off chance we run across a ravine?
Where did I say this crap?
You are complaining about employers restricting the ability of people to carry at work, I am simply reasserting their right to do whatever they choose as it is their place of business.

If you can't see the logical conclusions to what it is that you advocate... well then, I guess we're done.

attitudinal
11-06-2007, 10:51 PM
I'm a "trolly doll" because I disagree with you?

Building straw men and setting them on fire is called trolling. Also, I have a coworker with a "Trolly Doll" haircut, so I was free-associating in vacuo. My bad there.

I find the rest of your comments trollish as well, or at least askew, so I'm done splainin to jyu, Lucy.

Does anyone remember a description of all the different sorts who lived for the art of usenet argument?

N6ATF
11-06-2007, 11:15 PM
Put away your rulers.

DigglerD
11-06-2007, 11:23 PM
Building straw men and setting them on fire is called trolling. Also, I have a coworker with a "Trolly Doll" haircut, so I was free-associating in vacuo. My bad there.

I find the rest of your comments trollish as well, or at least askew, so I'm done splainin to jyu, Lucy.

Does anyone remember a description of all the different sorts who lived for the art of usenet argument?

I guess "trolling" applies when you are stuck on your opinion and attack those who see things a different way... it's call ad hominem attack (see I can pull out fallacies too). You would rather attack my character than my argument. The argument is simple... a business can do as it pleases and you can quit as you please. Whining here and attacking me will never change that.

attitudinal
11-07-2007, 3:31 AM
Oops, repost.

attitudinal
11-07-2007, 3:35 AM
Where I work now, there is a very clear "no guns" policy, and even the security guards are unarmed.
Do they search everyone before entering, or conduct any other sort of guaranteed searching (ie daily random sample)?

Glock22Fan
11-07-2007, 6:43 AM
Let me get my position straight.

I believe that you are safer (but not ultimately bomb-proof) if you are armed, than if you are not. I further believe that (as you never know when trouble is going to hit you) then you should (if this is your mindset) carry whenever legal. If you are unhappy carrying, then carrying is not for you and you should leave your firearm at home.

I believe that you are more likely to need a firearm in a hurry than you are a vaulting pole. I also carry a pocket knife and a packet of kleenex, just in case.

Although I believe business owners should let legitimate people (i.e. CCW holders, LEO's etc.) carry, I respect their right to control their own area, just as I respect my right to boycott such places. At my usual place of work, I am openly carrying, and there is no conflict with any law or any boss with that fact. When I visit clients, I follow the law and their wishes; doesn't mean I always like it.

On that note, I have finished with this thread.