Legal Carry ???

[DieselPower]

My wife can out shoot me, and my kids will be reloading for us until they can shoot for themselves.

Must be nice to have a fully automated loading machine. I'm stuck with the Dillon Super 1050 and a bunch of RCBS's.

 

[RollTideRam]

Thanks for all the replies, helpful of not. I just can't walk away from a job after 13 years like some of you think. Decent paying jobs around here are hard to find. 4 weeks of vacation and day shift are nice. I have talked to a few others in the plant about this. They are upset also, and one said he will continue to carry. I will probably leave mine home for now. JC

 

[Soundguy]

I agree.. I wouldn't want to walk away from an otherwise decent job either.. just because they are thinking more about their potential liability, then their employees personal protection.

i wonder if they have bothered to lookup crime stats that show that CCW holders are among the most law abiding crossection of the population.. etc.

Soundguy

 

[Spiveyman]

Totally understand and agree. I'm 12 years at this job, and if they started a policy like that I'd leave mine at home, THEN contact HR. There was advice for you to contact them, and that would be dangerous if you planned to continue to carry, BUT if you are going to follow the rules, I see no reason not to go in and try to reason with them. Then they are welcome to search your car/truck and find that you are obeying the rules they set out, but that you are trying to work with them to improve their employee relations. Be the good guy here trying to help them help you. If they are anything at all like our HR that approach will be completely useless. But it may be worth a shot. If there are other like minded people that will lend their support that may help. Good luck.

 

[LMTC]

I used to park in a county owned facility....it was the only parking available within a reasonable distance for me. Used to shoot in a league on Tuesdays after work, so I kept pistols in the trunk, properly cased. Somewhere in the 90s the county issued the mandate that any vehicle in their parking facility be gun-free (unless of course you were a judge or a LEO...never understood why they could carry in the garage, but a CCW holder could not). I presented my case, and was told no exceptions. IF (totally hypothetical supposition here) I had been carrying loaded for self-protection because I arrived and left in the dark and had to drive through a less than safe area no matter the direction I took, I would have done one of two things depending on how I assessed the risk to my person and to my job. I would have continued carrying, or I would have bought the best taser/stun gun I could get and a couple canisters of the most potent pepper spray available.

A subordinate of mine once had a 2" pocketknife confiscated at the door by the deputies running the metal detector.....yet most desks in the building were equipped with an 8" letter opener. Go figure.

 

[RoyJackson]

I used to park in a county owned facility....it was the only parking available within a reasonable distance for me. Used to shoot in a league on Tuesdays after work, so I kept pistols in the trunk, properly cased. Somewhere in the 90s the county issued the mandate that any vehicle in their parking facility be gun-free (unless of course you were a judge or a LEO...never understood why they could carry in the garage, but a CCW holder could not). I presented my case, and was told no exceptions.

That would be the justification...judges (off work) and LEO's off duty have no more rights then any other citizen.
This would be a good one to discuss with the county commissioners. I think you could get your point across.

 

[AlanB]

I guess what gets me in the entire discussion, is why do some of you think that your right to carry a gun (which I happen to agree with) supersedes the right of the property owner to determine what goes on at their property?

All talk of 13 years, it is a good job, jobs are scarce etc, does nothing in my mind about the fact that it is "their" property that you are on.

You have a choice, just like most of us did this morning, working in the civillian marketplace, as to if you are going to go too work this morning.

As I told my crew two weeks ago, you hold out your hands, and one fill's with the crud parts of the job, the hours, being somewhere when you would rather be fishing, not being allowed to carry your gun, working with your co-workers whatever, and you weigh that against the other hand which fills with the good, the pay is usually central, then maybe benefits etc.

As long as the good keeps outweighing the bad, you get up, get dressed, and go to work. And when you do, you follow the rules that they have established. You wear the clothes they tell you to wear, etc. etc.

When they change something, then too me, you sit down and re-weigh the scales. For you, they just changed that gun carry deal, for me they just cut my (and every other Crew leads) pay $2 an hour.

For me, I weighed it out and came to work. I need the job and have 16+ years tied in. Sounds like you will do much the same.

That said, I will ask about the pay, the wheres the whys, and at the end, if they won't budge, I will just have to reweigh my decision and see where it leaves me.

I have been offered several jobs paying over 200 a year, but I weigh out the risks, and the benefits and to not find them worthwhile. (and at those jobs they would provide my gun ) and so far, I have walked from them. That said, several of my guys here lately have decided that it was worth the risk.

Well, I wander too much.

Weigh it out, and make your decision. If you want to stay, then follow the rules and speak with HR about getting them modified, or possibly them giving you relief from that rule.

Good luck, hope it works out positively.

 

[Podunkadunk]

But it may be worth a shot.

Pun not intended

Good one though!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[LMTC]

I guess what gets me in the entire discussion, is why do some of you think that your right to carry a gun (which I happen to agree with) supersedes the right of the property owner to determine what goes on at their property?

All talk of 13 years, it is a good job, jobs are scarce etc, does nothing in my mind about the fact that it is "their" property that you are on.

You have a choice, just like most of us did this morning, working in the civillian marketplace, as to if you are going to go too work this morning.

As I told my crew two weeks ago, you hold out your hands, and one fill's with the crud parts of the job, the hours, being somewhere when you would rather be fishing, not being allowed to carry your gun, working with your co-workers whatever, and you weigh that against the other hand which fills with the good, the pay is usually central, then maybe benefits etc.

As long as the good keeps outweighing the bad, you get up, get dressed, and go to work. And when you do, you follow the rules that they have established. You wear the clothes they tell you to wear, etc. etc.

When they change something, then too me, you sit down and re-weigh the scales. For you, they just changed that gun carry deal, for me they just cut my (and every other Crew leads) pay $2 an hour.

For me, I weighed it out and came to work. I need the job and have 16+ years tied in. Sounds like you will do much the same.

That said, I will ask about the pay, the wheres the whys, and at the end, if they won't budge, I will just have to reweigh my decision and see where it leaves me.

I have been offered several jobs paying over 200 a year, but I weigh out the risks, and the benefits and to not find them worthwhile. (and at those jobs they would provide my gun ) and so far, I have walked from them. That said, several of my guys here lately have decided that it was worth the risk.

Well, I wander too much.

Weigh it out, and make your decision. If you want to stay, then follow the rules and speak with HR about getting them modified, or possibly them giving you relief from that rule.

Good luck, hope it works out positively.

The right to carry a gun is essentially inseparable IMO from the right to defend oneself. The latter is a natural right, endowed by God, the former is, IMO, a constitutional right. That is what makes this different from a property owner/employer having the authority to determine dress/uniform and other workplace behavior. What if a company said "You can only work for us if you agree to vote for the XYZ party's candidates"? Or "You can only work for us if you agree to not vote"? I suspect virtually no one would think that to be acceptable, but in essence how different is that from the restrictions on self-defense?

Mind you, I am not saying a property owner should NOT have the right to say "no guns on my place", but I am trying to make the point that it is an issue unto itself, far different from saying you have to wear a tie to work, etc. And again I ask....how is it we allow legislation to force property owners to do things with their property that violate even their religious beliefs (with rental property in particular), but find it so offensive to consider forcing property owners to allow individuals to exercise a constitional right? Either property owners rights are absolute or not....with the obvious exceptions of impacting public safety/health.

 

[AlanB]

The right to carry a gun is essentially inseparable IMO from the right to defend oneself. The latter is a natural right, endowed by God, the former is, IMO, a constitutional right. That is what makes this different from a property owner/employer having the authority to determine dress/uniform and other workplace behavior. What if a company said "You can only work for us if you agree to vote for the XYZ party's candidates"? Or "You can only work for us if you agree to not vote"? I suspect virtually no one would think that to be acceptable, but in essence how different is that from the restrictions on self-defense?

Mind you, I am not saying a property owner should NOT have the right to say "no guns on my place", but I am trying to make the point that it is an issue unto itself, far different from saying you have to wear a tie to work, etc. And again I ask....how is it we allow legislation to force property owners to do things with their property that violate even their religious beliefs (with rental property in particular), but find it so offensive to consider forcing property owners to allow individuals to exercise a constitional right? Either property owners rights are absolute or not....with the obvious exceptions of impacting public safety/health.

I guess I just find myself more in the bottom half of that quote in that I do not think we should allow that legislation and restrictions on property rights either, but that said, we do.

The next question then too me is do we

A: say because the property guys lost some rights, they have none so we just trample them?

or B: lets work to restore the wrongly taken rights of the property owner, let them rent to whom they would like etc. etc.

As to the voting, I know of several places, and have been attempted to be strongarmed into voting for things I disagreed with. Again, the choice is too me, do I stay there, or do I leave.

But that is a choice, that I make. I cannot make the choice that I get what they are offering, but do not comply with the requirements that they are placeing on it for me to recieve it.