View Poll Results: Which right holds sway?

Voters
79. You may not vote on this poll
  • 2nd Amendment

    17 21.52%
  • Property Rights

    62 78.48%
Page 40 of 54 FirstFirst ... 30383940414250 ... LastLast
Results 391 to 400 of 538

Thread: Which right holds sway?

  1. #391
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    You have the right to carry in public as you please. The problem occurs on others property.
    When you open your private land to the public, it is public, even while it remains privately owned. The is true because private land opened to the public is subject to public accommodation. You surrendered a level of sovereignty when you engaged in commerce.

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    On others property you can be searched and ejected by the private property owner leagaly.
    You have to have a Guard Card and be employed as a Guard on the property in order to search any kind of visitor, and even then only for weapons after being legally detained. If an employer or business owner feels someone needs to be serched, they are obligated to call the police. Upon arriving, the police are required to establish 'probable cause' before searching you, otherwise they have to get a warrant. A private property owner does not have a right to search an employee's person or personal property, to include bag, purse, or car (see aforementioned guns-in-cars law).

    Personal Property at Work
    • However, an employee may carry some property of her own to work. In general, a company is not allowed to search this property. For example, a company cannot search an employee's purse. Yet, according to Lawyers.com, laws regarding the search of areas in a workplace specifically designated for the storage of personal property, such as lockers, vary from state to state. While some states allow employers to search these areas, others restrict them from doing so.
    See also:
    The Pearl Law Firm: Workplace Serches
    Privacy Rights Clearinghouse

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    Property owners must retain control of their property, gun owners need to be able to carry. The only way that will be able to be balaneced is though tort law. IE the property owner must provide adequete security or allow people to carry. If done otherwise both rights will be eroded.
    I can go along with that.

    If a property owner feels they need to maintain and sterile aria, and they provide licensed (Guard Card or legit LEO) armed security, great. No problem, the gun stays in the car, unloaded and locked.

    However, the other side of that coin is that if the property owner doesn't provide legit armed security, then employees and customers would have the right to carry no matter how much the private owner doesn't like it.
    Last edited by Jerry; 08-23-12 at 10:37 AM.

  2. #392
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    I don't believe Tort law can resolve the reciprocity issue, however. IMO that falls squarely under the Interstate Commerce Clause.

    I belong to a couple gun-enthusiast forums. Every once in a while someone makes a thread talking about where they live and where they want to take a vacation. The topic of such threads is to provide information and advice on how to plan the road trip: which states honor OP's CCW, which don't; if there's a duty to inform police here, but not there; if 'no guns' signs have force in this state but not that state, then OP might plan to stop for dinner in the more agreeable state. One OP had to pass though IL no matter what, as I90 East was the absolute best way...so OP decided to mail his weapon to his destination, and mail it back when he was coming home.

    Occasionally a suggestion is made for OP to make or acquire a colored map of the US, showing which states have what laws. On this map, IL and CA are not color-coded, they are cut out completely.

    Exorsizing the 2A shouldn't involve this much bull****.
    Last edited by Jerry; 08-23-12 at 10:54 AM.

  3. #393
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,040

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Searches and Seizures
    An employer has the right to inspect personal belongings (bags, purses, briefcases, cars, lockers, desks, etc.), except when the employer has created a reasonable expectation of privacy. These expectations can be raised if the employee is given a key to a desk or if the employer 4has disseminated a written policy explicitly stating that it will not make such inspections.
    Employee Privacy Law & Legal Definition


    Which means that unless the employer makes rules that allow privacy an employee has no legal privacy at work. Many workplaces are not public spaces or even semi-public spaces. And the size of the shop or place of employment have different legal definitions. A restaurant with fewer than 50 seats in most states can out right refuse to serve you. A small mom and pop type shop can through you out for no other reason than they wanted you gone from their property.

    In McDonalds the lobby in a public space but the kitchen, backroom and offices are not public spaces. These non public space are private spaces despite the fact that employees are allowed to go into these spaces.

    The question of whether an employee can be told whether they can have a gun stored in their car depends on if the parking lot is a public, semi-public or private space. If the parking lot is a public space and the laws of that state allow guns in public spaces then there is no problems with having a gun there. But if the parking area is not public then the property owner tell the person with the gun to beat it of their property that is if the property owner does not make the expatiation of privacy in their rules given for people being on the property. The reason that a parking lot law is being pushed serves one reason which is to force property owners to allow guns in private areas not public or semi-public areas.

    Also a shop owner can tell a patron to leave the property if the patron is engaged in activity that the shop was not designed for. A shop owner can also tell a patron to leave if they have over stayed the normal amount of time that the average patron spends on the property.

    In my shop/my workplace I have no public parking, it is all private parking space. At most I have at times 5 employees (most of the time perhaps one if I can afford it at the time) which means that even under the parking lot laws I am exempt form having to allow a person to carry a gun no matter what permit they may be carrying. On my gate I have a sign that clearly states private property authorized personal only. So if I hire a contractor to do some work my sign already expresses my desire to keep all of my property private. My employees have no right to be armed no matter the parking lot laws. So I am satisfied at this point that the NRA has not yet screwed my liberties. The problem is that the NRA are opening the door that allows the Government to dictate gun laws. So I will continueto oppose the NRA's push for more Federal regulations on gun owners and property owners.

  4. #394
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    The moment an employer touches me against my will, it's assault.

  5. #395
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,040

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    The moment an employer touches me against my will, it's assault.
    AN employer can only touch an employee within the legal bounds of the law. Which in most cases is never unless the employee gives permission or if there is a medical need. Or if there is a security need. If an employee is damaging property or life and limb then an employer is obligated to act to stop the employee under liability laws. The employer has an right to protect the property of course there are legal limits. Like if an employee is destroying property you cannot kill them etc.

    If there are no rules or contracts saying otherwise an employer can request a search of your personal space. If you refuse the employer may request that you wait for law enforcement or you may want legal advice. Unless you are an employee with a contract or if their are rules that the employer made you can be fired on the spot for refusing a request of the employer as long as that request is legal. In the state of New Mexico as an employer if I have banned guns on my property where you are working I have the right to request a search of your personal space in order to see if you are complying with my rules. Of course you can legally refuse the search but I now have the power to fire you since there is no contract and you are working "at will". In fact a person working "at will" can be fired for any legal reason. Legally being that it does not against any anti-discrimination laws. If you still refuse to leave my property after you have been fired I can now call the police and bring trespassing charges against you. At that point the police will remove you from my property. But if you become unruly, belligerent, pose a threat in any way shape or form I can physically remove you from my property. If at any point your hand goes near your gun I can then pull a weapon on you and demand that you surrender the weapon at once. If you refuse I can then restrain and disarm you since you pose a direct threat to me and anyone nearby. I would not be able to do some of these things if you did not have a weapon on you unless you actually started attacking someone or something. But since you have a weapon you pose a threat by having the weapon in arms reach. Which is a legal requirement.


    Now you can choose to not accept that what I just said is how the law works and request links but it really does not matter to me what you believe and how correct that you think I am, since I own my own business and must know my rights when it comes to my business. SO far I have only had minor disputes with employees things like no you cannot listen to your ipod and run machinery or tardiness or poor work ethic. But you also have to remember generally I have less than 5 employees at any given time, some federal employment laws do not apply to me since they have limits based on the number of employees. And like I said my entire property is private property there is no expatiation of it being open to the public. Like any other manufacturing plant large or small the property is private not public or semi-public. Which is why the NRA was only able in some states to gain a parking lot law if the parking lot was open to the public. The parking lots that are not open to the public are not covered by the law.

  6. #396
    Resident Martian ;)
    PirateMk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    9,921

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I don't believe Tort law can resolve the reciprocity issue, however. IMO that falls squarely under the Interstate Commerce Clause.

    I belong to a couple gun-enthusiast forums. Every once in a while someone makes a thread talking about where they live and where they want to take a vacation. The topic of such threads is to provide information and advice on how to plan the road trip: which states honor OP's CCW, which don't; if there's a duty to inform police here, but not there; if 'no guns' signs have force in this state but not that state, then OP might plan to stop for dinner in the more agreeable state. One OP had to pass though IL no matter what, as I90 East was the absolute best way...so OP decided to mail his weapon to his destination, and mail it back when he was coming home.

    Occasionally a suggestion is made for OP to make or acquire a colored map of the US, showing which states have what laws. On this map, IL and CA are not color-coded, they are cut out completely.

    Exorsizing the 2A shouldn't involve this much bull****.
    I have run the course of my arguments. I have nothing new. I will let you and Freedomfromall go at it. I think I have explained as best I can why the NRA law is foolish. I am just going to have to agree to disagree Jerry. For the record you bring up valid points and good arguments its just that being the freedom loving guy I am, I just cant go where you are going. I guess it comes down to a mans got to do what mans got to do. C'est La'vie. It has been an interesting debate though. Thanks and cheers.

    P.S I'll drop by and make a comment or two if I can bring somthing new.
    Semper Fidelis, Semper Liber.
    I spit at lots of people through my computer screen. Not only does it "teach them a lesson" but it keeps the screen clean and shiny.
    Stolen fair and square from the Capt. Courtesey himself.

  7. #397
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    AN employer can only touch an employee within the legal bounds of the law. Which in most cases is never unless the employee gives permission or if there is a medical need. Or if there is a security need. If an employee is damaging property or life and limb then an employer is obligated to act to stop the employee under liability laws. The employer has an right to protect the property of course there are legal limits. Like if an employee is destroying property you cannot kill them etc.

    If there are no rules or contracts saying otherwise an employer can request a search of your personal space. If you refuse the employer may request that you wait for law enforcement or you may want legal advice. Unless you are an employee with a contract or if their are rules that the employer made you can be fired on the spot for refusing a request of the employer as long as that request is legal. In the state of New Mexico as an employer if I have banned guns on my property where you are working I have the right to request a search of your personal space in order to see if you are complying with my rules. Of course you can legally refuse the search but I now have the power to fire you since there is no contract and you are working "at will". In fact a person working "at will" can be fired for any legal reason. Legally being that it does not against any anti-discrimination laws. If you still refuse to leave my property after you have been fired I can now call the police and bring trespassing charges against you. At that point the police will remove you from my property. But if you become unruly, belligerent, pose a threat in any way shape or form I can physically remove you from my property. If at any point your hand goes near your gun I can then pull a weapon on you and demand that you surrender the weapon at once. If you refuse I can then restrain and disarm you since you pose a direct threat to me and anyone nearby. I would not be able to do some of these things if you did not have a weapon on you unless you actually started attacking someone or something. But since you have a weapon you pose a threat by having the weapon in arms reach. Which is a legal requirement.


    Now you can choose to not accept that what I just said is how the law works and request links but it really does not matter to me what you believe and how correct that you think I am, since I own my own business and must know my rights when it comes to my business. SO far I have only had minor disputes with employees things like no you cannot listen to your ipod and run machinery or tardiness or poor work ethic. But you also have to remember generally I have less than 5 employees at any given time, some federal employment laws do not apply to me since they have limits based on the number of employees. And like I said my entire property is private property there is no expatiation of it being open to the public. Like any other manufacturing plant large or small the property is private not public or semi-public. Which is why the NRA was only able in some states to gain a parking lot law if the parking lot was open to the public. The parking lots that are not open to the public are not covered by the law.
    You keep talking about the way things are as though I don't know. The way things are today is what my objections are based on, so restating the status quo doesn't advance the discussion.

  8. #398
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    I have run the course of my arguments. I have nothing new. I will let you and Freedomfromall go at it. I think I have explained as best I can why the NRA law is foolish. I am just going to have to agree to disagree Jerry. For the record you bring up valid points and good arguments its just that being the freedom loving guy I am, I just cant go where you are going. I guess it comes down to a mans got to do what mans got to do. C'est La'vie. It has been an interesting debate though. Thanks and cheers.

    P.S I'll drop by and make a comment or two if I can bring somthing new.
    I'm sorry to hear that. I'm still completely in the dark on exactly how federal enforcement of reciprocity could in any way lead to gun restrictions.

  9. #399
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Here's a perfect example of why property owners have nothing to fear from your typical licensed concealed weapons costomer or employee:
    Convictions for Concealed Handgun License Holders: Texas 2012

    Total offenses 63,679 crimes 120 by TX CHL holders 0.1884% of the total.
    0.1884% does not constitute a need to maintain a gun-free zone, but it does establish the need to disallow arbitrary gun-free zones.

  10. #400
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,040

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Here's a perfect example of why property owners have nothing to fear from your typical licensed concealed weapons costomer or employee:


    0.1884% does not constitute a need to maintain a gun-free zone, but it does establish the need to disallow arbitrary gun-free zones.
    I would agree that property owners need not have a choice in the matter if the world was 100% safe. But the world is not 100% safe that is why people are running around with concealed weapons in the first place.

Page 40 of 54 FirstFirst ... 30383940414250 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •