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 7 of 54 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 538

Thread: Which right holds sway?

  1. #61
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,937

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    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.
    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.

  2. #62
    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 Zyphlin View Post
    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.
    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.

    The issue of guns aside, when I'm hired and walk into a client's home, I'm already bringing infringements with me. At the minimum, OSHA now lives in your house until we're don. If part of your home is designated as a hard-hat aria, even-though it's still your private residence, you *have to* wear a hard-hat in that aria or you can be fined. If we have to stake orange netting through your prize winning rose garden (typically for ditches which need to remain exposed for a couple days), then it's going to be don.

    Now, we're professionals, not jerks. We're going to use a healthy level of tact and respect, and you will have known these things were going to happen in advance. But my point is, as the homeowner, you can't contradict OSHA regulations while we're working in your home.

    Likewise, you can't contradict regulations protecting employees from discrimination while they're in your home as hired hands, either.

    Currently, today, as a contractor I can already store my firearm in my car while it's parked on your private property. This is only one step removed from the firearm being on my person.

    So again, if I'm a regular guy, you're free to kick me off for any or no reason at all. That's your right. But if you hired me to work for you then you accepted a level of infringement on your own rights so as to make room for mine while I'm on the job.

    ***
    I also appreciate your bringing up the Hajib, since it's another protected item with a bad public image. Like the Hajib, a concealed gun should comply with a dress code.
    Last edited by Jerry; 08-02-12 at 10:31 AM.

  3. #63
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,039

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    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.
    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?

    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.
    I am not for gun control even though you seem to think so.



    Well, in your state, you can press charges even they made an honest mistake, immediately fully comply and sincerely apologize.
    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.



    Not when you're an employee, they can't...at least not without also suffering legal consequences.
    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.



    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.
    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.

    The safety of the private property should actually be up to to the property owner. Right now a property owner can allow someone to possess a firearm if they wish. But if you start trying to regulate private property and force employees to declare gun ownership it may become no longer a choice for the property owner but instead a regulated decision out of the property owners hands. The result could be higher insurance for gun owners.




    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.
    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.


    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.
    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.
    Last edited by FreedomFromAll; 08-02-12 at 05:06 PM.

  4. #64
    Haters gon' hate
    MarineTpartier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    01-04-16 @ 04:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,586
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    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.
    “Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

  5. #65
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,039

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    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.

    No the Constitution is in full power even on private property. But being on someone elses private property is a privilege, and it being not your private property means that they can make you leave their private property for whatever reason that they wish. Sure you could complain and perhaps even win some type of ruling for such behavior but one thing is sure you are no longer on their property.
    Perhaps even being banned from ever setting foot on their property again. The Constitutional rights of the private property owner still exist whether the guests on that property own guns or not.
    Last edited by FreedomFromAll; 08-02-12 at 05:43 PM.

  6. #66
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,157

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    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.
    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.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  7. #67
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Again, HOME is one thing, BUSINESS is a slightly different thing. A business has to make some accomodation for employees and customers.
    Barring legal requirements, why does a business "have" to make accommodations for employees and customers. Why can't businesses choose to make accomodations?

  8. #68
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,039

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    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.
    The business owner want just want employees that do not have a firearm on their property. If that is bad for his business that is on the owner of the business and the government has no right to say otherwise.

    I own my own business I occasionally hire helpers if the job calls for it. I can dictate to those employees what they are allowed to take onto my property. If they feel that they cannot work under those conditions they are free to leave. They do not have the right to dictate to me the property owner what I allow on my property. I have to take in account the safety of the other people on my property at ALL times. If a I allow an object that will cause harm to other people I am liable for the danger if it were to happen. This concept is proven by the fact that signs that enforce speed limits on private property are enforceable by law enforcement. And make no mistake private property that the owners allow public usage of is still legally private property. The owner is still the responsible party of that property or the person(s) that he gave the ;legal responsibility too. The public that goes to a store do not have any claims to the private property where the store is located. By going onto private property you are submitting an agreement to follow the rules that the owner of said private property has set. If you feel that the rules are wrong either do not go there or take them to court.

    In short I see where you could legally be allowed to carry a gun where you want but a property owner could also legally not allow you on their property as well. In New Mexico:NMSA 29–19–12; NMSA 30–14–6 Property owners may prohibit the carrying of firearms onto property they lawfully possess by posting signage or verbally notifying persons upon entering the property. they do not state that the property has to be private space at all.

  9. #69
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,157

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    Barring legal requirements, why does a business "have" to make accommodations for employees and customers. Why can't businesses choose to make accomodations?

    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.

    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. That affects my safety, and it impacts my 2A rights in too many ways.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  10. #70
    Haters gon' hate
    MarineTpartier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    01-04-16 @ 04:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,586
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Which right holds sway?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    Barring legal requirements, why does a business "have" to make accommodations for employees and customers. Why can't businesses choose to make accomodations?
    They don't have to do anything if they don't want to. But if they want to remain in business for any amount of time, it would be in their best interest to do so.
    “Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

Page 7 of 54 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... 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
  •