Tndeer Logo

Page 4 of 9 « First<23456>Last »
Topic Options
#3136586 - 01/23/13 08:35 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: waynesworld]
-DRM-
6 Point


Registered: 08/21/12
Posts: 771
Loc: Spring Hill, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: waynesworld
As it should be the owner should have the right but if he takes your right to protect yourself he should be held liable for your protection.


Liable for your protection? That is silly. How about you just leave if you don't like the rules set by the property owner?

I love my guns, and I love my right to carry. But y right to carry is NOT more important than a property owner's right to not want me to carry on his or her property. Period.

I want that same respect on MY property, I will give it on HIS property.
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3136591 - 01/23/13 08:40 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: Bone Collector]
-DRM-
6 Point


Registered: 08/21/12
Posts: 771
Loc: Spring Hill, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Bone Collector
It makes no sense that you would have to forfiet your right to carry to and from work, because your employer said no guns.


This is a straw man argument.

Your employer is not "taking away your right to protect yourself". You have DOZENS of other options... here are just a few:

-Go work somewhere else.
-Bring your gun anyway.
-Park off of their property.
-Rent a storage locker off the property near your work to keep your gun.
-Find a friend's house close to work where you can keep your gun.

I really don't care if these options are unpopular, expensive, or otherwise an inconvenience... they ARE options, and refusing to use one of them is NOT excuse for TAKING AWAY someone else's property rights.
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3136789 - 01/24/13 05:00 AM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: -DRM-]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 44841
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
I'm very fortunate that, although our rules and regs state no firearms on premises, it also states "unless approved by management". I have my paperwork from the man. ;\)
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3136792 - 01/24/13 05:06 AM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: MUP]
stik
"Popcorn"
18 Point


Registered: 03/12/99
Posts: 21022
Loc: lenoir city,tn

Offline
officially, it is prohibited but is not enforced. i have even worked on my guns in the plant with the company president's blessing.
_________________________
experienced hunters know its not just a bushy white tail, its a big middle finger.

nothing makes a fish bigger than almost being caught


Top
#3137666 - 01/24/13 03:04 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: -DRM-]
FLTENNHUNTER1
16 Point


Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 16224
Loc: Tampa FL

Offline
 Originally Posted By: -DRM-
 Originally Posted By: waynesworld
As it should be the owner should have the right but if he takes your right to protect yourself he should be held liable for your protection.


Liable for your protection? That is silly. How about you just leave if you don't like the rules set by the property owner?

I love my guns, and I love my right to carry. But y right to carry is NOT more important than a property owner's right to not want me to carry on his or her property. Period.

I want that same respect on MY property, I will give it on HIS property.


I understand and respect your opinion. But when a property owner denies you your right to self defense, and someone comes in and attacks you and you could not defend yourself because of the property owners decision, the property owner is liable.

For example, if you have parking lot lights on your property, and one of them is burned out, and a women is raped because of the light being burned out, the property owner is liable.
_________________________
The Second Amendment - George Washington didn't use free speech to defeat the British, he shot them.
"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." - Thomas Paine





Top
#3140701 - 01/26/13 08:27 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: FLTENNHUNTER1]
-DRM-
6 Point


Registered: 08/21/12
Posts: 771
Loc: Spring Hill, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: FLTENNHUNTER1
I understand and respect your opinion. But when a property owner denies you your right to self defense, and someone comes in and attacks you and you could not defend yourself because of the property owners decision, the property owner is liable.


Again, this is a straw man argument.

The property owner did not deny you anything - YOU made the decision to STAY on that property unarmed. That is YOUR choice.

If you want to use that argument for GOVERNMENT owned property, I will agree with your position. But as long as YOU are the one deciding to remain on someone's property after they inform you of their firearm policy, YOU are responsible for YOUR decision to stay there.


 Quote:
For example, if you have parking lot lights on your property, and one of them is burned out, and a women is raped because of the light being burned out, the property owner is liable.



I'd like to see you cite some case law for this, thanks.
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3140780 - 01/26/13 09:25 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: TAFKAP]
worriedman
6 Point


Registered: 10/12/06
Posts: 978
Loc: Bells

Offline
 Originally Posted By: TAFKAP


Sorry....Fred Smith told the Reps to jump, and on the way up, they asked "HOW HIGH???"

It doesn't stand much of a chance again, so long as the super buisiness elites of the state have their way. Don't forget, Hizzoner Haslam is one of them. Even if it does pass, it won't escape committee, where I recall, Mr. "Put the Boot To 'Em" Ron Ramsey killed it last year.


No, actually it passed the Judiciary committee in the Senate, and Employee and Consumer Affairs in the House, it was killed outright by Ramsey by not allowing it to come up for consideration on the floor, and Beth Harwell in the House. That action cost Debra Maggart her seat, she was the House Republican caucus chair, and Harwell had her do the dirty work to kill the bill, and at the same time her career.


Edited by worriedman (01/26/13 09:48 PM)
_________________________
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams

Life Member NRA, TFA, Tennesseans for Liberty

Top
#3140811 - 01/26/13 09:45 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: worriedman]
worriedman
6 Point


Registered: 10/12/06
Posts: 978
Loc: Bells

Offline
18 States have made the decision that an individual Citizen should have the ability, (and in Tennessee non felons that have not been adjudicated mentally incompetent have the Right) to provide for their own defense. It has been carried all the way to the Federal Appellate level twice, once in Oklahoma and once in Florida, and both times the right to arms for self defense was upheld, and, both rulings found that allowing the Citizen to enjoy that natural Right did not constitute a taking of any private property Right, as Life comes before property.

The Employee Safe Commute Act did not reference "wearing" arms, simply the keeping of them in private property already deemed legal by the Castle Doctrine.

Case law upholds this, no governmental agency has ANY obligation to provide security, safety or defense for any individual Citizen, Article 1 Section 26 of our State Constitution lays that charge on the individual Citizen. Law Enforcement is only charged with investigating crime after it has occurred.

Big Business has simply purchased more Tennessee Legislators than necessary to deny the People their Constitutional Rights, proven by this:

“The Tennessee Supreme Court has recognized that the General Assembly has the authority, under this section of the Constitution, (Article 1 Section 26) to enact legislation to regulate the wearing and carrying of arms in public. Any such enactment, however, “must be guided by, and restrained to this end, and bear some well defined relation to the prevention of crime, or else it is unauthorized by this clause of the Constitution.” Andrews v. State, 50 Tenn. 165, 181 (1871).

The right to keep arms, necessarily involves the right to purchase them, to keep them in a state of efficiency for use, and to purchase and provide ammunition suitable for such arms, and to keep them in repair. And clearly for this purpose, a man would have the right to carry them to and from his home, and no one could claim that the Legislature had the right to punish him for it, without violating this clause of the Constitution.

Bearing arms for the common defense may well be held to be a political right, or for the protection and maintenance of such rights, intended to be guaranteed; but the right to keep them, with all that is implied fairly as an incident to this right, is a private individual right, guaranteed to the citizen, not the soldier."
_________________________
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams

Life Member NRA, TFA, Tennesseans for Liberty

Top
#3140865 - 01/26/13 10:36 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: -DRM-]
FLTENNHUNTER1
16 Point


Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 16224
Loc: Tampa FL

Offline
 Originally Posted By: -DRM-
 Originally Posted By: FLTENNHUNTER1
I understand and respect your opinion. But when a property owner denies you your right to self defense, and someone comes in and attacks you and you could not defend yourself because of the property owners decision, the property owner is liable.


Again, this is a straw man argument.

The property owner did not deny you anything - YOU made the decision to STAY on that property unarmed. That is YOUR choice.

If you want to use that argument for GOVERNMENT owned property, I will agree with your position. But as long as YOU are the one deciding to remain on someone's property after they inform you of their firearm policy, YOU are responsible for YOUR decision to stay there.


 Quote:
For example, if you have parking lot lights on your property, and one of them is burned out, and a women is raped because of the light being burned out, the property owner is liable.



I'd like to see you cite some case law for this, thanks.


http://www.kramerdunleavy.com/PracticeAreas/Sexual-Assault-Rape.asp

Legal Support for New York Rape Victims

Sexual assault and rape victims may never fully recover emotionally from all they have endured as a result of an attack. Even when the attacker is caught and put behind bars, victims may not feel whole. While civil legal action cannot take away the wrongdoings and suffering caused, it provides an avenue for sexual assault victims to pursue peace of mind and justice while also preserving the safety of other women from suffering the same injustice.

At Kramer & Dunleavy, LLP we dedicate our legal practice to preserving the health and safety of women in the Manhattan area. We are focused on empowering women to move forward with dignity despite the physical and emotional injuries they have endured.

If you have been attacked in a parking lot, hotel, apartment building, shopping mall, or other establishment, you may be entitled to compensation for your physical and emotional injuries. Property owners have a responsibility to keep their properties safe for people entitled to be there. This includes providing proper lighting, security, and other measures to deter crime. Property owners can be held financially responsible in a premises liability lawsuit.

As women's health and women's safety we are experienced handling claims involving varying levels of negligence that led to our clients getting sexually assaulted or raped:

Negligent entrance security: Failure to install or replace proper locks at the entrances to apartment buildings, failure to screen employees entering a building, or other negligent security at building entrances provides opportunity for intruders to gain entrance into a building where residents presumed they were safe.
Poor lighting: Failure to replace dim or burnt out light fixtures in stairwells or other discreet locations, failure to provide high intensity lighting in a parking lot or parking garage, or failure to identify areas of risk and install proper lighting can result in victims getting attacked or abused in dark areas.
Negligent security: Failure to monitor cameras or perform routine security patrols, failure to ensure security cameras are functioning properly, and failure to provide adequate training of security officers can result in the threat of attackers taking advantage of innocent people. Further, failure to provide working intercoms or emergency phones reduces the likelihood that victims report an incident or get away.
_________________________
The Second Amendment - George Washington didn't use free speech to defeat the British, he shot them.
"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." - Thomas Paine





Top
#3141023 - 01/27/13 07:55 AM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: Redfred16]
MidTN
6 Point


Registered: 01/07/08
Posts: 954
Loc: Franklin, TN

Offline
I'm Pro 2nd amendment as well, but I also believe a property owner has the right to set the boundaries of what they will allow on their property. It's a tough call and I see both sides of the issues.
_________________________
"If something's difficult to learn son, then it's really not worth doing."

Homer Simpson

Top
Page 4 of 9 « First<23456>Last »


Moderator:  RUGER, Unicam, gtk, Tennessee Todd, Lakeland Charlie, Cuttin Caller, CBU93, stretch, TurkeyBurd, MAN, Bobby G, Kimber45, Crappie Luck 
Hop to:
Top Posters
4105543
RUGER
87043
Deer Assassin
65411
BSK
61038
Crappie Luck
51376
spitndrum
Newest Members
Mik475, AaronB, Bad Wolf, jw3783, Jesse91
13278 Registered Users
Who's Online
53 registered (bigasports, Mr.Bro, biglefty20, McCoy, lung-buster, shaneb, 4 invisible) and 87 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13278 Members
42 Forums
93274 Topics
1089099 Posts

Max Online: 788 @ 11/11/13 08:06 PM
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
September
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
Forum Donations
The TnDeer.Com Deer Talk Forum is for Tennessee Deer Hunters by Tennessee Deer Hunters. If you enjoy using our Talk Forum and would like to contribute to help in it's up-keep. Just submit your contribution by clicking on the DONATE button below and paying with PayPal or a major credit card. Any amount is much appreciated. Thanks for your support!

TN Burn Safe

Generated in 0.094 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 15 queries. Zlib compression enabled.