Tndeer Logo

Page 5 of 9 « First<34567>Last »
Topic Options
#3141149 - 01/27/13 10:03 AM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: Redfred16]
arctic_cat
8 Point


Registered: 11/18/08
Posts: 2479
Loc: Lenoir City,Tn

Offline
Yup, and I work on a D.O.E site in Oak Ridge, you better not even joke about having one in your car or its going to get searched

Edited by arctic_cat (01/27/13 10:04 AM)
_________________________
GO BLUE

WHEN YOU LOSE SOMEONE YOU LOVE, YOU GAIN AN ANGEL YOU KNOW

MEMORIES, IT'S THE ONLY THING THAT CAN NEVER BE TAKEN AWAY.

Top
#3141266 - 01/27/13 12:46 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: MidTN]
worriedman
6 Point


Registered: 10/12/06
Posts: 987
Loc: Bells

Offline
 Originally Posted By: MidTN
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.


The Employee Safe Commute bill did not allow any one to wear or carry a firearm anywhere, it simply stated that a Handgun Carry Permit holder would be allowed to keep their legally owned firearm stored, unhandled and out of sight withing the confines of their private vehicle. It removed personal private property (homes) and all farms from the locations covered in the bill.

I would like someone to show me where the Constitution sets property Rights above those of Life. In every mention of these is always Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (which is property), in that order.

There are three mentions of property in the Declaration of Rights in our State Constitution:

Article 1 8. Deprivation of life, liberty or property under law; due process

That no man shall be taken or imprisoned, or disseized of his freehold, liberties or privileges, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any manner destroyed or deprived of his life, liberty or property, but by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land.

Article 1 21. Taking of property; eminent domain

That no man's particular services shall be demanded, or property taken, or applied to public use, without the consent of his representatives, or without just compensation being made therefor.

Article 1 34. Property rights

The General Assembly shall make no law recognizing the right of property in man.

In none of these is the Right to own property made inviolate, in fact in Sections 8 and 21, both describe how it may be taken from the individual by the State or one's neighbors including lands, goods or even a person's life if his "peers" decide it is the thing to do.

We are guaranteed however that only the LEGISLATURE has the power to regulate the wearing of arms, no private entity may do so, and in the case of this bill, it was not even wearing of arms that were under consideration, only the keeping of them and even the State does not have the power to control that if we hold to our Constitution.

Article 1 26. Weapons; right to bear arms

That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.
_________________________
"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
#3141270 - 01/27/13 12:51 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: FLTENNHUNTER1]
-DRM-
6 Point


Registered: 08/21/12
Posts: 774
Loc: Spring Hill, TN

Offline


That's not case law, that's ambulance chaser website text.
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3141289 - 01/27/13 01:20 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: worriedman]
-DRM-
6 Point


Registered: 08/21/12
Posts: 774
Loc: Spring Hill, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: worriedman
The Employee Safe Commute bill did not allow any one to wear or carry a firearm anywhere, it simply stated that a Handgun Carry Permit holder would be allowed to keep their legally owned firearm stored, unhandled and out of sight withing the confines of their private vehicle. It removed personal private property (homes) and all farms from the locations covered in the bill.


Why is the private owner of a home or farm deserving or more rights than the private owner of a piece of property used for other business?

 Quote:
I would like someone to show me where the Constitution sets property Rights above those of Life.


How many times do I have to explain this straw man argument for what it is?


The facts are clear: people who support this are TAKING AWAY ANOTHER MAN's PROPERTY RIGHTS by FORCE of the Government.

Personally, I refuse to be party of TAKING another man's rights to do with his own property as he sees fit, just so I can get my way on HIS property.

IMHO, There are other ways to address this which does not result in taking another man's rights away. I would suggest something more along the lines of "don't ask don't tell", where laws can protect property owners from lawsuits - which addresses the corporate position - and also allow for property owners to have the same remedy as a home owner: to only be able to ask you to leave the property, and not be allowed to fire you over it, if it were your employer. That is IMHO reasonable legislation that I could possibly get behind.

But please, stop using the straw man argument about the property owner "taking away" your right to protect yourself - it is simply not accurate and cheapens the entire debate.



Edited by -DRM- (01/27/13 01:21 PM)
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3141340 - 01/27/13 02:23 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: -DRM-]
Bowdacious
Skillet
16 Point


Registered: 09/01/00
Posts: 16350
Loc: over here

Offline
I do think I should be allowed to carry mine to and from work. It would be in a locked vehicle the same as it is when I go to the courthouse to get tags or pay property tax and when I go to the post office. The most likely time I would need it, I am without it. That being said, I must go unarmed or risk losing my job. Possible vehicle search is in the handbook and I can't afford to lose my job. I will just hope nothing ever happens. It's their property and I agreed to the rules as part of my employment.
_________________________
Disagreeing with me doesn't make me any less right

There is a difference between being proud and being conceited

Beware the skillet ---O

Top
#3141374 - 01/27/13 03:06 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: -DRM-]
worriedman
6 Point


Registered: 10/12/06
Posts: 987
Loc: Bells

Offline
 Originally Posted By: -DRM-


Why is the private owner of a home or farm deserving or more rights than the private owner of a piece of property used for other business?

 Quote:
I would like someone to show me where the Constitution sets property Rights above those of Life.


How many times do I have to explain this straw man argument for what it is?


The facts are clear: people who support this are TAKING AWAY ANOTHER MAN's PROPERTY RIGHTS by FORCE of the Government.




Because you say it is a "strawman" argument does not make it so. Two separate Federal Appellate Courts (Oklahoma and Florida) have heard YOUR argument, and found it lacking. The parties have refused to appeal it to the Supreme Court, (and it should be noted that Disney Corp. and Connoco Phillips are two of the plaintiffs) for the simple fact that the Supreme Court would not hear it, and if it did it would finish the argument once and for all. The two Courts found that the mere "keeping" of a legal implement did not rise to the level of "taking" anything. Read the judgments.

Our own Democrat appointed Attorney General gave the opinion last year that the bill as amended was CONSTITUTIONAL, or did you blindly miss that reading as well? Are you as a business owner willing to take on responsibility for providing safety and security for the Citizen on their commute to and from their homes? Constitutions of both the Union and the State say each has a right to life, our State Constitutions says I have a Right to carry a firearm to protect it.

The bill as written last year gave absolute immunity to a property owner for the results of the use, either legal or otherwise of a firearm on their property. No need for some stupid don't ask, don't tell, all that is required is to adhere to the Constitution and read the bill before sending forth a lot of chin music when you do not understand the issues.



Edited by worriedman (01/27/13 03:15 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
#3141385 - 01/27/13 03:14 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: -DRM-]
FLTENNHUNTER1
16 Point


Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 16574
Loc: Tampa FL

Offline
 Originally Posted By: -DRM-


That's not case law, that's ambulance chaser website text.


I am sure it exists, I don't have the time or desire to find it. Somewhere, someone has been sued because of a wet floor, iced parking lot, a secured door that wasn't secured properly, blocked fire exit, whatever.
_________________________
"The fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follow that, and in its turn wretchedness and oppression."
--Thomas Jefferson
18 Trillion http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Top
#3141470 - 01/27/13 04:42 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: worriedman]
-DRM-
6 Point


Registered: 08/21/12
Posts: 774
Loc: Spring Hill, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: worriedman
Because you say it is a "strawman" argument does not make it so.


It is a straw man argument because that is what it is. You can twist it any way you want, but here are the facts:

When YOU choose to stay on someone else's property once they inform you they do not allow guns there - YOU are responsible for YOUR decision to stay and consequently YOUR own safety is - and always has been - in YOUR hands.

To try and shift the blame or responsibility to someone else is an exercise in dishonesty, and I challenge you to find the flaw in what I just said.

Listen, I understand what you *want*. I want it too. I guess the difference is I am not willing to TAKE AWAY ANOTHER MAN'S FREEDOM just to get what *I* want, on *their* property.
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3141476 - 01/27/13 04:52 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: -DRM-]
-DRM-
6 Point


Registered: 08/21/12
Posts: 774
Loc: Spring Hill, TN

Offline
BTW, not intending to offend anyone, I just put the bar pretty high when someone comes along and wants to use the government to take another man's freedoms... even if I do like the end result of that theft of freedom (i.e. me getting to carry my gun wherever I want).

As far as I see it, the two main issues are:

1. People who are worried about losing their job
2. Businesses that are worried about being sued

I think there are ways to address both of these, without taking away another man's property rights.
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3141589 - 01/27/13 06:45 PM Re: Question? Guns at work. [Re: worriedman]
TAFKAP
14 Point


Registered: 11/06/09
Posts: 9856
Loc: Memphis

Offline
 Originally Posted By: worriedman
 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.



Gotcha....I thought Mr. Conservative "Put the Boots to 'Em" Ramsey had something to do with it. I just couldn't remember the exact context.
_________________________
Everything important in life was learned from Mary Jo Kopechne.

Top
Page 5 of 9 « First<34567>Last »


Moderator:  RUGER, Unicam, gtk, Tennessee Todd, Lakeland Charlie, Cuttin Caller, CBU93, stretch, TurkeyBurd, MAN, Bobby G, Kimber45, Crappie Luck 
Hop to:
Top Posters
4106599
RUGER
88400
Deer Assassin
65979
BSK
62020
Crappie Luck
51392
spitndrum
Newest Members
yarddawg54, schiesser, bigdoc, Bggamehunter, willy2763
13605 Registered Users
Who's Online
1 registered (excalhunter) and 44 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13605 Members
43 Forums
100233 Topics
1180122 Posts

Max Online: 788 @ 11/11/13 08:06 PM
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
December
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 31
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 0.008 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 15 queries. Zlib compression enabled.