Tndeer Logo

Page 4 of 8 « First<23456>Last »
Topic Options
#3163581 - 02/14/13 08:17 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: MUP]
-DRM-
6 Point


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

Offline
 Originally Posted By: MUP
I believe that when an employer is hiring citizens to work for his company, he's asking the public to come onto his property for the purpose of employment, mutually beneficial for both parties, and shouldn't restrict their right to keep and bear arms...although again, he/she would have that right I do believe, he/she would also be more of a liberal mind than of a conservative one, ie govt minded. JMO FWIW


Wow...

So because you want to force a property owner - by power of the government - to let you bring something on to THEIR property...

your position is conservative.

And because I want the government to stay OUT of this, and let property owners control their own property rights...

my position is liberal?


Some of you truly amaze me with the lies you are willing to tell yourself to get what you want.
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3163583 - 02/14/13 08:19 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: -DRM-]
-DRM-
6 Point


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

Offline
So John, you admit the bill does not protect an employee from being fired. It ONLY covers permit holders (so much for this being a freedom issue), along with half a dozen other problems with the wording...

Why are you not advocating that this bill be pulled on principle alone?
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3163601 - 02/14/13 08:40 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: -DRM-]
John Harris
4 Point


Registered: 09/04/03
Posts: 283
Loc: Nashville

Offline
 Originally Posted By: -DRM-
So John, you admit the bill does not protect an employee from being fired. It ONLY covers permit holders (so much for this being a freedom issue), along with half a dozen other problems with the wording...

Why are you not advocating that this bill be pulled on principle alone?


I am trying to persuade legislators and enlist the support of other voters to understand that the bill has serious flaws and should be addressed before they rush to make it law.

On the property rights issue, I wrestled with that myself. I have considered the federal appellate cases which specifically looked at that issue (a case called Ramsey Winch) after the law was passed in Oklahoma about 6 years ago. The federal government found that this is a balancing a rights (real property rights, personal property rights (i.e., the contents of the car), and self-defense/2nd Amendment rights) and that there is not a material or unconstitutional violation of any real property rights or even a "taking" because any infringement is minimal to non-existent. That same opinion was adopted by the Tennessee Attorney General in 2012 when the Senate Judiciary asked for a review of the proposed legislation then.

In addition, the court of appeals noted that real property rights (particularly commercial/business property) are actually heavily regulated with zoning, land use, aesthetics, ADA, and other government infringements.

The court also noted that since most states adopt a civilian carry law at least with the belief or statement that allowing citizens to carry firearms has a proven deterrent effect on generalized and specific crime, that such laws also fall within the state's police powers. Thus, allowing a private property owner to "nullify" a police power of the state was seen as unwarranted under the law just as a property owner could not declare rape or murder laws "void" on their properties.
_________________________
John Harris
_________________________________
Attorney &
Executive Director, Tennessee Firearms Association
both of which support my hunting interests.

Top
#3163611 - 02/14/13 08:46 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: -DRM-]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 44893
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
 Originally Posted By: -DRM-
 Originally Posted By: MUP
I believe that when an employer is hiring citizens to work for his company, he's asking the public to come onto his property for the purpose of employment, mutually beneficial for both parties, and shouldn't restrict their right to keep and bear arms...although again, he/she would have that right I do believe, he/she would also be more of a liberal mind than of a conservative one, ie govt minded. JMO FWIW


Wow...

So because you want to force a property owner - by power of the government - to let you bring something on to THEIR property...

your position is conservative.

And because I want the government to stay OUT of this, and let property owners control their own property rights...

my position is liberal?


Some of you truly amaze me with the lies you are willing to tell yourself to get what you want.


I'm not trying to force anybody to do anything. If you'll read my post you will see that I said it's their right to do whatever they wish. But, if they deny their employees the right to keep and bear arms on their property, they are essentially doing just as the govt, overriding the Constitution. I just think, that if someone is preaching constitutionality, then saying that citizens can't exercise their 2A right at their place of business, as an employee, it's hypocritical.
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3163661 - 02/14/13 09:15 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: MUP]
-DRM-
6 Point


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

Offline
 Originally Posted By: MUP
I'm not trying to force anybody to do anything.


If you support a law such as the one above, yes - you are forcing a property owner to do something he does not want to do with his property.

 Quote:
But, if they deny their employees the right to keep and bear arms on their property,


Yet again, you seem confused as to what the Constitution and Amendments actually are.

They are a contract between YOU and your GOVERNMENT.
They are NOT a contract between you and a property owner.

Simply put: a property owner is not and can not "deny the right to keep and bear arms" - as no such right exists in the relationship between you and that property owner.

This is basic concept stuff here, yet so many people are confused about it.

Even if it were an applicable concept, it is still a flawed view in that you are not being FORCED to be on their property in the first place. If you are not forced to be on their property, it is absurd to claim they forced you to be on their property unarmed.

Again, this is basic concept stuff here people... not rocket science.
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3163671 - 02/14/13 09:24 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: John Harris]
-DRM-
6 Point


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

Offline
 Originally Posted By: John Harris

On the property rights issue, I wrestled with that myself. I have considered the federal appellate cases which specifically looked at that issue (a case called Ramsey Winch) after the law was passed in Oklahoma about 6 years ago. The federal government found that this is a balancing a rights (real property rights, personal property rights (i.e., the contents of the car), and self-defense/2nd Amendment rights) and that there is not a material or unconstitutional violation of any real property rights or even a "taking" because any infringement is minimal to non-existent. That same opinion was adopted by the Tennessee Attorney General in 2012 when the Senate Judiciary asked for a review of the proposed legislation then.

In addition, the court of appeals noted that real property rights (particularly commercial/business property) are actually heavily regulated with zoning, land use, aesthetics, ADA, and other government infringements.

The court also noted that since most states adopt a civilian carry law at least with the belief or statement that allowing citizens to carry firearms has a proven deterrent effect on generalized and specific crime, that such laws also fall within the state's police powers. Thus, allowing a private property owner to "nullify" a police power of the state was seen as unwarranted under the law just as a property owner could not declare rape or murder laws "void" on their properties.


With all due respect, John - what this says to me is you wrestled with it until you found enough legal-ease and court cases to justify what you *want*, even though in your heart you know what I am saying is true: You are forcing a property owner to give up their rights to control their property so you can get what you want, by force of the government.

And to be clear - forcing a property owner to give up their rights by force of the government is sometimes a necessity... eminent domain being one such example. But in this case - I think there are other solutions that do not trample on the rights of property owners.

Providing legal protections for property owners - included in this bill - is a GOOD step that does not trample on rights.

Removing criminal charges from the equation when someone has a gun on someone else's property, and leaving the property owner with the same recourse I have were you to bring a gun on to my property - I can ask you to leave... that would be a GOOD step that does not take away anyone's rights.

Creating a law that employers would have to PROVE you had a gun on their property for them to terminate you with cause - that would be a good step that does not take away anyone's rights.

My point is - there are other ways to skin this cat that don't involve stripping a property owner of control of their own property.
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
#3163676 - 02/14/13 09:29 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: -DRM-]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 44893
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
The company and the employee have an agreement for employment. I still don't see why there is an issue with the employees carrying in the first place. Again, they(the co.) absolutely have the right to do as they please concerning their property, but I just don't see why any business would actually deny that constitutional right to begin with. Not a question of forcing anyone to do anything. Oh, and on the bill that just passed, it shouldn't have come to this in the first place imo.
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3163686 - 02/14/13 09:38 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: MUP]
TNGunsmoke
8 Point


Registered: 09/07/11
Posts: 1373
Loc: Jackson,TN

Offline
I don't know about every employer, but I do know the reasoning where I work for why employees are denied their carry rights. Several years ago, they had a supervisor who had a carry permit, and used the sidearm on his waist to intimidate the guys working under him. He was reprimanded, and policy was then changed to disallow the carry of arms while at work. As far as them being in your parked vehicle on their lot, it is prohibited, but it is don't ask don't tell and as long as their isn't a problem, as far as they are concerned, it isn't there.
_________________________
You can't fix stupid.....

Top
#3163700 - 02/14/13 09:46 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: TNGunsmoke]
BlountArrow
10 Point


Registered: 07/13/12
Posts: 2592
Loc: SouthEast Tenn

content Online
 Originally Posted By: TNGunsmoke
I don't know about every employer, but I do know the reasoning where I work for why employees are denied their carry rights. Several years ago, they had a supervisor who had a carry permit, and used the sidearm on his waist to intimidate the guys working under him. He was reprimanded...


First, he should have been fired for intimidation tactics. Second, might have got the same reaction with a 12" Bowie Knife so let's not blame the gun (not saying you did).

Gentlemen, I'm enjoying the posts and the education. I hope it stays professional.
_________________________
"The world is so dreadfully managed, one hardly knows to whom to complain."
-Ronald Firbank

Top
#3163716 - 02/14/13 10:04 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: MUP]
-DRM-
6 Point


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

Offline
 Originally Posted By: MUP
I just don't see why any business would actually deny that constitutional right to begin with.


Does this place have the little emoticon where the guy is banging is head against the wall? It is needed here.

The business is not denying your constitutional right!
_________________________
~DRM~

Top
Page 4 of 8 « 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
4105562
RUGER
87066
Deer Assassin
65411
BSK
61051
Crappie Luck
51376
spitndrum
Newest Members
zatoan, DanParchman3, saddleman1, Jculber301, Mik475
13282 Registered Users
Who's Online
80 registered (gasman, BlountArrow, Mr.Bro, golfnfish, TDW05, DaveB, 12 invisible) and 128 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13282 Members
42 Forums
93399 Topics
1090554 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 0.121 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 15 queries. Zlib compression enabled.