Tndeer Logo

Page 5 of 9 « First<34567>Last »
Topic Options
#3163700 - 02/14/13 09:46 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: TNGunsmoke]
BlountArrow
8 Point


Registered: 07/13/12
Posts: 2487
Loc: SouthEast Tenn

Offline
 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
#3163707 - 02/14/13 09:52 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: -DRM-]
LSUtigers
8 Point


Registered: 07/21/10
Posts: 2135
Loc: East TN

Offline
How many Corporations or small companies are going to sue the State of Tn.; none. I have talked to my employer and, I have been told just that and also they said if we fire you we know you will sue us.

Edited by LSUtigers (02/14/13 09:56 AM)

Top
#3163713 - 02/14/13 09:57 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: LSUtigers]
LSUtigers
8 Point


Registered: 07/21/10
Posts: 2135
Loc: East TN

Offline
BlountArrow; well said.
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: 768
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
#3163750 - 02/14/13 10:41 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: -DRM-]
woodchuckc
8 Point


Registered: 02/09/05
Posts: 1794
Loc: Hickman County, TN

Offline
Regarding property rights, I was under the impression that your car is your property, no matter where it is parked, and what is inside it is your property as well. It seems that some are inferring that when your car, with its contents, is parked in your employer's parking lot it ceases to be your property and becomes your employer's. I'm sure that there are a number of things besides guns that employers prohibit from being brought into the workplace that people sometimes have in their cars because they used them before or will use them after work.


Top
#3163789 - 02/14/13 11:06 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: woodchuckc]
John Harris
4 Point


Registered: 09/04/03
Posts: 282
Loc: Nashville

Offline
 Originally Posted By: woodchuckc
Regarding property rights, I was under the impression that your car is your property, no matter where it is parked, and what is inside it is your property as well. It seems that some are inferring that when your car, with its contents, is parked in your employer's parking lot it ceases to be your property and becomes your employer's. I'm sure that there are a number of things besides guns that employers prohibit from being brought into the workplace that people sometimes have in their cars because they used them before or will use them after work.



This is a good point. It is interesting that during the 2012 legislative hearings, Federal Express had a representative who testified in the Senate. The video is still available on the legislative website and, if not, I have a copy. Anyhow, the Federal Express representative testified that they could, as the property owner, prohibit employees from having even Bibles in their cars. The point is that Federal Express and others opposing this law in the past have asserted that once anyone crosses the property line that the owner/renter/manager has all rights to declare what is and is not allowable on the property.

While I agree that real property owners have a lot of rights regarding what use to make of the property, once a use is selected that involves allowing others to come onto the property some of those "owners" rights are constrained by a wide variety of laws and I would agree that too many laws are imposed on property owners and limits on the uses.

Where the courts (as opposed to legislatures) have worked to find balance is where activity on property has an identifiable impact on the rights of others off the property. Thus, there are nuisance laws that limit what one property owner can do (such as a pig farm) if it materially impacts the adjoining ability of adjoining property owners to reasonably use their land.

Thus, the issue for me is not absolute control over real property which is merely an illusion but the balance between the rights of the real property owner, the personal property (car) owner relative to contents, and the right of self-defense which in my mind has a higher priority to any property right.
_________________________
John Harris
_________________________________
Attorney &
Executive Director, Tennessee Firearms Association
both of which support my hunting interests.

Top
#3163805 - 02/14/13 11:15 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: Hunter 257W]
easy45
Non-Typical


Registered: 11/06/07
Posts: 28899
Loc: Chester County

Offline
cool
_________________________
Work to live, Live to hunt

Top
#3163826 - 02/14/13 11:27 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: John Harris]
woodchuckc
8 Point


Registered: 02/09/05
Posts: 1794
Loc: Hickman County, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: John Harris
 Originally Posted By: woodchuckc
Regarding property rights, I was under the impression that your car is your property, no matter where it is parked, and what is inside it is your property as well. It seems that some are inferring that when your car, with its contents, is parked in your employer's parking lot it ceases to be your property and becomes your employer's. I'm sure that there are a number of things besides guns that employers prohibit from being brought into the workplace that people sometimes have in their cars because they used them before or will use them after work.



This is a good point. It is interesting that during the 2012 legislative hearings, Federal Express had a representative who testified in the Senate. The video is still available on the legislative website and, if not, I have a copy. Anyhow, the Federal Express representative testified that they could, as the property owner, prohibit employees from having even Bibles in their cars. The point is that Federal Express and others opposing this law in the past have asserted that once anyone crosses the property line that the owner/renter/manager has all rights to declare what is and is not allowable on the property.

While I agree that real property owners have a lot of rights regarding what use to make of the property, once a use is selected that involves allowing others to come onto the property some of those "owners" rights are constrained by a wide variety of laws and I would agree that too many laws are imposed on property owners and limits on the uses.

Where the courts (as opposed to legislatures) have worked to find balance is where activity on property has an identifiable impact on the rights of others off the property. Thus, there are nuisance laws that limit what one property owner can do (such as a pig farm) if it materially impacts the adjoining ability of adjoining property owners to reasonably use their land.

Thus, the issue for me is not absolute control over real property which is merely an illusion but the balance between the rights of the real property owner, the personal property (car) owner relative to contents, and the right of self-defense which in my mind has a higher priority to any property right.


You brought up a pertinent example with FedEx and their stance of having a Bible in their car. It would seem that the exact same issue of Constitutionality would apply (just different Amendments). Do employers have the right to enact an absolute prohibition of having a Bible (or Torah or Quran or prayer rug) in the car or just one laying on the dashboard or seat of the car (i.e., visible to someone from outside the car)? Would it infringe on an employee's right to freedom of speech/expression or freedom of religion to be forbidden to have a Bible in your car even if locked in your glovebox or trunk, like a gun would be?

Top
#3163833 - 02/14/13 11:30 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: woodchuckc]
Redfred16
8 Point


Registered: 01/22/12
Posts: 1410
Loc: Hartland, WI

Offline
 Originally Posted By: woodchuckc
 Originally Posted By: John Harris
 Originally Posted By: woodchuckc
Regarding property rights, I was under the impression that your car is your property, no matter where it is parked, and what is inside it is your property as well. It seems that some are inferring that when your car, with its contents, is parked in your employer's parking lot it ceases to be your property and becomes your employer's. I'm sure that there are a number of things besides guns that employers prohibit from being brought into the workplace that people sometimes have in their cars because they used them before or will use them after work.



This is a good point. It is interesting that during the 2012 legislative hearings, Federal Express had a representative who testified in the Senate. The video is still available on the legislative website and, if not, I have a copy. Anyhow, the Federal Express representative testified that they could, as the property owner, prohibit employees from having even Bibles in their cars. The point is that Federal Express and others opposing this law in the past have asserted that once anyone crosses the property line that the owner/renter/manager has all rights to declare what is and is not allowable on the property.

While I agree that real property owners have a lot of rights regarding what use to make of the property, once a use is selected that involves allowing others to come onto the property some of those "owners" rights are constrained by a wide variety of laws and I would agree that too many laws are imposed on property owners and limits on the uses.

Where the courts (as opposed to legislatures) have worked to find balance is where activity on property has an identifiable impact on the rights of others off the property. Thus, there are nuisance laws that limit what one property owner can do (such as a pig farm) if it materially impacts the adjoining ability of adjoining property owners to reasonably use their land.

Thus, the issue for me is not absolute control over real property which is merely an illusion but the balance between the rights of the real property owner, the personal property (car) owner relative to contents, and the right of self-defense which in my mind has a higher priority to any property right.


You brought up a pertinent example with FedEx and their stance of having a Bible in their car. It would seem that the exact same issue of Constitutionality would apply (just different Amendments). Do employers have the right to enact an absolute prohibition of having a Bible (or Torah or Quran or prayer rug) in the car or just one laying on the dashboard or seat of the car (i.e., visible to someone from outside the car)? Would it infringe on an employee's right to freedom of speech/expression or freedom of religion to be forbidden to have a Bible in your car even if locked in your glovebox or trunk, like a gun would be?


The same could be said for bummer stickers. Can they restrict the 1st Amendment just cause you work for them and the vehicle is parked on thier property?
_________________________
Packer Fan back in Packer Country

"Recon Ready"
Airborne and Air Assault Blood Wings Worn Here

Top
#3163839 - 02/14/13 11:37 AM Re: Tennessee Senate approves guns-in-parking-lots bil [Re: Redfred16]
John Harris
4 Point


Registered: 09/04/03
Posts: 282
Loc: Nashville

Offline
As one of other posters commented, the Bill of Rights and other Constitutional prohibitions are restrictions on the extent to which, if any, government may limit or impair rights. When it comes to private relationships, other common law principles like nuisance, interference with contract, or impairment take over and to some extent yield similar results.

My position is that as to a car or other item of personal property, you should be able to keep, store, carry anything that you legally own or possess in your car because its your personal property. If you (or the public) are generally granted permission to park your car on another's property, such as employee parking lots or open business parking lots, then the real property owner has "invited" that use of their property. That does not mean that they have the right to impair or infringe your use of your car any more than you would have the right to get out of the car and repaint their parking lot.

On the 1st amendment issue, it is interesting that the federal court in California has specifically held that a property owner that provide open parking to the public (e.g., a mall) cannot prohibit the distribution of handbills on car windows b/c that would constitute an unreasonable restraint of the 1st Amendment.
_________________________
John Harris
_________________________________
Attorney &
Executive Director, Tennessee Firearms Association
both of which support my hunting interests.

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
4104881
RUGER
86294
Deer Assassin
64812
BSK
60492
Crappie Luck
51375
spitndrum
Newest Members
Deadeye14, woodie, Montana10point, sandman064, MossyOak30
13107 Registered Users
Who's Online
80 registered (stik, 57bear, TieCampBuckSlayer, David Sapp, ADR, LA man, 13 invisible) and 85 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13107 Members
42 Forums
88979 Topics
1040883 Posts

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