Gun owners claim right to take their rifles to work

Telegraph ^ | 11/12/04 | Alec Russell in Valliant and Scott Heiser in Washington

[Dead Corpse]

So is burglary and tresspassing. Unauthorized searching of my car, even if parked on their property, is tresspassing. Period. Anything taken from the car during the unwarrented search is theft. Period.

You toss around a thousand strawmen and try and imply that I'M the one setting them up?

[Luis Gonzalez]

No "profanity" jonesy.

Build yourself a bridge and get over it.

[Luis Gonzalez]

You are arguing that you have the right to lie to your employer.

[Dead Corpse]

As you say, the gun is IN my car. My property. This is not addative. As long as my gun stays in my car, it is STILL my property. Period.

Learn English? Go back to friggin' Cuba... You've got more in common with them than you do us.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Unauthorized searching of my car, even if parked on their property, is tresspassing."

Weyerhauser did not conduct an unauthorized search, they conducted an authorized search. They also did not burglarize the cars, the owners willingly opened their cars at the request of the company.

[jonestown]

When they don't have a leg to stand on, they'll do anything they can.
666 Dead Corpse

---

One wonders what they hope to gain by arguing against their own right to keep & bear arms.

[Dead Corpse]

Not at all. I'm not carying my firearms on their property. Period. Not in their buildings or on their grounds. That you can't grasp the distinction between their property and my eqaul Right to control my property is none of my concern.

Grow up...

[Dead Corpse]

Compensation from their masters? Better to be a Camp Guard than a camp detainee?

[Luis Gonzalez]

And your property, including the gun, is ON their property.

You are fired.

Are you arguing that if you put your loaded gun in a locked briefcase, bring it into the workplace, and lock the briefcase in your locker, you are violating a no guns in the workplace rule?

[spunkets]

"the owners willingly opened their cars at the request of the company."

The pretense was drugs.

[Luis Gonzalez]

The one arguing that an employer has no right to control their property is you, not me.

There is a gun ON the premises, the gun is IN your car, which means that you have parked illegally, and in violation of the workplace rules set in place by the property owner.

You are fired.

[spunkets]

I also noted that the dogs hit on tobacco.

[Luis Gonzalez]

If the police enter you house because they have reason to believe that you have drugs in your house, and during the course of their investigation they find kiddie porn, you're arrested.

[Luis Gonzalez]

You want employers to respect your property rights, yet you want to blatantly violate theirs.

[Dead Corpse]

Look up the word "additive" sometime. As the company has no property Rights over my car, the contents are irrelevant. A fact you continue to ignore.

No. A briefcase could be construed a holster type device as such do in fact exist. The same for putting a firearm in a jacket pocket. Now who's setting up straw men? Is this all you got? If so... then I have no more time for you. You are irredeemable. I hop[e the Brady Campaign continues to keep you as a spokesmen. You make it too easy to make you look like an idiot.

[Dead Corpse]

No. I'm not. Idiot.

[spunkets]

The relevant point is that the willingness depended on the employees veiw that the search was legit, because the reason was for drugs. They claim, they thought their firearms were fine where they were.

[jonestown]

Could be.
Some believe in 'licking the boot that feeds them' theory. Most conservatives don't.

[Dead Corpse]

Bait and Switch. Isn't that illegal? ;-)

[Modernman]

Why use "caselaw"?

Because that's what we do in a common law system. You are advocating a novel legal position- you are claiming that exercising one's right to regulate whether firearms come onto one's property violates public policy. Other than your opinion, what legal basis do you have for this claim?

And don't say "the Constitution." The only place in the Constitution where you could find a right to bring firearms onto others' property is in the infamous penumbra.

The clear words of the 2nd support the peoples position. - Our rights to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed.

And courts have ruled in hundreds, if not thousands, of cases that the Constitutional prohibitions against infringements of rights applies to government action only. And, of course, SCOTUS has never actually ruled on whether the 2nd Amendment recognizes an individual right to bear arms, but that's a discussion for a different day.