Posted on 12/11/2004 6:07:04 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
Gun-toting, tough-talking, and anti-establishment to his muddy boot straps, Larry Mullens is an Oklahoman "good ole boy" personified.
He is also fast becoming a classic American folk hero as he takes centre stage in a revolt of gun owners that is reverberating in boardrooms across the United States. The son of one of the last of the old-style Wild West ranchers, he first fired a gun as a boy.
Now he carries his trusty Winchester in his pick-up on his way to work at a sawmill in case he comes across a coyote, a wild dog or even a wolf attacking his small herd of steers. Last year he lost five calves to wild dogs.
So it was perhaps not surprising that he was enraged when his previous employer fired him for breaking company security rules that banned guns from the company car park after they found a .38 pistol stashed behind the seat of his pick-up.
No one could have predicted that two years later he and his backers would claim an extraordinary revenge - a law allowing employees to keep guns in locked cars on company property.
Just two days after a gunman jumped on to a stage in Columbus, Ohio, and shot dead a heavy metal guitarist and three others before himself being shot dead, it might seem surprising to hear that elsewhere a state is extending gun owners' rights.
But in Oklahoma, as across much of rural America, gun control is seen as the work of naive and meddling minds.
"Having a gun is no different from having a hammer. It is just a tool," said Jerry Ellis, a Democratic representative in the state legislature who drafted and pushed through the law.
"Here, gun control is when you hit what you shoot at."
The passage of the law resounded like one of Larry Mullens's Winchester rifle shots through the boardrooms of America.
In recent years companies have been implementing anti-gun policies in an attempt to cut down on violence at the work place.
Now they fear the Oklahoman ruling will encourage the powerful gun lobby all over America to try to roll back the reforms.
Paul Viollis, the president of Risk Control Strategies, is appalled at the new law. Every week there are 17 murders at the work place across America, and most of them involve guns, he says.
"It's the most irresponsible piece of legislation I've seen in my 25 years in the business," he said. "I would invite anyone who'd allow people to bring firearms to work to write the first death notice.
"The argument that emp-loyees should be allowed to bring firearms to work because they'll be locked in the car is so absurd it barely merits a response."
Several companies are trying to block the law. Two days before it was due to come into force last month, a judge granted a temporary restraining order preventing it from taking effect. The next hearing is on Tuesday.
But the firms are fighting on unfavourable terrain. Contrary to the widespread impression that the nation is polarised between gun-loving Republicans and more liberal Democrats, in the heartland gun control spans party lines. The law passed unanimously in Oklahoma's Senate and by 92 votes to four in the House.
Mike Wilt, a Republican, voted against the law, not on security grounds but because he believes the state should not dictate gun policies to property owners. "Here in Oklahoma the issue of guns is not a wedge issue," he said. "We all go hunting together and we all tend to have the same beliefs."
Two weeks ago one of the principal plaintiffs, Whirlpool, a prominent supplier of white goods, withdrew from the case. It said it was satisfied that its ban on guns on its property was not affected. The gun lobby suspects that the decision had more to do with talk of a boycott of the firm.
Nowhere do feelings run more strongly than in Valliant, a small town where, on Oct 1, 2002, at the Weyerhaeuser paper mill, the row began.
Mr Mullens was one of four on-site employees who were sacked after guns were found in their vehicles in contravention of a new company ruling. They are convinced it was just an excuse to lay off workers and insist they did not know about the new security laws.
The firm, which is locked in litigation with the fired employees, rejects the charges and says everyone knew it had a zero-tolerance approach to security. "You don't need a gun to be safe at Weyerhaeuser," said Jim Keller, the firm's senior vice-president. "Safety is our number one priority.
"It's more important to tell someone they don't have a job than to have to tell a family that their loved one is not coming home from work. This is about safety; it's not about guns."
But the people of Valliant, where the high school closes down during the prime week in the deer-hunting season to allow pupils to shoot, will not be easily assuaged.
James Burrell, an assistant at the local gun shop, said: "Most people around here think the new law is already a right."
Mr Mullens has now found a new job, where his employer is less pernickety.
"People tell me to 'stick to my guns' because they are all carrying one too," he said. "The bottom line is that it is our constitutional right to have a gun in the car."
And since the big corporations and their underpaid,understaffed,under-equpted and unarmed security are afraid of ___________ the right to keep and use ________ will be effectively destroyed.
I thought situations such as this was why certain things were RECOGNIZED,not granted, as rights.
Must have been some other land , some other time.
Knowing that the bad guys whom you, in general,cannot identify soley from appearance, will carry ________ despite laws to the contrary, and that certained licensed persons whom you ,in general, cannot identify from appearance, it is reasonable to assume that ANY person you meet may be carrying ________,and to govern your own actions accordingly.
This would recommend being polite and respectful to all ,neither offering nor accepting insult, and basically minding your own business.
jonestown:
Your specious 'no wit - sorry' bit is evidence in itself that you're playing the 'one up' game called the dozens.
Dear jonestown,
"who's 'we', dude?"
Those of us who practiced, or once practiced psychotherapy (past tense for me).
Is your mother a psychotherapist, too? ;-)
sitetest
Basically "minding your own business" seems to be a lost art in the legal/corporate/political circles that approve of banning guns in parking lots.
Dear hoosierham,
"This would recommend being polite and respectful to all ,neither offering nor accepting insult, and basically minding your own business."
My own personal motivation for trying to be polite, respectful, etc., is that it is the right thing to do.
Oh, and I work very hard to mind my own business.
I wish others would mind theirs, not thinking they have a right to tell a businessman his.
;-)
sitetest
Thanks. - Identifying your former profession explains more than you know.
Dear jonestown,
"Thanks. - Identifying your former profession explains more than you know."
I figured you'd say that. Sorta hoping you wouldn't disappoint.
;-)
sitetest
Make the case.
Let me try ....
The right to keep and bear arms is not a right that is granted by some man, government, or institution ... but rather a right granted at birth by the creator. The same as a right to be black or the right to pursue happiness ... Lets look at the civil rights movement of the 60s ... the same underlying concept is at work here. Should we be allowed to discriminate against those who exercise the right to protect themselves? If we can extend" civil" rights to private property then surly we can extend the God given right to self-protection to private property.
I try to please. It's my duty to help unfortunates.
Now it's much clearer why you are a liberal gun grabber.
San Francisco supervisors propose sweeping gun ban
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1302332/posts
"Under the language of the measure, police officers, security guards, members of the military, and anyone else "actually employed and engaged in protecting and preserving property or life within the scope of his or her employment" could have a firearm."
Hmmmm, whatdayathink, sitetest? Sound go to you?
San Francisco supervisors propose sweeping gun ban
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1302332/posts
"Under the language of the measure, police officers, security guards, members of the military, and anyone else "actually employed and engaged in protecting and preserving property or life within the scope of his or her employment" could have a firearm."
Hmmmm, whatdayathink, sitetest? Sound good to you?
Dear jonestown,
I need all the help I can get.
I'll let you know if you're actually ever helpful.
;-)
sitetest
I will also let you know if you are ever acutally right on anything Ms Maryland.
I can carry anything I want to in my vehicle, and as long as it does not violate state or federal laws, there isn't a dang thing any private company can say about it.
794 O.C. - Old Cracker
Your superior gun grabbing attitude shows through nicely.
This isn't about "those inclined to rob,rape,and murder", this is about the ability of a property owner to set the conditions and rules of access to his private property.
These people used the force of government to impose their will on the rightful owner of a parcel of land.
That's wrong, and it's going to bite everyone in the ass.
"Henry Perritt Jr., one of this country's foremost scholars on labor and employment law, advocates a comprehensive test for analyzing wrongful discharge claims involving violations of public policy."
"Public policy" has nothing to do with the private policies established by a property owner when exercising his property rights on his land.
Those would be far from "public policies" as they pertain to his property, and does not dictate or even seek to alter public policy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.