[Batrachian]

Of course the government violates private property rights in many ways. That's my whole point. This law is another example of it.

I'm as big a Second Amendment supporter as anyone, but private property rights have to take precedence.

[Mulder]

I'm as big a Second Amendment supporter as anyone, but private property rights have to take precedence

So I can count on you to grab a rifle and help me defend my property should I ever decide to stop paying taxes on my "private property"?

Thanks in advance!

[Wonder Warthog]

"I'm as big a Second Amendment supporter as anyone, but private property rights have to take precedence."

They do. The outer skin of the guys automobile is the limit of the company's "property right". The interior space is NOT the company's, but belongs to the owner of the car.

If the car owner is stopped by police, they had better have or get a warrant if they want to search the interior. The company has no right to make such searches, either.

The new law is "right on".

[paul51]

I'm as big a Second Amendment supporter as anyone, but private property rights have to take precedence

How do you feel about someone refusing to rent a property they own to someone based on their religion or the color of their skin?

[BOOTSTICK]

You are of course 100% correct, but beware of some of the Yahoos and simple minded gun slingers at FR who will castigate you as a lefty gun grabber because some of these people have the ill informed opinion that their gun rights should trump your property rights. Once again the small cabal of loonies, will insure a backlash against responsible gun owners like you and me.

[nobdysfool]

I'm as big a Second Amendment supporter as anyone, but private property rights have to take precedence.

What about the right to be free from unreasonable search? Even if my car is parked on the company's lot, the car remains MY private property, and as such, is not subject to search and/or seizure without probable cause. It isn't as cut and dried as you'd like to make it.