Posted on 10/09/2005 9:09:28 AM PDT by RightDemocrat
TALLAHASSEE -- A rare and spectacular showdown may be coming in Florida's Republican Party: Big Business vs. Big Guns. And the stakes couldn't be higher. To critics, it's about the safety of workplaces, including hospitals and churches, throughout the Sunshine State. To supporters, it's about the safety of employees who travel to and from those workplaces.
The dust-up is over the "guns-at-work" bill, which the National Rifle Association began pushing last month in Tallahassee to force all Florida businesses to allow firearms in the vehicles of any employee or visitor. Companies could keep policies banning guns from their buildings themselves but could no longer apply those policies to their parking lots.
Many businesses are either wary of or leaning against the proposal, including heavy-hitters such as Disney and local giants such as Blue Cross and Blue Shield, CSX and Baptist Health System.
But the NRA is insistent. The group, which has donated nearly $1 million in Florida over the past decade, mostly to Republicans, is led in Tallahassee by former national President Marion Hammer. Hammer said the rights of gun owners should be intact in their vehicles, and the proposed law already gives businesses immunity from liability lawsuits in cases of workplace shootings.
"Your home is a slam dunk, but bridging that into the private property of an organization doesn't hold," said Mike Hightower, chairman of the Duval County Republican Party and lobbyist for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida. "I don't think people are going to want to cross that line."
In a telling sign of wariness, neither Gov. Jeb Bush, Senate President Tom Lee nor House Speaker Allan Bense are taking positions on the bill yet.
(Excerpt) Read more at jacksonville.com ...
Absolutely. But I don't have access to a Lexis/Nexis database, so I can't readily answer the number of successful lawsuits on this issue. However, the number of lawsuits against the gun manufacturers are readily apparent for other similar incidents that are sponsored from the other side. They have consistently lost on point that just because a firearm functions in exactly the manner in which it is desgned to function the manufacturer can't be held responsible for illicit or irresponsible action by a user. Can't legislate against insanity. Can't litigate against it either. But you can physically protect yourself against a dangerously insane person who also happens to be armed.
Actually, I agree that a business owner has the right to exclude anyone from his property for any reason, or no reason at all. Just playing devil's advocate.
Alaska anti-gun-control law goes into effect Wednesday
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1503545/posts?page=1
" -- Gun owners will be allowed to keep their firearms in their vehicle, even if the car is parked on private property where the owner has a no-gun policy. -- "
Incredibly enough, there are lots of conservatives on FR who insist that private property 'rights' are being violated by such laws.
Hi faireturn. You are right, some of us, me anyway, think that is a violation of private property rights.
What will you do when all 50 States prove you're wrong?
I'll say they are wrong, though the RKBA cause is right.
Ever hear of cognitive disassociation?
You pinged me here so you could be insulting?
Calm yourself. -- I pinged you with new info on the issue, -- and you answered with the same old same o..
I'm calm, thank you. If the new info is that the NRA wishes all 50 states to pass such a law, you're right, that is new to me. But while that info does add something new to the situation, it does not add something new to the argument.
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.