Replies

Faireturn, I personally wouldn't want to keep employees from carrying. What I want is solely the power to control what's on my property, including contents of cars. As I said, my few employees routinely carry on my property, which pleases me. But I believe it's up to me, not the state, to determine these things on my own property.

Well at least you honestly admit you want " -- the power to control what's on my property, including contents of cars. -- "
Most employers are using bogus liability arguments.

And, IMO, if we give the state the power to insist that guns may come onto one's property without their consent,

The state is obligated to enforce our 2nd Amendment against all infringements. Parking lot gun bans are infringements.

then we risk giving it power to also prohibit such a thing. The power to truly infringe the RKBA, which I don't believe is happenning in these corporate parking lots.

You are letting your beliefs blind you to the truth. These bans are orchestrated by the brady bunch faction, imo.

I kind of go along with the idea of a car being an extension of one's home, but I don't believe one can "extend" one's home onto someone else's private property. I don't think it matters whether it's business or residential.

Parking your car in a private or public lot does not "extend your home" by any stretch..

"Parking lot gun bans are infringements."

They are not, because such bans are a voluntary agreement. What you want is for the state to disallow the ability of employers to make the agreement a condition of employment. However, I do think such bans are infringements of RKBA when they exist, as they do, on public property.

"You are letting your beliefs blind you to the truth. These bans are orchestrated by the brady bunch faction, imo."

In fact I recognize that and stated as much in a prior post. I don't know whether or not the liability claims are bogus, but I consider that corporations do this because they want to appear politically correct. Which is reprehensible, but within their rights. The point is that, as Exsoldier noted, your freedom ends at the point it interferes with the freedom of another. In this case, it ends at the freedom of the property owner to control what may be carried by another onto his own property.

"Parking your car in a private or public lot does not "extend your home" by any stretch.."

Here, we agree, regarding private lots. The car is an extension of the home on public lots, IMO. Should be, that is.