Posted on 02/08/2006 7:13:35 AM PST by neverdem
Where was these people's outrage at Procter and Gamble, and Microsoft?
The interior of the vehicle is not yours. The use of the parking lot is based on whether, or not the employee is doing his work to your satisfaction, and whether, or not you're willing extend parking priviledges to that employee based on his otherwise satisfactory work. If you tow the car w/o the owner's knowledge, you are liable for the charges and damages for the action. The police will not enter the vehicle, nor will they assist you with the illegal tow. If you tow the car w/o the owner's permission, you are guilty of grand theft auto.
Believe it or not, there was a time in this country where you could. Planes didn't get hijacked back then. And grandmothers and Medal-of-Honor recepients weren's subjected to warantless searches by Stasi-wannabees.
Argue your Second Amendment rights then.
You'd probably be doing so from a jail cell unless you were a "party member in exceptionally good standing".
Since you'd be arrested by an agent of the state, sitting in a jail owned by state, and so one, one might conclude that the state is infringing upon your 2nd amendment Rights.
After your 50 previous posts on this thread about how the "2nd amendment only applies to gov't infringements", I suspect that we will discover that you don't give a rat's behind about those infrigements either. So I don't expect you to have any problem with the state banning citizens from flying armed.
I've come to the conclusion that you simply don't like "average citizens" carrying guns and you will do anything in your power to harass them and make life difficult for them.
And equally impulsively, there is a contigent of posters here who can't lick the boots of their corporate masters quickly enough.
As for "deeper thought", I've engaged in this while studying the various gun edicts across the US. It is damned near impossible to "legally" carry a gun across the US, even with a concealed carry permit. Some states open carry is legal, but concealed is not. In other states, concealed carry is legal, but open carry is not. In a few states, "open" means "concealed", to add confusion. And in other states, both open and concealed carry are illegal.
If that isn't enough, you now have the problem of transitioning from open to concealed or vice versa. That means pulling off the interstate in a fairly remote area so you can't be seen by others and accused of brandishing your weapon. Now in some states, if you are legally carrying, you must inform a police officer upon any contact. If you fail to do so, you can be arrested and taken to jail. However, if you are illegally carrying, there is no requirement to inform the officer, since that would violate constitional protections against self-incrimination (at least that Right hasn't been trampled on yet).
If that wasn't enough, you must also know the locations in each state that are "off limits" to carry. Banks are legal in some states, but not in others. Some states allow carry in restaurants, but not the bar areas of restaurants. Some states ban carry in any restaurant that serves alcohol, but don't have laws against carrying after you had a beer or two. At least one state bans carry if you are taking any prescription medicine.
I could go on and on and on. My point is that a Right is useless if you can't easily exercise it. If all the gov't infringements weren't bad enough, now we have multinational corporations employing dogs to snoop through their workers vehicles and firing those with guns. So even if you manage to follow all the state edicts regarding guns, now you have to worry about an anti-gun bureacrat firing you. That's not America. That's some perverted combination of the beginnings of the USSR, 1984, and Nazi Germany.
The NRA is finally doing something meaningful and all these "pro gun" people are now coming here griping about it. Grow a spine and stand up for your Rights! Stop being such a chump! I get the impression from reading this thread that if many posters were alive back in 1774, all king George would have had to do is to declare the colonies a corporation, and himself CEO, and they would have submitted to all forms of tyranny.
Wouldn't that be a sight to behold?
Can you imagine how the control freaks on this thread would react to they themselves being subjected to other control freaks (jail wardens and many cops)? LOL! I'd almost pay to watch it.
You're back!
Thank the stars, my friend!
I agree 100%. I would do exactly the same thing. But I would not ask the police or the legislature to force you to allow me to carry my gun onto your proprty against your will...outside of invasion or insurrection.
I wouldn't do it, I do not agree with it...but since it is their property they have a right to establish the rules on their own property.
This same principle holds for others on their property, even if we do not agree with it. Else, your proerty rights...and therefore your liberty, or worthless in the eyes of any such law founded upon their infringement (and we already have a bunch of those) and in the eyes of any such citizen who feels free to trample your rights on your property and do whatever the hell they please irrespective of your desires.
What really keeps us free is the morality that allows us to recognize other's rights and respect them. As I said, your ability to bear arms is not infringed...you can choose to boycott me and my property and remain armed, you can choose to ignore my just requests and suffer the consequences when doing so on my property.
Now...I personally would not, as a company, make such a demand. But these people are. Boycott them and their business, boycott their employ, as Squantos said. But do not use the force of law and the government to demand that they do things your way on their property. Such a premise is an awful, and dangerous two-edged sword.
My friend, in essence, that is exactly what he did. And in doing so, one of the things he did was to compel the colonists, at force of arms, for them to allow his Redcoats, armed, into their homes and property against their will. They rebelled against that, just like they rebel;led against him taking their arms.
Anyhow, I have stated my thoughts and feelings on this. I do not support a law that compels private property owners to allow people to come armed onto their property if that is against their will. That is the issue. Arms are not being banned, their right to keep and bear arms is not being infringed. They are free to either go elsewhere or knowingly violate said request...bearing the burden in that case of the responsibility of the consequences.
I do not agree with such businesses, and would avoid them and boycott them...or simply carry anyway and then accept responsibility for that act if found out. Like in the large National Parks. I carry there, even though they say don't. I do so to protect my own in those wilds...and would willingly pay the fine rather than lose a child.
Anyhow...goodnight all.
It is a dangerous and a fatally slippery slope to use the force of law in such instances. The enemies of the very principle of the RKBA have been using them for so long...I pray we never join in on that when we have the majority...to force the countervailing views on them and their rights. It is just as wrong for us to do it to them ans for them to do it to us.
Anyhow...folks will debate this long after I am gone from this good green earth I am sure. I understand the desire to bear arms anywhere I go...but when it comes to a neighbor or someone else telling me to not carry on their property...then I generally choose to just go another way, staying armed in the process. In the back country...I go armed...and am willing to pay the fine and accept the responsibility of doing so should the owner confront me.
Sort of like seeing a no tresspassing sign and going around someone's property rather than going through it. It would not be right to indicate that my right to free travel trumps his right to post his property. Now, if my child was bleeding to death and going around would result in much more time in getting to the hospital...well, in that case I would go on through figuring that anybody of reason would understand...like speeding to a hospital with your pregnant wife.
Well, now I am rambling. Goodnight.
Wrong! even if invited, if I decide I don't care for your free speech, I can have you ejected from my property.....nice try though.
Wrong! the employer does have the right to decide what you may or may not have inside the interior of your car, while your car is on private property. This would include, but not restricted to firearms, alcohol, tobacco. And the employer has the right to search your car while it is on his property. The employer even has the right to decide if what the employee does while off the clock is dangerous or immoral, when deciding weather or not to keep someone in his employ.
As long as you continue to stamp your feet indignantly and merely repeat your black and white worldview, you're not going to get many adherents.
Until you have more to contribute than that, that's all I have to say on this matter.
Good day to you.
Yes, and I have done this in the past, civil disobedience being the only course sometimes.
Today, with more options at my command, I choose to do what I have mentioned already on this thread and what you have stated -- I simply take my business elsewhere. In fact, I don't even visit (or if I do, it's on business and not very long!) states that don't acknowledge and respect my God-given rights. I vote with my feet and with my wallet whenever the opportunity presents itself.
As a life long NRA member I fully support the 2nd amend, but -- you do not have the right to park in your employers parking lot,
As a life long NRA member I fully support the 2nd amend, but you can take public transportation to and from work.
As a life long NRA member I fully support the 2nd amend, but {the govt. has the right to ban you from riding public transportation if armed}
As a life long NRA member I fully support the 2nd amend, but the employer also has the right not to hire folks who own guns!,
As a life long NRA member I fully support the 2nd amend, but the employer also has the right to fire any employee he believes owns a gun!.
As a life long NRA member I fully support the 2nd amend, but some of the asinine arguments on this thread saying employers have no say if employees take weapons onto their property is laughable at best.
Laughably correct, there have been many asinine arguments on this thread, none of which can refute the fact that efforts are being made to infringe on our right to bear arms while going to and from work.
Why a life long NRA member would fully support these efforts is beyond normal comprehension.
No your wrong JAbberbonk! I've been there before. The car doesn't belong to you. Either respect the rights of your fellow citizens, or get the hell out of the country. Move to red friggin china ya petty tyrant!
I tried to make a similar point. I doubt that their is anyone here who does not support the 2nd admendment. However, a persons right to their property, and the regulation of what takes place there by those persons, is just as important.
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.