Posted on 02/24/2006 11:33:14 AM PST by agenda_express
MR. SPEAKER:
I move that House Bill 1028 be amended to read as follows:
SOURCE: Page 3, line 10; (06)MO102801.3. --> Page 3, delete lines 10 through 17, begin a new paragraph and insert: " Sec. 2. (a) Notwithstanding any other law and except as provided in subsection (b), a person may not adopt or enforce a policy or rule that prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting an individual from possessing: (1) a loaded or unloaded handgun; or (2) an unloaded rifle or shotgun; that is locked in the individual's motor vehicle while the motor vehicle is in or on the person's property.". (Reference is to HB 1028 as printed January 26, 2006.)
Representative Koch
The introduced bill can be found here.
If the property is truly company property, and not a shared lot, then the employer should have full discretion about what is and what isn't allowed on their property.
Private property rights should trump all others.
The right to defend yourself ( be armed ) in your PRIVATE vehicle would IMHO trump a ban on the parking lot where you work . Unless you work in a school where the law stipulates no firearms within a given distance of the school grounds .
Understandably, this has always a point of contention.
I carrry concealed, either on my person or in my car, in Indiana daily. The subject of weaponry in private vehicles on other people's property is a tough nut to crack, indeed.
However, If your weapon is in a vehicle and it's on my property, your weapon is on my property. As the property owner, I should have sole discretion as to how my property is used. If I start letting The State determine the rules of use for my property, they will ultimately claim that property.
Where do you carry a weapon, then? If you carry it on your person anywhere except public roads/places or your own home, then you are being hypocritical.
The state can claim your property anyway ( eminent domain ). I guess these laws and stipulations are moot if you work in a Post Office .
I think this is fitting:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater...confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson
I carry wherever I can, and NO, I am not being hypocritical:
I still believe that it's the property owner's decision to let someone on HIS PROPERTY with a firearm (or anything else, for that matter). If a property owner has a specific policy/request that I not carry there, I make a decision - enter unarmed or remain off THEIR PROPERTY.
I guess we will just have to disagree on this. I believe the second amendment allows me to carry a weapon, whether on my property, or on someone else's. Their rights to private property do not mitigate my right to protect myself and vice versa.
"Agree to disagree"?
On the Interweb?
C'mon!
You've got to haggle!!!
That's why any crazy galoot cruising down the street can stop into virtually any post office and blow everybody away. No one there is armed, nor do they have ready access to any weapons.
More than one person has died in the last month because of the continuation of this mindless board of governor rule.
Wouldn't be so bad, though, if the board mandated the use of armed guards at all entrances to post offices. However, they've elected to depend on electronic key entry identity card control systems ~ that's so they can save money, though not lives.
Has anyone done a study as to why postal workers go beserk and kill collegues ?I know this happens in other work venues , but it seems to happen in the post offices more than average .
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.