Posted on 07/08/2008 1:21:49 PM PDT by neverdem
Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. District Court, Northern District of Oklahoma
Nominated by William J. Clinton on March 9, 1994, Confirmed by the Senate on June 8, 1994.
The Legacy of the Clinton's.
I figured as much.
The exemption is supposed to be for highly explosive industries. Disney claims they qualify because they obtained a permit because they have such a large amount of fireworks stored on the property. Apparently since they have the permit, they do technically qualify, although the law wasn’t meant for their type of exemption.
Woof !
I think the law also states that the reason for the exemption has to be the primary industry of the company in question.
Storing fireworks doesn’t cover Disney, IMHO.
Jiminy Crickets! Did they think he was going to do something Goofy?
AOL uses explosives?
AOL Can Fire Gun-Owning Employees
3 employees of AOL fired September 2000.
Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 8:56:58 PM
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1177470/posts
However, the bill states that property owned or leased by an employer who has a permit required by federal law to manufacture, use, store or move explosives would still be off limits. Disney has a permit for its fireworks shows.
“(6) exceptions.—the prohibitions in subsection (2) do not apply to:...
(d) property owned or leased by an employer or the landlord of an employer upon which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials regulated under state or federal law.”
Disney is not in the fireworks making or warehousing business. This was intended to apply to oil refineries, fuel tank farms, and ammunition manufacturers.
Following Disney’s logic, any business with a can of gasoline or solvent would be exempt.
Oh wow!
Where is:
"No. Disney employees with concealed-weapons permits should be allowed to keep their guns on their persons while at work."
I don’t think the parking lot covers any employer. Unless they are storing explosives in the parking lot.
That's not the law in my state. Sure, you can say (for instance) no midgets are allowed on your property, but if you own a store, you are dealing with the public. Utah law states that if you have opened your property to the public, your open your property to public law, and lawful concealed carry is legal. There is an allowance for churches to post a no guns sign. Carry is legal in the malls, parks, schools, anywhere that isn't a "secure" area (courts, jails, and of course all federally restricted sites).
DMV employees and teachers carry in Utah, God bless em.
The narrow issue here is that his car is his private property. He was fired for not giving permission to some Mickey Mouse cops to search said property.
After reading the law, it is obvious Disney is in violation. You are right that the reporter paraphrased it to say something it doesn’t.
It is?? Why on earth would it be (other than Disney's well known propensity for buying the best legislators money can buy)?
Disney’s property ends at the bottom of your tires.
The gun isn't "on" Disney property--it's inside the car, which is the car owner's property. Just because the car happens to be sitting on Disney dirt changes that not one bit. And Florida law now specifically says that employees CAN have guns in their cars at their places of employment--of which said law, Disney is NOT exempt (though they are claiming to be).
The Disney policy is very similar to the policy on US Military bases. You may not bring your weapon onto base, Conceal/Carry permit or not.
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.