Ping.
Florida did that last year — no problems.
Texas will be the second I know about — copy cats in a good way.
“Texans who love guns and pickup trucks”
hey look. they houston hammer&sickle is taking a swipe at “rednecks” in their disarming fervour.
I know a guy, who knows a guy, who doesn't keep it in his car either....he always has it on him instead where it should be.
‘Bout time you caught up with your neighbors to the West.
I would imagine state Senator Dan Patrick would support this
“Bill allows Texans to keep guns”
it was none of Bill’s business in the first place...
Little known factoid.
Many years ago a shooter went to the top of a building at a Texas college, the building wes some sort of tower, I forget some of the details.
But a teacher had his hunting rifle in his car. And he had another teacher handing him ammo as he fired at the shooter and made him keep his head down so he couldn’t shoot more people and the police could get to the top and shoot him.
Good deal...my boss told me I couldn’t have one on the property even though my life is possibly at risk (long story involving a convict serving time for murder my hubby testified against that keeps coming up for parole)...now it ain’t his call.
Er... Wouldn't it be a good idea for MORE people to be armed then? To defend against this? Since some nut bag going off isn't going to follow their precious restrictions in the first place...
....Hm, if you are the member of the militia, then isn’t there no way that the 2nd Amendment can be dismissed?
For example, some states’s constitutions define the militia; one I know of is all male citizens aged 18 to 55.
Or is this “lawyering” and “reading” not allowed to the general public?
I saw the title and started to ping you, until I read a little farther...
Bump instead of Ping
I have mixed feelings on this type of law. Great for 2nd Amendment, not so great for private property rights.
I understand that a person’s ability to enjoy their 2nd Amendment rights can be hampered by not being allowed to keep guns in their cars, at work. However, this is not being done by the government, and it does not directly interfere with their rights to bear arms.
On the other hand, forcing companies to allow guns on their property, directly interferes with private property rights.
I fear the precedent thses laws might set. What else might a company (or landlord or homeowner) be forced to allow on their property?
I tend to think we should let the market take care of this. If enough good workers refuse to work for companies that won’t allow the guns, many will change their policies and gun friendly companies would have a competitive advantage in the labor market.
Also, I’d like to see the market produce some innovative solutions. Maybe gun checking services could open up near large employers.
At the very least, I think employers should have the option of paying for offsite parking and shuttle service, or providing free gun checking service for their employees.
Incrementalism working for the good guys, for once.
TEXAS & General Interest Ping! Ping! Ping!
Then I guess those supervisors and co-workers better be prepared to defend themselves, shouldn't they Hammy?
Newsflash, you political porker....If the state has no legal liability for failing to protect an individual, it CANNOT have any legal authority to prevent that individual from protecting themselves.
Put some ice on it.
Well, all I can say is...
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”
(Robert A. Heinlein)