[timm22]

First I would argue that, as in all cases, gun rights improve safety especially in the workplace. (I think we all agree on this but it doesn't hurt to repeat it.)

We agree.

Second, their property rights are being respected because this is not a law that allows them to carry into the building at work only the parking lot. If there is a private property rights issue it would arise from someone telling you what you can and can't keep in your own car. Many States have laws that treat parking lots that are private property but open to the public as public property in certain respects-- police ticketing handicapped parking violations for example.

This is an interesting perspective, but I remain unconvinced that parking lots are not private property. The fact that the government does not respect private property (by regulating parking lots in other ways) does not mean that parking lots are public property, any more than private wetlands are public property because the government unjustly tells the owners how that property can be used.

Without this law, people are required to travel to and from work unarmed. Just think about your own daughter leaving a remote workplace at midnight and the issue takes on a whole new light.

I would simply tell my daughter not to work for that dangerous employer, just as I would tell her to not work at a steel mill with a history of avoidable accidents. If she chose to ignore me, I'd have to respect her decision (assuming she is an adult).

[sarasmom]

My car does not become company property if I park it in the company parking lot.
Does the company assume all liability for any damages to my car in the lot?
My body does not become company property when I sit at my desk.
Can the company do with my body what they will, regardless of law, while I am at work?
Well to answer that question, yes but...the only employer with the legal right to suspend any and all constitutional protections to employees is the Federal government of the USA.
Is Maytag a branch of the Federal government?
I don't think so.

[Cobra64]

I would simply tell my daughter not to work for that dangerous employer...

The employer is "dangerous"?

BTW, Timm, how old are you, and what do you do for a living? We'd all like to know.

[Ragnorak]

The fact that the government does not respect private property (by regulating parking lots in other ways) does not mean that parking lots are public property

I certainly understand (and agree) with your complaints about the government and private property. If I lived in Oregon I would have revolted by now.

The parking lot as psuedo-public property stems from the property owners choice to open the property to the general public--think of a supermarket parking lot. Police can enforce the same laws in the parking lot that they can on sidewalks or streets but can't on your front porch. I certainly don't think a supermarket should be able to refuse you access because you had an unseen and otherwise perfectly legal item in your trunk. Should an employer be able to refuse to let you park in his lot if you drive an SUV or a motorcycle? Does he give up this right of refusal when he grants employee parking?

I don't know how, if at all, this "public treatment" applies when the property is only opened to the limited public such as only your employees. My guess is it varies greatly from State to State.

I'm uncomfortable with anyone telling me what I'm allowed to have in my personal vehicle. Especially in this case because, if I read this correctly, they don't want employees parking on public property to be allowed to have guns in their cars either.