[timm22]

It looks like this issue is being presented as workplace safety vs. gun owner's rights. This misses the most important aspect of this law.

The focus should be on property rights. In my opinion, if I own a parking lot, I should be able to determine what things are allowed on that lot and which things are prohibited. I am against state-imposed gun control, but if someone doesn't want firearms on THEIR property, they should be allowed to make that decision. No one is forcing anyone to work for am anti-gun private employer.

[John Thornton]

The focus should be on property rights. In my opinion, if I own a parking lot, I should be able to determine what things are allowed on that lot and which things are prohibited.

So, if you work for me and park in my lot, I can ban your car from displaying a John Kerry bumpersticker?

Of course not, the First Amendment trumps my property rights.

Just as the Second Amendment trumps Whirlpool's property rights here.

[WhosJohnGalt]

Dude, you are way off.

[Emmett McCarthy]

I see your point - but only up to a certain point. The employees should make it publicly known that the employer cares more about the possibility of a lawsuit than it does about the lives of their employees. Much like the pizza companies that won't allow their delivery drivers to be armed or the convenience store owners who leave their late-shift workers defenseless. In the last analysis, it's an individual decision. Ignore the company's silly rule and make a large public stink if they do happen to catch you and fire you for it. What's the old expression? "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6"?

[Ragnorak]

workplace safety vs. gun owner's rights

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.) 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.

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.

[Wonder Warthog]

"The focus should be on property rights. In my opinion, if I own a parking lot, I should be able to determine what things are allowed on that lot and which things are prohibited. I am against state-imposed gun control, but if someone doesn't want firearms on THEIR property, they should be allowed to make that decision. No one is forcing anyone to work for am anti-gun private employer."

And you would be wrong. "Your" property (the parking lot) begins at the outer skin of the automobile. Inside that skin is the private property of the owner of the vehicle. Only if he moves the firearm across that threshold have YOUR property rights been violated.

[jdege]

If you ban guns on your property, and include your parking lots, you are in effect forbidding your employees from carrying anywhere on the days they work - including on their trips to and from work.

IMO, you should be able to forbid your employees from carrying on the premises. But if you do so, you should be required to provide secure storage for their firearms while they are on the premises.