Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

He said, 'If you come on my land, I'll kill you'
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1000land.htm ^

Posted on 01/27/2007 1:36:11 PM PST by tpaine

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 941-960961-980981-1,000 ... 1,061-1,079 next last
To: tpaine

Yes, I did. The GA bill agrees that an employee has a right to carry arms in his vehicle.

Yes, and it intends to codify the right of GA employees to secure arms in their vehicles while at work.

No, as the GA bill agrees that an employee has a right to carry arms in his vehicle.



Clever. But we weren't talking about the right to carry arms in a vehicle. We were talking about the right of an employer to restrict weapons from his private property, a right that is recognized in the GA bill.


961 posted on 01/30/2007 10:12:20 AM PST by UpAllNight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 955 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
In my opinion, the whole reason we have the Second Amendment is that sometimes the King's Men need killing, and the people need to have the ability to do so.

Certainly not justified in this case.

962 posted on 01/30/2007 10:16:33 AM PST by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

You know. It would really help if you had read the bill. TATA!

(b) Subsection (a) of this Code section shall not apply:
(1) To an employer providing applicable employees with a secure parking area which restricts general public access through the use of a gate, security station, or other similar means of limiting public access into the parking area;


963 posted on 01/30/2007 10:18:53 AM PST by UpAllNight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 955 | View Replies]

To: higgmeister

>>I disdain commercials also, but I fail to see how vigilantism/anarchy is to blame.

Please finish you point though. What happened after the commercial?<<

The point was that this was basically the end of it. There were no repercussions on the family that wiped out ALL the males from the other family.

And life went on...


964 posted on 01/30/2007 10:36:31 AM PST by RobRoy (Islam is a greater threat to the world today than Nazism was in 1938.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 956 | View Replies]

To: UpAllNight
I am only trying to understand why you won't answer my question.

I've answered it as in the post below , but you claim you can't 'understand'.

I have NO interest in your 'debate' with luis so don't go there. I am just asking luis so that I can understand why you won't answer the question.

I'll re-post this one more time:

You wrote:
I have the right to carry a gun in my vehicle. I do not have the right to tresspass another's premises with my gun in my vehicle.

Clever non-answer. -- You are not trespassing - you are an employee with a right to carry a gun in your vehicle, -- as you admit.

A condition of employment is that I obey the rules of my boss.  He has the right to not allow me on the property if I don't obey his rules.

You admit: "-- I have the right to carry a gun in my vehicle. --"
Does your boss have the right to stop you from carrying a gun in your vehicle"?

You said you agreed with the GA bill.

Yes, I did. The GA bill agrees that an employee has a right to carry arms in his vehicle.

Given that, one can infer that you agree with my employer's right to prohibit uncontrolled guns on his property.

Daffy inference, as the GA bill agrees that an employee has a right to carry arms in his vehicle.

Not a daffy inference.  I read the bill, did you? 

Yes, and it intends to codify the right of GA employees to secure arms in their vehicles while at work.

My employer is not in GA but if we had that state law, he would be allowed to prohibit uncontrolled guns on his property. 

Clever. now you claim the issue is about "uncontrolled guns" on his property; -- it's about guns secured in employees vehicles while parked.  

His policy is in strict agreement with the proposed GA law

No, as the GA bill agrees that an employee has a right to carry arms in his vehicle.

and in strict agreement with my position as stated to you prior to my reading the bill.

It's becoming quite evident your position parallels that of Luis Gonzalez. approves of parking lot prohibitions.
-- Thanks for your candor.

UpAllNight 'dissembles':

Clever. But we weren't talking about the right to carry arms in a vehicle.

Daffy claim; -- that's what the GA bill is about.

We were talking about the right of an employer to restrict weapons from his private property, a right that is recognized in the GA bill.

Nope, the bills object is to stop an employer from banning weapons from his employees private property, their vehicles.

It's becoming quite evident your position approves of such parking lot prohibitions. -- And that when you wrote:
"I have the right to carry a gun in my vehicle"; -- you were being 'clever', not truthful.

965 posted on 01/30/2007 10:41:56 AM PST by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia <)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 961 | View Replies]

To: UpAllNight; Everybody
I am only trying to understand why you won't answer my question.

I've answered it as in the post below , but you claim you can't 'understand'.

I have NO interest in your 'debate' with luis so don't go there. I am just asking luis so that I can understand why you won't answer the question.

I'll re-post this one more time:

You wrote:
I have the right to carry a gun in my vehicle. I do not have the right to tresspass another's premises with my gun in my vehicle.

Clever non-answer. -- You are not trespassing - you are an employee with a right to carry a gun in your vehicle, -- as you admit.

A condition of employment is that I obey the rules of my boss.  He has the right to not allow me on the property if I don't obey his rules.

You admit: "-- I have the right to carry a gun in my vehicle. --"
Does your boss have the right to stop you from carrying a gun in your vehicle"?

You said you agreed with the GA bill.

Yes, I did. The GA bill agrees that an employee has a right to carry arms in his vehicle.

Given that, one can infer that you agree with my employer's right to prohibit uncontrolled guns on his property.

Daffy inference, as the GA bill agrees that an employee has a right to carry arms in his vehicle.

Not a daffy inference.  I read the bill, did you? 

Yes, and it intends to codify the right of GA employees to secure arms in their vehicles while at work.

My employer is not in GA but if we had that state law, he would be allowed to prohibit uncontrolled guns on his property. 

Clever. now you claim the issue is about "uncontrolled guns" on his property; -- it's about guns secured in employees vehicles while parked.  

His policy is in strict agreement with the proposed GA law

No, as the GA bill agrees that an employee has a right to carry arms in his vehicle.

and in strict agreement with my position as stated to you prior to my reading the bill.

It's becoming quite evident your position parallels that of Luis Gonzalez. approves of parking lot prohibitions.
-- Thanks for your candor'.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UpAllNight 'dissembles' yet again:

Clever. But we weren't talking about the right to carry arms in a vehicle.

Daffy claim; -- that's what the GA bill is about.

We were talking about the right of an employer to restrict weapons from his private property, a right that is recognized in the GA bill.

Nope, the bills object is to stop an employer from banning weapons from his employees private property, their vehicles.

It's becoming quite evident your position approves of such parking lot prohibitions. -- And that when you wrote:
"I have the right to carry a gun in my vehicle"; -- you were being 'clever', not truthful.

I think it fair to say that throughout this threads discussions, you've been playing wordgames with the truth, -- with everyone here.

966 posted on 01/30/2007 10:49:19 AM PST by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia <)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 961 | View Replies]

To: UpAllNight
UpAllNight 'dissembles' yet again:

Clever. But we weren't talking about the right to carry arms in a vehicle.

Daffy claim; -- that's what the GA bill is about.

We were talking about the right of an employer to restrict weapons from his private property, a right that is recognized in the GA bill.

Nope, the bills object is to stop an employer from banning weapons from his employees private property, their vehicles.

It's becoming quite evident your position approves of such parking lot prohibitions. -- And that when you wrote:
"I have the right to carry a gun in my vehicle"; -- you were being 'clever', not truthful.

I think it fair to say that throughout this threads discussions, you've been playing wordgames with the truth, -- with everyone here.

You know. It would really help if you had read the bill. TATA!

(b) Subsection (a) of this Code section shall not apply:
(1) To an employer providing applicable employees with a secure parking area which restricts general public access through the use of a gate, security station, or other similar means of limiting public access into the parking area;

So? It's a [proposed] bill. Hopefully, - weasel word provisions like the above would be culled.

Answer this, -- why do you ~want~ to give employers the power to ban guns?

967 posted on 01/30/2007 11:03:06 AM PST by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia <)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 963 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
The point was that this was basically the end of it. There were no repercussions on the family that wiped out ALL the males from the other family.

And life went on...

I agree then, vigilantism is necessary in that situation. If one family can murder all the men in another family with impunity, someone else should take the law into their own hands and punish them when the law doesn't.

I wasn't aware that anyone but Hick's father actually was killed in "Huckleberry Finn" though.

968 posted on 01/30/2007 3:27:27 PM PST by higgmeister (In the Shadow of The Big Chicken [Its beak has stopped working])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 964 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
From the Wikipedia plot summary: "The vendetta finally comes to a head when Buck's sister, Sophia Grangerford, elopes with Harney Shepherdson. In the resulting conflict, all of the remaining Grangerford men are killed, and Huck narrowly escapes, reuniting with Jim and the raft and fleeing further south on the Mississippi River."

Very interesting. I don't remember ever reading this at all.

969 posted on 01/30/2007 3:42:53 PM PST by higgmeister (In the Shadow of The Big Chicken [Its beak has stopped working])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 968 | View Replies]

To: tpaine; UpAllNight
"Nope, the bills object is to stop an employer from banning weapons from his employees private property, their vehicles."

"Our main objective is to put employees on the same level playing field as any other individual who would park in a public parking lot," Rogers said.

Last year, a similar measure, the Georgia Self Defense Act, failed to gain much traction. The bill passed a House committee, but failed to reach the floor for a vote. The senator who sponsored a companion version withdrew the measure.

The Georgia Self Defense Act failed to pass last year partially because of pressure from business organizations that opposed it, saying the bill could increase the chance of workplace violence. Some employers also opposed language that would have allowed employees to leave firearms in vehicles left in private parking lots.

Rogers and Graves said their new proposal does not include employee parking that is restricted from the general public. Both Senate Bill 43 and House Bill 143 also exclude vehicles owned by an employer and used by a worker for business purposes. In addition, the bill excludes employees who are already restricted from carrying firearms on their employer's premises because of disciplinary action, and does not apply to penal and correctional institutions.

"We want to ensure that law-abiding citizens have the opportunity to protect themselves, whether they're leaving work or out shopping," Graves said. Joe Fleming, the senior vice president of government affairs for the Georgia Chamber of Commerce, said Tuesday that the group's members plan to review the new bill this week before taking a stand on it. He said that the language of the new proposal differs from last year's bill.

Several lawmakers expressed reservations about the new proposal.

Source

Well t, you're living in fantasy land again.

I'm guessing that the NRA is selling this one hard.

The Georgia bill still protects the rights of a private property owner, whose parking lot is used for employee parking only, and not open to the general public, to ban guns from their parking lot.

One more gun regulation about to be set into law with the help of the NRA.

Read what the bill's sponsors said:

"Rogers and Graves said their new proposal does not include employee parking that is restricted from the general public."

If I own a mall, a factory, a restaurant...whetever, all I have to do is fence in an area, call it "Employee Parking", tell employees that's where they must park, and ban guns from the employee parking lot.

You and the NRA have just managed to make the employees the ONLY people without a gun in their parked car.

Nice going ace.

970 posted on 01/30/2007 7:47:24 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 967 | View Replies]

To: tpaine; UpAllNight
SECTION 1.Part 3 of Article 4 of Chapter 11 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to carrying and possession of firearms, is amended by adding a new Code section to read as follows:"16-11-135.(a) Except as provided in this Code section, no private or public employer shall establish, maintain, or enforce any policy or rule that has the effect of prohibiting an employee from transporting or storing a firearm in a locked motor vehicle in any parking lot, parking garage, or other employee parking area.(b) Subsection (a) of this Code section shall not apply:(1) To an employer providing applicable employees with a secure parking area which restricts general public access through the use of a gate, security station, or other similar means of limiting public access into the parking area;

I see fenced employee parking in Georgia's future.

Send them another check t.

971 posted on 01/30/2007 7:55:38 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 970 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

I posted the section yesterday. Actually, I think that the law will generally work.


972 posted on 01/30/2007 8:02:53 PM PST by UpAllNight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 971 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

You're supporting a bill that will give employers the LEGAL means to forcibly disarm employees!!

That's the best laugh yet!!!


973 posted on 01/30/2007 8:05:41 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 967 | View Replies]

To: UpAllNight

I saw that.

I think that the law will pass as it stands; the Georgia legislature can't totally piss off their primary source of campaign funds, they can't piss off Georgia businesses.


974 posted on 01/30/2007 8:09:32 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 972 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Thanks Lurker.

See, there are things we agree on.


975 posted on 01/30/2007 8:16:25 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 772 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!

You so funny!

"I think it fair to say that throughout this threads discussions, you've been playing wordgames with the truth." -- tpaine

"Nope, the bills object is to stop an employer from banning weapons from his employees private property, their vehicles." -- tpaine
(b) Subsection (a) of this Code section shall not apply: (1) To an employer providing applicable employees with a secure parking area which restricts general public access. -- The Bill

"I think it fair to say that throughout this threads discussions, you've been playing wordgames with the truth." -- tpaine

"As Luis commented, there ~is~ an 'age old tradition' [reinforced by our 4th] that people have a right to be "secure in their person, houses, --"; thus they can ban arms from their home property." -- tpaine

"Our US Constitution makes it clear that the peoples owning & carrying of arms is not to be infringed. - By anyone" -- tpaine

"I think it fair to say that throughout this threads discussions, you've been playing wordgames with the truth." -- tpaine

"I fight against majority rule." -- tpaine

"How many millions of our peers support the NRA & similar gun orgs luis?" -- tpaine

"I think it fair to say that throughout this threads discussions, you've been playing wordgames with the truth." -- tpaine

"I fight against majority rule." -- tpaine

"How many millions of our peers support the NRA & similar gun orgs luis?" -- tpaine

"I think it fair to say that throughout this threads discussions, you've been playing wordgames with the truth." -- tpaine

"Authoritarian socialism is a political disease just as bad as liberal socialism, -- all socialists, left & right, -- want to enforce majority rule by government force." -- tpaine

"Actually, millions of us, -- and the NRA, - are demanding that governments do their duty and stop business parking lot owner's from violating an individuals right to carry arms in vehicles." -- tpaine

"I think it fair to say that throughout this threads discussions, you've been playing wordgames with the truth." -- tpaine

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

You so funny!

976 posted on 01/30/2007 8:32:13 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 967 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
"The emploer's parking desion must be restricted to considerstionof the vehicle only."

Post the statute limiting the employer like you claim.

977 posted on 01/30/2007 8:34:43 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 472 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! You so funny!

Luis, compared to you, I not so funny.

978 posted on 01/30/2007 9:34:53 PM PST by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia <)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 976 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Re: "The emploer's parking desion must be restricted to considerstionof the vehicle only."

"Post the statute limiting the employer like you claim.

Post the statute that gives an employer sovereignty over the interior contents of their employee's vehicle.

979 posted on 01/30/2007 11:44:21 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 977 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez; spunkets
Luis:
"Post the statute limiting the employer like you claim."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


spunkets wrote:
Post the statute that gives an employer sovereignty over the interior contents of their employee's vehicle.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


No statutes/rule of law needed in Luis' world:

Watson insisted that ~his~ rules over his property trumped our rule of law.

Luis Gonzalez insists that ~his~ rules over his property trumps our rule of law about carrying arms in vehicles.
980 posted on 01/31/2007 4:22:09 AM PST by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia <)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 979 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 941-960961-980981-1,000 ... 1,061-1,079 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson