[tpaine]

Thus we see:
--- 'Even if everyone in the community desires -- [that employees be disarmed while going to or from work] -- they have no right individually or collectively to force them to do it. --'

"-- They cannot delegate a power they themselves do not have. --"

--- 'Even if everyone in the community desires -- [that land owners allow armed people on their property] -- they have no right individually or collectively to force them to do it. --'

No one in our constitutional community wants to force land owners to allow 'armed people' on their property.
-- We want our right to carry arms in our vehicles to be respected by landowning employers/shopkeepers who we do business & work with.

And a court decision upholding that right is not a "decree".

[LexBaird]

And a court decision upholding that right is not a "decree".

Don't play semantics. Court decisions are court declarations are decrees of the Court are the dictates of the Government are the Government intruding into what should be a private contract between two people.

Any way you slice it, one side or the other in any court decision has to abide by a Governmentally imposed ruling against what they see as their own interests. The other side has the coercive power of that decision backing their interests.

[LexBaird]

No one in our constitutional community wants to force land owners to allow 'armed people' on their property.

You do.

-- We want our right to carry arms in our vehicles to be respected by landowning employers/shopkeepers who we do business & work with.

Even against the will of that business or employer's wishes of association, under penalty of governmental sanctions. Sounds like force to me.