Opinion pieces do not carry the weight of fact. If you think you cannot voluntarily contract away rights, -- [snip the obvious]
Using the coerce-ment of a job to infringe on your employees right to carry also contravenes our constitutional principles.
You don't agree with the way our rule of constitutional law works? -- Do business elsewhere.
You haven't a clue how our rule of constitutional law works if you believe any one right has automatic precedence over any other.
Admit it; you believe your property right has automatic precedence over an employees right to carry in their vehicle.
Doing business includes the hiring of employees. Don't agree with the way private property and freedom of association works in the United States? Bear your guns elsewhere. I understand the Horn of Africa is a free-carry zone. Maybe someone there will be willing to hire you at gun point.
You can do your business elsewhere. I understand England loves gungrabbers.
You wrote that you want employers to post on their parking lots -- "Anyone who brings unauthorized weapons on this property will be considered an armed intruder --"? That's your solution? -- Thanks.
No, my solution is for the two parties to come to a private, non-governmental agreement.
We came to that compromise/agreement years ago; -- my vehicle is my property, parked on your lot while I work, -- and nothing in that vehicle concerns you.
-- Now you want to infringe upon that agreement for unknown reasons. [political reasons?]
Your solution is to use force to impose your passage with arms.
A locked vehicle on your parking lot imposes no 'force' upon you, no matter if it contains arms. - Admit it.
But if you grant yourself the indisputable power to go where you will armed, then don't whine when others use their right to bear arms to defend themselves from your undesired presence on their property.
Hype. -- You desire the presence of your employees on your property. -- Admit it. -- You simply 'hate' them having guns locked in their vehicles.
One cannot justify using force to take away another's rights simply in order to more easily exercise their own.
-- The exercise of your parking lot property rights do not give license to violate another's right to carry in their vehicle. As Will Rogers famously said [paraphrased], -- 'Your right to ban guns ends at my tires'
Sorry, dude, but you have no right to a job, and no right to take away property rights from another, just so you can hold one.
We came to that compromise/agreement years ago; -- my vehicle is my property, parked on your lot while I work, -- and nothing in that vehicle concerns you.
What "we"? And in what way is enclosing your gun in a vehicle any different than enclosing your gun in a box in your cube, a locker, or a hip holster? If an owner can ban you from carrying on your person or storing it in your cube, how can he not stop you from leaving it in the car?
A locked vehicle on your parking lot imposes no 'force' upon you, no matter if it contains arms. - Admit it.
If it is there against my desire solely because the Government has imposed the accommodation, it is forced. Just as the useless handicapped parking spot in front of our building is forced on us, even though we could use the space better, and have never had a handicapped person use it in the 15 years I know of.
Admit it; you believe your property right has automatic precedence over an employees right to carry in their vehicle.
Vehicles have no right to carry; only individuals do. If you aren't in your car, but your weapon is, it is not being carried. It is being stored. You have no right to store your possessions wherever you want on another's property, even within another allowed possession. Simply enclosing it within another larger container does not negate its presence. If there was a company policy against alcohol on the premises, you could not disregard the policy simply because you stored your booze in your backpack or car trunk for those emergency uses.
Admit it. -- You simply 'hate' them having guns locked in their vehicles.
You seriously need to learn to separate between advocating an action and advocating someone else's right to do that action. I don't advocate racial intolerance, but I advocate your right to be racist. I don't advocate protests against America, but support your right to do so. I think Scientology is silly, but won't lift a finger to stop you from giving them money and time. I don't mind if responsible adults carry weapons, but won't force others to accept it on their property.
But, on another level you are correct. I do think storing your guns in a vehicle is a darn good way to get them stolen, and so a somewhat irresponsible action, even if occasionally unavoidable. It is too easy to gain access to the interior of even a locked car. I would prefer to see them safely carried, placed where they can be monitored, or stored in a secure place when they cannot be. Were I making the rules at a business regarding weapons, I would require anyone desiring them to carry at all times and not leave the weapons unattended in a drawer or car, for example.