Posted on 02/19/2009 10:11:28 AM PST by cashion
ATTORNEY GENERAL USED AN NRA LAWYER TO ARGUE THE STATES POSITION
DENVER - An appeals court said Wednesday that Oklahomas law allowing employees to have guns at work in their locked vehicles is valid.
The Denver-based courts decision overturns a ruling by U.S. District Judge Terence Kern in Tulsa, who barred enforcement of the law.
Gov. Brad Henry and Attorney General Drew Edmondson appealed Kerns 2007 ruling.
"It was our opinion that the law is constitutional and the court agreed with us today, Edmondson spokesman Charlie Price said. "We are thankful for the assistance of the National Rifle Association and its counsel they provided great help.
Starting with a 2004 lawsuit, several companies challenged the law, including Weyerhauser Corp.; Whirlpool Corp., which later dropped out; and more recently, ConocoPhillips.
"The safety of our employees is a top priority of ConocoPhillips and we are disappointed with todays decision, said company spokesman Rich Johnson, adding that the company has not determined whether to appeal.
THE RULING
The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decided 3-0 that Kern erred in concluding the law is pre-empted by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act.
Kern said gun-related workplace violence was a "recognized hazard under the act and the state law interfered with employers ability to comply with the act.
"We disagree, the appellate judges in Denver wrote. "OSHA is aware of the controversy surrounding firearms in the workplace and has consciously decided not to adopt a standard (banning firearms from the workplace).
The appellate judges said Kerns ruling "interferes with Oklahomas police powers and essentially promulgates a court-made safety standard. ... Such action is beyond the province of federal courts.
Edmondson, in an unusual step, had an attorney for the rifle association instead one of his own lawyers argue the case at the appeals court. The court had allowed the NRA to submit arguments as a "friend of the court.
The court allowed the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and several safety and business groups to submit arguments as friends of the court in support of Kerns ruling.
THE LAW
The law, which allows nonfelons to lock legal guns in their vehicles while parked at work, was passed in two stages in 2004 and 2005.
The law was proposed by legislators after Weyerhauser reportedly fired eight workers who violated policy by having guns in their vehicles at a mill in southeastern Oklahoma.
Disgruntled workers who shoot people in the workplace are going to do so no matter what laws are on the books. Why should it matter to my employer what is locked in my car?
Nobody forced you as a business owner to provide a parking lot that would hold your employee's personal vehicles. If you don't like what is in their personal vehicles, don't provide a parking lot.
The speech issue is different, because restricting speech ON employer property does not have the side effect of restricting speech OFF employer property. Employees who wish to express themselves with slogans on their cars can do so with removable stickers or magnetic signs, which they can remove and conceal in their cars just before entering the employer’s property, and put back on right after they leave.
That's not the point. I own the business, I pay your salary, I have the right to make work rules no matter how ridiculous they may seem.
Next chapter,,,,, will Phillips-Conoco and others appeal this decision?
This ruling does away with that type of silly double standard.
Your property line ends at my tires.
Bull$h!t.
Your car is your property. If you are required to park on company property, you do not give up the rights that your car and whats in it, is your private property.
Unless your an Obama-ite.
One can certainly argue the wisdom of any particular constraint on the behavior of corporations. But I don't think it can be argued that corporations have a right to exist or a right to anything whatever. Corporations are a completely man-made concept and were invented for the public good of encouraging business activity.
I see no reason whatever to limit the public good to only those issues that appeal to liberals, such as the double taxation of corporate earnings.
Do you feel that you would be responsible for you employees safety, to and from work and also at work.
The "law of the jungle" did prevail before the state came into existence. Humans are social creatures who defended territory as well as expanded what they held.
Refer to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The state is supposed to protect our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness according to the Declaration of Independence, although that is recognized only in a general sense, i.e. it can't protect everybody all of the time. The Second Amendment of the Constitution recognizes your right to protect yourself and your property. The British Bill of Rights, from which the the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights was derived, evolved from common law, an invention of the state so disputes between various parties might not become violent.
.
If you would like to be added to this conservative Digg ping list,
please FReepmail me!
This is a big step up from ripping testicles. Good to see!
HookUm
Indeed sir. And If I worked for you, I would respect your rules. If I was disarmed and murdered on the way home from work.....no skin off your back. You have no liability either way.
I guess it never occurred to you that those "ridiculous rules" might have consequences....
If the 1st Amendment were treated the same as the 2nd Amendment, there would be a 3 day waiting period for journalists to print editorials and the stuff they call “news”; journalists would be subject to background checks before they can write; and the size of newspapers would be limited to 15 pages (good bye to the Sunday Times).
The founders obviously thought the right to keep and bear arms is important. After all, it IS the Second Amendment, not the 10th, etc. Everyone who is eligible should buy a gun and learn how to use it. Those who already own a gun -— buy a couple more and extra ammunition. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, per the 2nd amendment, but various state and local laws already violate the 2nd amendment and should be reversed.
The DemoSocialist oppose the 2nd Amendment. So would Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Kim, Lenin, Castro ..... to name a few other tyrants and dictators.
So my vehicle is now your property because I am on it?
“My property, my business, my rules”.......”I do prohibit smoking”
Does this mean your workers cannot have a pack of cigarettes in their car????
My coworkers and I have to drive through a rough area to get to work, but the company says no to cold steel and lead..
Probably the only serious disagreement I have with the management.
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.