[RugerGirl]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/...kers-from/

The Second Amendment spat began in 2013, when Gov. Bill Haslam signed into law the controversial “Guns in Parking Lots" bill. But the original law, which stated citizens with permits to carry guns can keep them in their cars on company property even if the employer bars them, only protected citizens against prosecution, not firing. The Tennessee Firearms Association dubbed the law the “Lose Your Job if You Commute Act.”

Now, pro-gun politicians say they have fixed the law.

“No employer shall discharge or take any adverse employment action against an employee solely for transporting or storing a firearm or firearms ammunition in an employer parking area,” reads an amended version of the bill, signed into law earlier this month by Haslam, a Republican.

An estimated 500,000 residents of Tennessee have permits to carry guns, and in a state where hunting is popular, having guns secured inside a car is not uncommon. While employers usually would not know if cars in their parking lots contained firearms, there are ways it could be brought to their attention, according to University of Tennessee Law Professor Dwight Aarons.

“Maybe there’s a broken window in the car, or a drug sweep or somebody being careless where someone is talking too much, saying they have a gun in their car -- there are a thousand other different ways,” Aarons told FoxNews.com.

The amended bill had overwhelming support in Nashville’s GOP-dominated Statehouse, but was opposed by a coalition of groups that included Democrats, gun control advocates and the state Chamber of Commerce.

“It’s outrageous,” said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Mike Stewart, who told FoxNews.com businesses are now forced to allow people with weapons on their private property. “What’s next? Are we going to have a law that forces a family to let an armed person into their living room? Where does it stop?”

I found this article amusing because now that the lawmaker DISAGREES with the law, he is appalled at the lack of freedom the business now has on their own property. WOW REALLY???? hahahaha. So Democrats can force Christian businesses to serve people they don't want to serve, but they don't want to force anti-gun businesses to allow guns in their parking lots. Because the latter is a terrible loss of freedom for the busineses...but the former isn't, I guess.

Anyway.....I actually think this law is dumb. I think it should be "don't ask, don't tell" (really...I don't think it's that hard to keep your gun a secret in your car unless the business does regular car searches, and I wouldn't want to work at a place that did that) and I think if you work for an anti-gun business then you should be aware of that, and decide whether or not you want to continue working for them based on that belief.

I'm not for any law that forces businesses to accept certain things on their own private property. I think the employee should choose where they want to work and make sure the guidelines of that workplace line up with what they are comfortable with. Same thing with customers....you should frequent businesses where you are comfortable working with the owners and employees...you should not be giving your money to a business with whom you greatly disagree. No need for all these bazillion laws telling businesses what they can and cannot do. Can't we all just handle these things like adults?

Anyway I just think it's sooooo funny how worried the Democrats are about "freedom" when it's something THEY care about! "Where does it stop", INDEED......

[DeadEye]

Sorry, but I have to disagree. Occasionally, as in this case, there comes a conflict of rights, when the rights of property ownership interferes with rights of personal freedom. In that case, one right must "trump" the other. My personal belief is that ones right to defend themselves far outweighs a property owner's or business owner's right to deny you that freedom. In fact, property rights go with MANY restrictions people don't always realize. Mineral and water rights, for example, are often overlooked by potential buyers, unless you are a cattle rancher or miner. Also, ones gun ownership does not place the property owner in peril, all it does is place the gun owner in the position of being either a criminal or unemployed. THAT alone is why I am against it. Yes, one has the right of refusing to work there, but you also have a greater right of personal protection "that shall not be infringed". I agree the employer has the right to keep guns out of their business, but what's in my car, is my business, so long as it is legal. In my personal case our business was sold. Previous owners had no policy regarding such, so it was no issue. My new employer, however, has specific policy regarding no guns in your car unless your state has a law like TN's, and others. Within the last year, this once sleepy rural area, has experienced 2 homicides and 1 armed robbery.

[Camper]

Private property rights trump all, IMHO.

If someone owns a business and wants to make it anti-Jew, anti-christian, anti-black, anti-heterosexual, or anti-gun (or anti-anything you can think of) then that is totally and completely within their right and they should be allowed to do so without interference from the government. The market will dictate their success or failure.

ONLY the government needs to be fair and equal to everyone for every reason and 100% inclusive in all their dealings.

[pinhead1979]

Private property rights trump all, IMHO.

If someone owns a business and wants to make it anti-Jew, anti-christian, anti-black, anti-heterosexual, or anti-gun (or anti-anything you can think of) then that is totally and completely within their right and they should be allowed to do so without interference from the government. The market will dictate their success or failure.

ONLY the government needs to be fair and equal to everyone for every reason and 100% inclusive in all their dealings.

+10000000000

[streaker69]

Private property rights trump all, IMHO.

If someone owns a business and wants to make it anti-Jew, anti-christian, anti-black, anti-heterosexual, or anti-gun (or anti-anything you can think of) then that is totally and completely within their right and they should be allowed to do so without interference from the government. The market will dictate their success or failure.

ONLY the government needs to be fair and equal to everyone for every reason and 100% inclusive in all their dealings.

While I agree with you, that isn't the country we currently have, and I doubt that it's going to change that way anytime soon. I would like to see gun ownership and carry recognized the same way as any other civil right and no business of public accommodation should be able to discriminate against you.

I also don't feel that being employed by a company gives them the blanket right to search private vehicles even though they're parked on their property. It's a case of private property rights colliding, and the only equitable solution I feel is that If you're going to be employed there, the company should respect your own privacy, the same way they expect you to respect their privacy when it comes to digging through company documentation that you're not entitled to see.

[Camper]

While I agree with you, that isn't the country we currently have, and I doubt that it's going to change that way anytime soon. I would like to see gun ownership and carry recognized the same way as any other civil right and no business of public accommodation should be able to discriminate against you.

I agree, but that's also why we have the mess we have now. Everyone has rights, but some rights are more important than others and which ones are changes with the wind. That is why private property rights should trump all, because they are not subject to political whims which change directions based upon what fringe group politicians and the media think they need to win over to get elected.

I also don't feel that being employed by a company gives them the blanket right to search private vehicles even though they're parked on their property. It's a case of private property rights colliding, and the only equitable solution I feel is that If you're going to be employed there, the company should respect your own privacy, the same way they expect you to respect their privacy when it comes to digging through company documentation that you're not entitled to see.

There is nothing forcing a person to work anywhere. If you object to what your boss/company is doing within the confines of the law, you are free to leave. If a condition of employment is subjecting yourself to occasional vehicle searches and you object, then you have no business working at that company.

[pinhead1979]

Down to the issue of private property itself, the gun is your property, the vehicle is your property. If you park a vehicle on someone's property it doesn't make the contents accessible to them unless you expressly worked out an agreement upon entering their property. So basically, if you drive your car onto someone's property and park it, they can't search it unless you give them permission. If you don't give them permission, they can invoke their property rights and ask you to remove yourself and your vehicle from their property. Pretty simple actually.

While I don't like the fact that guns aren't allowed in some places, if someone knew I had one and asked me to leave, I'd oblige without immediate protest. I'd sure as hell expose their leanings to the public afterward, but there's also nothing wrong with that either.

[streaker69]

I also don't feel that being employed by a company gives them the blanket right to search private vehicles even though they're parked on their property. It's a case of private property rights colliding, and the only equitable solution I feel is that If you're going to be employed there, the company should respect your own privacy, the same way they expect you to respect their privacy when it comes to digging through company documentation that you're not entitled to see.

There is nothing forcing a person to work anywhere. If you object to what your boss/company is doing within the confines of the law, you are free to leave. If a condition of employment is subjecting yourself to occasional vehicle searches and you object, then you have no business working at that company.

...and when every company out there bans firearms in vehicles I guess you just don't have a job. Please provide a list of companies that allow firearms in vehicles on company property that aren't gun shops.

When you're interviewing for a job, it isn't common to ask "do you allow guns in cars on company property" and I doubt you'd have a chance to read through the company handbook during the interview, so you won't even know the policy until you're hired.

[Camper]

Down to the issue of private property itself, the gun is your property, the vehicle is your property. If you park a vehicle on someone's property it doesn't make the contents accessible to them unless you expressly worked out an agreement upon entering their property. So basically, if you drive your car onto someone's property and park it, they can't search it unless you give them permission. If you don't give them permission, they can invoke their property rights and ask you to remove yourself and your vehicle from their property. Pretty simple actually.

That's the way it should work.

...and when every company out there bans firearms in vehicles I guess you just don't have a job. Please provide a list of companies that allow firearms in vehicles on company property that aren't gun shops.

That is the risk you take. The alternative is government mandating the rules, and those rules could be a blanket "no guns" regardless of the interest of the business owner.

But in this country, you have the freedom and ability to start your own business and make your own rules too. In theory.

As for companies that allow guns on company property, that's impossible to answer. But if there is no policy prohibiting, that's almost the same as allowing.

When you're interviewing for a job, it isn't common to ask "do you allow guns in cars on company property" and I doubt you'd have a chance to read through the company handbook during the interview, so you won't even know the policy until you're hired.

Any company that searches vehicles has it posted prior to you entering the parking lot. And company policies are generally posted on their website, or easily found. Again, if there is nothing strictly prohibiting it then it is a non issue.

[streaker69]

Any company that searches vehicles has it posted prior to you entering the parking lot. And company policies are generally posted on their website, or easily found. Again, if there is nothing strictly prohibiting it then it is a non issue.

That just isn't true at all. I've worked for many companies that have a vehicle search policy and there is nothing posted. I haven't seen a single sign posted at any company parking lot that says they search cars.