Jared Jewelry store "NO GUNS" sign

This is a discussion on Jared Jewelry store "NO GUNS" sign within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I think many are missing a bigger point. I believe a great deal of these companies are more worried about getting sued than pushing an ...

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 69 of 69
Like Tree7Likes

Thread: Jared Jewelry store "NO GUNS" sign

  1. #61
    New Member Array fitz777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    10
    I think many are missing a bigger point. I believe a great deal of these companies are more worried about getting sued than pushing an anti-gun agenda. If something were to happen in their store by a cc holder and no sign was on the door, how fast do you think that store is going to get sued for not banning people with guns in their store ? Not to say that some companies are not anti-gun, I just think that corporate lawyers reccomend this to the places they represent.

    Face it, our society has a legal system that has become out of control when people can sue for not warning people that the coffee is hot.

    Also if someone can confirm this, I heard in Oklahoma, if a company has a No Firearms sign on their door this makes the company legally responsible for the customers safety. Is this true ? Sounds odd to me.
    Mark

    Para Warthog .45
    Glock Mod. 27 .40

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #62
    Member Array hakuthedog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    27
    I noticed this sign at a Jared as well. In Texas, ours is legally binding and would be considered a misdemenor and what not. It has the 30.06 and is actually pretty huge.

    Just wanted to chime in :)

  4. #63
    Ex Member Array MadMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by fitz777 View Post
    I think many are missing a bigger point. I believe a great deal of these companies are more worried about getting sued than pushing an anti-gun agenda.
    Bingo

    Almost half the guys I work with have a CHP and carry. Our company is less anti-gun than they are anti-lawsuit.

    They really don't care if I get shot to death at work - they have an insurance company that will provide a nice fat check for my wife.

    However, if my wife tries to sue my employer, they'll say, "You can't sue us; we have a policy that bans guns from our facilities. The perp violated our policy. Sue the perp."

    It's all about the lawsuit. Welcome to America 2.0.

  5. #64
    Member Array tennvol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    NoVA
    Posts
    109
    they had them posted at the store here in NoVA. I turned around to go back to the car to leave and my wife said lets go check them out anyways. We went in, overpriced for the crummy quality you get. Price is pretty close to retail.

  6. #65
    New Member Array scohen47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1

    No Weapons allowed violates Florida law as far as I can tell...

    I found the following which I believe shows the company being unlawful in making such request in the state of Florida. Imagine if they required employees to sign a document prohibiting, said employee from carrying a firearm. Based on the info below, that would be a violation of their rights. Correct?
    Title XLVI
    CRIMES
    Chapter 790
    WEAPONS AND FIREARMS
    View Entire Chapter
    790.251 Protection of the right to keep and bear arms in motor vehicles for self-defense and other lawful purposes; prohibited acts; duty of public and private employers; immunity from liability; enforcement.—
    (1) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be cited as the “Preservation and Protection of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Motor Vehicles Act of 2008.”
    (2) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section, the term:
    (a) “Parking lot” means any property that is used for parking motor vehicles and is available to customers, employees, or invitees for temporary or long-term parking or storage of motor vehicles.
    (b) “Motor vehicle” means any automobile, truck, minivan, sports utility vehicle, motor home, recreational vehicle, motorcycle, motor scooter, or any other vehicle operated on the roads of this state and required to be registered under state law.
    (c) “Employee” means any person who possesses a valid license issued pursuant to s. 790.06 and:
    1. Works for salary, wages, or other remuneration;
    2. Is an independent contractor; or
    3. Is a volunteer, intern, or other similar individual for an employer.
    (d) “Employer” means any business that is a sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, professional association, cooperative, joint venture, trust, firm, institution, or association, or public sector entity, that has employees.
    (e) “Invitee” means any business invitee, including a customer or visitor, who is lawfully on the premises of a public or private employer.
    As used in this section, the term “firearm” includes ammunition and accoutrements attendant to the lawful possession and use of a firearm.
    (3) LEGISLATIVE INTENT; FINDINGS.—This act is intended to codify the long-standing legislative policy of the state that individual citizens have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms, that they have a constitutional right to possess and keep legally owned firearms within their motor vehicles for self-defense and other lawful purposes, and that these rights are not abrogated by virtue of a citizen becoming a customer, employee, or invitee of a business entity. It is the finding of the Legislature that a citizen’s lawful possession, transportation, and secure keeping of firearms and ammunition within his or her motor vehicle is essential to the exercise of the fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms and the constitutional right of self-defense. The Legislature finds that protecting and preserving these rights is essential to the exercise of freedom and individual responsibility. The Legislature further finds that no citizen can or should be required to waive or abrogate his or her right to possess and securely keep firearms and ammunition locked within his or her motor vehicle by virtue of becoming a customer, employee, or invitee of any employer or business establishment within the state, unless specifically required by state or federal law.
    (4) PROHIBITED ACTS.—No public or private employer may violate the constitutional rights of any customer, employee, or invitee as provided in paragraphs (a)-(e):
    (a) No public or private employer may prohibit any customer, employee, or invitee from possessing any legally owned firearm when such firearm is lawfully possessed and locked inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot and when the customer, employee, or invitee is lawfully in such area.
    (b) No public or private employer may violate the privacy rights of a customer, employee, or invitee by verbal or written inquiry regarding the presence of a firearm inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot or by an actual search of a private motor vehicle in a parking lot to ascertain the presence of a firearm within the vehicle. Further, no public or private employer may take any action against a customer, employee, or invitee based upon verbal or written statements of any party concerning possession of a firearm stored inside a private motor vehicle in a parking lot for lawful purposes. A search of a private motor vehicle in the parking lot of a public or private employer to ascertain the presence of a firearm within the vehicle may only be conducted by on-duty law enforcement personnel, based upon due process and must comply with constitutional protections.
    (c) No public or private employer shall condition employment upon either:
    1. The fact that an employee or prospective employee holds or does not hold a license issued pursuant to s. 790.06; or
    2. Any agreement by an employee or a prospective employee that prohibits an employee from keeping a legal firearm locked inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot when such firearm is kept for lawful purposes.
    (d) No public or private employer shall prohibit or attempt to prevent any customer, employee, or invitee from entering the parking lot of the employer’s place of business because the customer’s, employee’s, or invitee’s private motor vehicle contains a legal firearm being carried for lawful purposes, that is out of sight within the customer’s, employee’s, or invitee’s private motor vehicle.
    (e) No public or private employer may terminate the employment of or otherwise discriminate against an employee, or expel a customer or invitee for exercising his or her constitutional right to keep and bear arms or for exercising the right of self-defense as long as a firearm is never exhibited on company property for any reason other than lawful defensive purposes.
    This subsection applies to all public sector employers, including those already prohibited from regulating firearms under the provisions of s. 790.33.
    (5) DUTY OF CARE OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE EMPLOYERS; IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY.—
    (a) When subject to the provisions of subsection (4), a public or private employer has no duty of care related to the actions prohibited under such subsection.
    (b) A public or private employer is not liable in a civil action based on actions or inactions taken in compliance with this section. The immunity provided in this subsection does not apply to civil actions based on actions or inactions of public or private employers that are unrelated to compliance with this section.
    (c) Nothing contained in this section shall be interpreted to expand any existing duty, or create any additional duty, on the part of a public or private employer, property owner, or property owner’s agent.
    (6) ENFORCEMENT.—The Attorney General shall enforce the protections of this act on behalf of any customer, employee, or invitee aggrieved under this act. If there is reasonable cause to believe that the aggrieved person’s rights under this act have been violated by a public or private employer, the Attorney General shall commence a civil or administrative action for damages, injunctive relief and civil penalties, and such other relief as may be appropriate under the provisions of s. 760.51, or may negotiate a settlement with any employer on behalf of any person aggrieved under the act. However, nothing in this act shall prohibit the right of a person aggrieved under this act to bring a civil action for violation of rights protected under the act. In any successful action brought by a customer, employee, or invitee aggrieved under this act, the court shall award all reasonable personal costs and losses suffered by the aggrieved person as a result of the violation of rights under this act. In any action brought pursuant to this act, the court shall award all court costs and attorney’s fees to the prevailing party.
    (7) EXCEPTIONS.—The prohibitions in subsection (4) do not apply to:
    (a) Any school property as defined and regulated under s. 790.115.
    (b) Any correctional institution regulated under s. 944.47 or chapter 957.
    (c) Any property where a nuclear-powered electricity generation facility is located.
    (d) Property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which are conducted substantial activities involving national defense, aerospace, or homeland security.
    (e) Property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials regulated under state or federal law, or property owned or leased by an employer who has obtained a permit required under 18 U.S.C. s. 842 to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials on such property.
    (f) A motor vehicle owned, leased, or rented by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer.
    (g) Any other property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which possession of a firearm or other legal product by a customer, employee, or invitee is prohibited pursuant to any federal law, contract with a federal government entity, or general law of this state.
    History.—s. 1, ch. 2008-7.

  7. #66
    VIP Member
    Array msgt/ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    7,075
    Holy thread resurrection Batman, this one is three years old.
    When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
    "Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."

  8. #67
    Distinguished Member Array lionround's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Memphis
    Posts
    1,709
    Hey Sarge, at least they didn't start a new thread only to have the Admin merge the two. And they would have started the second thread in the wrong forum so that would have to be corrected too. "Oh, the humanity of it all." It just never seems to end.

    Robin, Out.
    The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
    -- Steven Wright
    1950 Colt .38 Police Positive Special
    2013 SCCY 9mm CPX-2 Stainless Steel
    US Army 1973-1977, 95B

  9. #68
    Member Array shorty82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Winter Garden, Florida
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by scohen47 View Post
    I found the following which I believe shows the company being unlawful in making such request in the state of Florida. Imagine if they required employees to sign a document prohibiting, said employee from carrying a firearm. Based on the info below, that would be a violation of their rights. Correct?
    The parking lot part of the prohibition is illegal in Florida. While businesses can legally ask people to not bring firearms into their premises they cannot ban them from the parking lot. People have the right to carry a firearm to protect themselves to and from work, even if they can't carry while at work. A few years back I heard about a Walt Disney World Cast Member who got fired for having a gun in his car that was parked in the cast member parking lot (Security searched his car as he was an idiot and said he had a gun in his car and Disney reserves the right to search vehicles parked in cast lots though very rarely do so) and as Disney bans guns on the property he got fired. Well, he sued and Disney lost due to this law, I don't remember if he got his job back (or if he even wanted it back) but I know that shortly thereafter company policy was changed to allow guns in the parking lots.

  10. #69
    Distinguished Member Array lionround's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Memphis
    Posts
    1,709
    Quote Originally Posted by shorty82 View Post
    The parking lot part of the prohibition is illegal in Florida. While businesses can legally ask people to not bring firearms into their premises they cannot ban them from the parking lot. People have the right to carry a firearm to protect themselves to and from work, even if they can't carry while at work. A few years back I heard about a Walt Disney World Cast Member who got fired for having a gun in his car that was parked in the cast member parking lot (Security searched his car as he was an idiot and said he had a gun in his car and Disney reserves the right to search vehicles parked in cast lots though very rarely do so) and as Disney bans guns on the property he got fired. Well, he sued and Disney lost due to this law, I don't remember if he got his job back (or if he even wanted it back) but I know that shortly thereafter company policy was changed to allow guns in the parking lots.
    It's a shame that it takes someone getting fired and a lawsuit to get company policy to comport with State law. They have lawyers on staff and did/should have read the law before writing the company policy handbook.
    The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
    -- Steven Wright
    1950 Colt .38 Police Positive Special
    2013 SCCY 9mm CPX-2 Stainless Steel
    US Army 1973-1977, 95B

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Cheaper alternative to "Blue Guns" or "Red Guns?"
    By SpringerXD in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: June 29th, 2013, 07:14 PM
  2. When I see a sign on a store that says "no weapons".......
    By bruce21b in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: December 26th, 2009, 12:14 AM
  3. "No Guns"- sign an insult...What if it said "No Jews"?
    By goawayfarm in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: November 4th, 2009, 02:38 AM
  4. About as useful as a "no guns" sign
    By JoJoGunn in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: October 25th, 2009, 10:18 PM
  5. General Aviation Airport removes "no guns" sign -- Manassas Virginia
    By DaveH in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 29th, 2009, 07:48 PM

Search tags for this page

can you bring a concealed weapon into a jewelry store
,

can you conceal carry in a jewelry store

,

concealed carry jewelry store

,

concealed weapon jewelry

,
firearm signs
,

is jared jewelry store good

,

jared jewelry crap

,

jared jewelry gun policy

,

jared jewelry store

,

jarred's gallery of jewelery no guns

,

no jewelry sign

,

no jewelry signs

Click on a term to search for related topics.