I've thought about travis' input and others. I appreciate all of their comments abut I think some are still missing an important point that has a lot to do with how this country functions, or at least how it's supposed to. In my post, I never disputed anyone's right to "defend" themselves. In fact the Bill of Rights guarauntees us this basic right, i.e. the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (note happiness isn't guarauntied, only that you're allowed to purse it). Now this might set some off, so I ask that you think about what I'm about to say before you react to it. I think we all agree that we have the right to defend ourselves. This is an inalienable right. However, carrying a gun and where/when we carry a gun isn't the exact same right, nor is it inalienable. for this we have to look at the 2nd amendment which says we can keep and bare arms. Now we all probably agree with these two rights. But, there's always a but, when we talk about carrying, we're not talking specifically about the right of defense, rather we're talking about the "MEANS" to defend. Sounds like I'm splitting hairs but I don't think I am. the means of defense a person can use are subjective and we as a people have given the government the right to pass laws. Now we could argue about how they've gone too far and are doing a lousy job, but for now, lets stay on the subject. Would you say I have a right to walk anywhere I want with a fully auto uzi, some hand gernates and a shotgun? Even into a mall or nursery or day care? I'm exagerating to make a point. Am I defending myself? No, not if I'm not under attack. I'm simply carrying what I subjectively feel I need to so I'll have the MEANS, "IF" I'm attached and exercise my right to defend myself. Travis, do I have the right to come on your land, armed like that if you've told me you don't want me to? If you take your logic and apply it, then I could say I do because no matter what you say about your land, all of your rights and liberties are trumped by my right to defend myself, but that's faulty logic, because you're not attacking me so I'm not defending myself, I'm just choosing to maintain the means to defend myself on my person. So, If I own my land and tell you that you can come on my property armed like that, don't I have a right to control who's on my land and how they conduct themselves when they're on it? If you say no, then I'd say that's taking away my rights and I don't think that's right. If I restrict your access or conduct on my land, that doesn't limit your right to defend yourself one bit. What it does do is present you with a choice. You can accept my condiditions and disarm. If you do and you come on my land and are suddenly attaced, do you have the right to defend? YES, with whatever mean's are available. If you consider my requirements, you're equally free to reject them and can stay off my land so you can continue to carry the means that you feel (subjectively) you need to have on you to be able to defend yourself.
Whew! No I don't want to offend anyone but it's easy to simply raise the flag and say we're going to carry no matter what a person or the law says and a lot of folks will "amen" us, BUT, I still think if you were treated that way you'd feel a lot differently about it.
Now the problem comes when the government comes to your home and starts to take away arms as a means to defend your home/family. The second amendment guarauntees me that right so now you have a true infringement of my rights.
So getting back to it, if my boss/company tells me in a straightforward manner that their rule (i.e., condition of employment) is that I not carry any weapon, then it's not a question of my right to defend myself, it's a question as to whether I want to except their terms or not. If I don't, I can get employment elsewhere. If I pretend to accept their conditions and enter on their land and basically lie about what I'm doing, then it's dishonest and nothing more than a lack of integrity. I can cry "self defense" all day long but its more than that.
Now if I'm on the job and someone attacks me, I can pickup a wrench or a choir or do whatever I can do defend myself becasue thats my right. My employer merely choose to limite the mean's of defense that they'll permit on "THEIR" property and that's THEIR right. If you don't think so, just think about your rights in your home! Would you like others to respect your rights?
Now before I sound like I'm defending companies with anti gun policies, let me say that I think companies would be wise to let us legally carry, but unfortunately, if something happend and you shoot someone, the family of that person is going to sue not only you, but guess who? Even if they win they'll spend a small fortune in court. Companies are in business to make money so they avoid the risk by setting policy. If people weren't so sue happy, half the dump corporate policies wouldn't be in place in the first place! Can't say I blame them do you? So they tell people, if you want to work here, here are our conditions. Seems fair doesn't it?
Anyone, I hope I don't make anyone mad but honestly guys, if our own kids applied integrity the way some posts might imply, how would you feel? I think if we saw it up close, in our own home, and directed towards us we'd call it like it its, lack of integrity.
I will say this, I appreciate the posts and it sure made me think about it alot. I really think we ought to have more gun rights in this country and I think we've already slid further down the path than we ever should have allowed and i don't know if we'll make it back to where we need to be, but in the mean time, I'm going to respect a man's/companies rights on thier land and I'd ask the same of any man coming on my land. If I can't, I won't go there or work there.
God Bless
Gideon