My father is the CEO of a company which is not required by the law to ban CCW on the premises yet they clearly display on the front door a sign reading "It is illegal to possess a handgun on these premises."
No my father is not against CCW at all and yes he's tried to change it. And yes they get complaints all the time. So why is the sign still there?
Insurance. The business could not afford the excellent health insurance its employees get it they didn't post those signs. Their insurance company demands it.
And you know what? My parents need that insurance very badly.
But here's the kicker.
Section 30.06 in the great state of Texas specifies that a sign prohibiting CCW on a premises has to meet some very specific criteria. I have to agree all such signs should be identical.
The sign on this business's door meet the insurance company's regulations but not the state law.
The reasons for this are two fold. One, the people who work there are not against CCW. Two, a great deal of their customers are going to carry in there regardless of what sign they hang up.
In effect what they really have done is very sneaky. It allows for lawful CCW carry and yet they are keeping their insurance company happy.
The irony of this situation is that I carry in there all the time because I know what the state law says and I don't have to obey a sign that doesn't meet regulations.
However I can see how the ethics of this situation might appall some.
On the one hand, you have a company who is cowing to an anti rights organization while using a loophole in the law to have its way anyway. Some might argue that they should just get another insurance carrier and suffer either the rate hike or the depleted coverage in the interest of being ethical.
I submit however that I personally know several of the people who have this insurance, parents included, and I know they need it badly. It's literally a matter of life and death. Also, they are doing nothing illegal, and furthermore it is absurd that an insurance company should be allowed to dictate their CCW policy. I see nothing wrong with subverting a dangerous regulation that isn't even a law!
As a matter of fact I feel concern that my father has to work in a place where they have had no less than 2 violent incidents and yet a no guns in here sign still hangs on the door.
I look at it like this... that insurance company only wants that sign there because it'll make them feel better and they won't provide coverage unless they can feel better. Well you know what, it's there. Feel better all you want to but you haven't changed a thing you pompous arrogant bureaucrats.
I don't like the idea that they're still giving money to this organization that supports this anti 2A stance, but like I said, if they don't have this insurance coverage they'd be in some real deep trouble. What's better, making a small but possibly ultimately meaningless strike against gun control Nazis, or a lot of people I know becoming unhealthy because their insurance won't pay for their medical care any more?
The company only has 40 something employees. Dropping their insurance company would not in any significant way harm their insurance company.