Can't where I work, Federal post
This is a discussion on Guns at Work: Should You Be Able to Defend Yourself? within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; The Evil HR Lady writes blogs about HR, the workplace, etc. I found her views regarding a particular case to be interesting. Guns at Work: ...
The Evil HR Lady writes blogs about HR, the workplace, etc. I found her views regarding a particular case to be interesting.
Guns at Work: Should You Be Able to Defend Yourself? | BNET
If you understand, things are just as they are... If you do not understand, things are just as they are....
- Zen Saying
She's spot-on there--even if you don't like guns in the workplace, and have a give-them-what-they-want policy, once someone starts taking hostages, all bets are off. You have no choice but to assume the next step is execution.
The key is not guns, it is escalation. If you feel that your life is in jeopardy, is anything you do an escalation? How narrow is the window. If they are already shooting at you in an attempt to kill you, is anything you do an escalation?
"I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".
Quoting from the article:Some words from a lawyer I hired to (successfully) sue a major auto manufacturer for lemon law who insisted that their policy was to fix the car, "Policy is irrelevant, policy is NOT LAW".To be clear, this isnít a political issue, but a policy one. Government is restricted by the 2nd amendment but companies are not.
I say my right for protection trumps another's no guns wishes. Said, no guns party, be it an individual or a company would certainly deny responsibility for my protection. Accepting the responsibility of concealed carry, you have a high standard to bear and maintain, most of which precludes you from engaging in activities that "no guns" legislation attempts (and fails) to address. A CC permit holder should not be exempted from carrying in any location, including govt institutions.
I believe in the "shall issue" philosophy in that as long as you haven't done something to be denied the privilege that you should be allowed to obtain a CC license. Given the extreme responsibility of such license, I think that training and testing should be required. Similarly, I think that the use of deadly force should be justifiable against more crimes. The crime rate would certainly go down as a result, either through the deterrent effect or attrition.
If the biz owner doesn't want wepons there, don't carry.
If you get hurt mentally or physically during a robbery or disgruntaled employee situation, you now own the company.
Sue them for everything you can.
Or quit, start your own biz or work for someone else.
I believe that if the business chooses to preclude employees or customers the right to self defense, it should, but law, be liable for a failure to provide a safe environment should anybody be hurt. I realize that this is not the law where I live, if anywhere at this point, but I believe it should be. Call it wishful thinking.
"I've noticed that everyone that is pro-abortion has already been born." - Ronald Reagan
"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson
You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.
Mixed feelings here.
Used to be a long haul truck driver. Needed to be able to carry for self protection on the road. However, most companies banned carry in company trucks and some locales ban carry even in a vehicle period.
Not to mention the recent Walgreens case which was a raw deal, but an understandable one for both parties.
A workplace is private property. And there are good reasons why guns at many workplaces isn't a great idea.
So the issue is whether a private property owner, one that allows the public access or has employees, has the right to control their own property in regards to the carry of deadly weapons by what are in essence visitors.
I'm often amused that the same ones that maintain the government should not have the power to regulate gun ownership or possession in any manner whatsoever, are often the same ones that demand the government require private property owners to allow gun possession on their own property.
You want to have a gun at work. Join a union and negotiate it with the legal property owner. That's the way the system as currently configured works.
And if you get your wish and suddenly the company closes it's doors and relocates your job to China where most gun possession by the slave class is illegal, you wont have to wonder why.
The other option is to open your own business on your own private property and do what you want.
I have worked for companies that did not allow carry at work, or to have a gun on company property. I parked off site and left mu gun secured in my truck. While I didn't like the policy, I did agree to it as terms of employment. If your going to take the persons wages, and that is a term of employment then in my opinion, you have nothing to complain about.
Look at it another way, if someone comes to your house, you expect them to abide by your rules, whether they like them or not. They have a choice, either abide by them, or leave. You have the same choice, either abide by your employers rules, or find another job.
Luckily I now work for a company who allows me to carry. All 3 of the owners have their permits and I know for a fact that 2 of them carry daily.
Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.
NRA Life Member
Fine example of the lack of clarity in "corporate" process..I see a pharmacist, "responsible" for his own life, carrying at work. This employee stands between any drug crazzed idiot tweekin SOB walkin in off the street and what they want most in all the world...He's made the same choices we all make, when we take responsibility for our own protection..lack of clarity..that would be letting the pharmacist go...corporate America needs people that reject wishfull thinking..corporate america needs couragous people...If you read this stalwart Walgreen pharmacist PM me, love to chat....I admire your style
No one prevented the pharmacist from defending himself, did they? The incident played out as it should have. The aftermath always get sticky....
Honor is self-esteem made visible in action. - Ayn Rand
If there are no metal detectors, and I'm aware of the danger of living in a certain city/area is heightening and I have a CPL/CHL, I'm not disarming to go into work. Neither will I consider it my job to defend the company president who is hunkered behind his desk begging me to protect him from the disgruntled employee bent on killing everyone.
Which clearly states in most states that where CCW or the carrying of weapons is prohibited one is guilty of a crime and subject to having their license revoked.
Not saying it's right in all cases, clearly it's not. And that's part of the problem with being an employee in most parts of this country.
You have few rights other than to show up everyday as instructed, get paid something and act as a target when one of your fellow employees snaps and chooses to take it out on everybody else.
If I ever get made at work, I get arrested. My life is still worth more than my job or arrest. So be it. Needless to say, my conceal is damn good.