FL: Take Your Gun to Work Day in House Council (MERGED)

This is a discussion on FL: Take Your Gun to Work Day in House Council (MERGED) within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by dang.45 No one's private property rights can trump another's. Of course they can and must. First, I think we all agree that ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 21 of 21

Thread: FL: Take Your Gun to Work Day in House Council (MERGED)

  1. #16
    Senior Member Array agentmel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    509
    Quote Originally Posted by dang.45 View Post

    No one's private property rights can trump another's.
    Of course they can and must. First, I think we all agree that a person's body is solely their own property, in not so different a way as their car is. Following your logic, employers also have no right to request their employees follow a certain dress code. This dress code might include a prohibition on men wearing lacy pink thongs. Now, provided that you are never caught, no one will be the wiser. But, if you are, your employer has the absolute right to ask you to leave, thereby using his property right (his land) to trump yours (your body and clothing), at least while on his property.

    Mel
    The Ethics of Liberty
    LewRockwell.com
    The Survival Podcast
    How long have we watered the Tree of Deceit with the blood of patriots?

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member Array David in FL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by dang.45 View Post
    While I agree with the sentiment that "this is a big one", I disagree with your interpretation of the issue.
    Interesting interpretation that I haven't heard expressed before in this particular case.....

    At the risk of being characterized as "non-thinking" twice in one day , why would one form of private property (an automobile) be afforded special treatment over another form, say, a briefcase? If this is really all about the individual's right to keep a gun secured within his/her own private property that happens to be located on the employer's private property, could the same argument not be made for the briefcase that the employee brings to work?

    Help me understand the difference here.

  4. #18
    VIP Member Array David in FL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by agentmel View Post
    This is NOT good news! While I personally disagree with the above mentioned companies, the government is infringing on their property rights in passing this. The owner of any property should have the ABSOLUTE right to any rules they want on their own property, provided they are not aggressing against others, just as you would want the same absolute right to determine who does and does not carry a weapon onto YOUR property. That said, if someone did have a weapon in their vehicle, these companies could ask that person to remove them, leave, or fire that person.

    The fact that you or I would or would not care who brought a weapon onto our own property is immaterial. Property owners have an absolute natural right to deal with their just property as THEY and ONLY THEY desire, provided they do not harm someone else in the process.

    I have a very simple litmus test to determine if any law is legitimate. If its a law passed by any government, it is illegitimate. If it is a law that logically follows from the nature of man (the rights to control one's own person and property), it is legitimate. Thus, this law would be illegitimate. The only other law I recognize, which falls outside of the question here, is God's law, which people are free (obviously) to accept or not.

    Mel
    I have to admit, I struggled a bit with the apparent willingness to take away the right of a property owner to control what happens on his/her own property. Then I began looking at the other ways that property owners are disallowed from exercising unlimited freedom just because they want to do something on their own property. A private company cannot bury hazardous waste, even though it's on their own property. They cannot violate labor laws, even though it's their own property. Heck, I can't even target shoot in my own backyard even though it's my own property.....and trust me, that one hurts!

    Is it a bit of a slippery slope? Perhaps. But I think that when someone makes the decision to open a business and employ other people, along with that comes a responsibility to afford those employees the rights granted to them by the constitution. Still a ways to go, but I still think this case helps along those lines.

  5. #19
    Senior Member Array agentmel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    509
    Quote Originally Posted by David in FL View Post
    A private company cannot bury hazardous waste, even though it's on their own property.
    And nor should they, for it could contaminate surrounding property, thereby infringing on someone else's property rights... As an interesting side note, most pollution comes from gov't or monopolistic power and utility plants and pollutes common lakes and rivers, also tacitly owned by the gov't. Not even a complete imbecile would pollute their own land, thereby driving down the value of their property.

    Quote Originally Posted by David in FL View Post
    They cannot violate labor laws, even though it's their own property.
    Most labor laws are another infringement by gov't onto someone's property rights, often forcing business owners to make decisions they otherwise would not. The unfortunate fact that we even have many of the labor laws we have does not validate them. Nor does it invalidate my previous argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by David in FL View Post
    Is it a bit of a slippery slope? Perhaps. But I think that when someone makes the decision to open a business and employ other people, along with that comes a responsibility to afford those employees the rights granted to them by the constitution. Still a ways to go, but I still think this case helps along those lines.
    Careful here. Our rights are NOT granted by the Constitution, merely recognized therein as rights. "...endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights... life, liberty, and the pursuit of happines..." The framers went a little higher than a piece of paper as the Grantor of our rights. This is a law, that though I agree with its rationale, infringes on someone's liberty in their property. That I cannot agree with. I believe everyone should go to church weekly, but am vehemently opposed to the gov't forcing anyone to do so. A property owner must have final and uncontestable right to who comes onto their property and in what manner. Any who dislike the property owners rules are free to work or go elsewhere. Under any other state of affairs, such an owner is not the sole owner. A portion of his right to his property has been illegitimately seized by the gov't.

    There are many things people should do. Refrain from smoking, take vitamins, exercise, read good books, go to church, allow guns, carry a gun, etc. Whatever our list might happen to be, no one has any right to force these decisions on others. For if we allow the gov't the decisions that we approve of, we have also likely allowed them the decisions we disapprove of. Therefore, we must be exceedingly careful in allowing the gov't any decisions at all.

    Government.. "Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." - George Washington

    Mel
    The Ethics of Liberty
    LewRockwell.com
    The Survival Podcast
    How long have we watered the Tree of Deceit with the blood of patriots?

  6. #20
    Senior Member Array KenInColo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    991
    ...provided they kept them in their vehicles.

    They might as well have worded it ...provided they left them at home.

    Where do a lot of muggings happen? That's right, in parking lots.

    I fail to see much benefit in having your gun locked in your car when where you really need it is walking between your car and your building.

    Wanna bet the break in rate of automobiles goes up, now that the BGs know where to find them?

    How is this a break through?
    An armed populace are called citizens.
    An unarmed populace are called subjects.

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array David in FL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by KenInColo View Post
    ...provided they kept them in their vehicles.

    They might as well have worded it ...provided they left them at home.

    Where do a lot of muggings happen? That's right, in parking lots.

    I fail to see much benefit in having your gun locked in your car when where you really need it is walking between your car and your building.

    Wanna bet the break in rate of automobiles goes up, now that the BGs know where to find them?

    How is this a break through?
    Ever see the movie "What about Bob"?

    Baby steps......

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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. Iowa National Guard to practice house to house gun searches!! (MERGED)
    By bps3040 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: March 11th, 2009, 04:04 PM
  2. DC Council Passes New Gun Control Laws: MERGED
    By press1280 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: December 21st, 2008, 12:12 AM
  3. House right to vote on d.c. Gun regs, make council behave, says saf
    By mrreynolds in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 17th, 2008, 08:03 PM
  4. NRA - Senate Passes NICS Improvement Act, House Concurs (merged)
    By ibez in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: January 10th, 2008, 11:11 PM
  5. Kansas House Overides Gun Law Veto (merged threads)
    By ebd10 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: March 23rd, 2006, 07:02 PM

Search tags for this page

bring your gun to work day florida

Click on a term to search for related topics.