LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. -- A Disney security guard told Eyewitness News he's okay with being fired rather than go to work unprotected. Disney claims it's exempt from a new state law that allows employees to keep handguns in their cars.
A Disney employee was suspended after challenging the company’s gun policy.
Edwin Sotomayor is a security guard at Disney’s Animal Kingdom. He said Disney is violating his rights by not allowing him to bring his gun to work.
"When it comes down to my personal rights, that’s where I draw the line," Sotomayor said.
Under a new state law that went into effect on Tuesday, Floridians with concealed weapons permits are allowed to keep firearms locked in their cars while on the job.
Disney claimed a loophole in the new law means the company does not have to comply. There is an exemption for businesses that import, manufacture or deal in explosive materials and Disney has a federal permit to handle fireworks.
Sotomayor said Disney has a weak excuse and he arrived at work on Friday with his gun locked in his trunk.
"I’m ready to be terminated because their stance is zero tolerance, if that’s the case, let it be," Sotomayor said. "They want to control government. They want to control society, society is us."
A video shot by Sotomayor on Friday shows Disney bosses and sheriff’s deputies waiting for him.
They asked him if they could search his vehicle, and when he refused, he was suspended and banned from the property.
"They are breaking the law," Sotomayor said. "I mean policy is one thing, but policies do not rule society, the law does."
Sotomayor said he is prepared to wage a legal battle if he is fired.
"Of course, it’s not just for me. It’s for everyone involved in this," Sotomayor said.
Disney spokeswoman Zoraya Suarez explained the suspension.
"Mr. Sotomayor refused to allow a search of his car as part of our continuing policy prohibiting guns on our property," Suarez said.
Other Disney employees agree with the company’s policy.
"No guns on property," Disney employee Lee Morgan said. "It’s a family facility. I don’t think their should be any firearms at all." Sotomayor said the issue is not his safety at work; it is his safety during his commute.
"I’m willing to lose my job," Sotomayor said. "I’m not the only one; I’m doing this for everyone."
Disney did not say if Sotomayor is suspended with or without pay.
A spokesman for the union that represents Disney’s security guards said he personally supports Sotomayor’s efforts, but also believes Disney should be able to keep guns off the property if they have a valid exemption.
What's interesting... they never found a gun in his car, because he never allowed them to search it. He can file suit in court against "unlawful search" .... and never even get into whether he did or didn't have a gun in there.
I believe that being on company property and being an employee he probably has relinquished his rights that while parking on company property his vehicle is subject to search,by not allowing the search they then suspended him and he was allowed to leave the property
Demolition companies have explosives. The military have explosives. Constructions firms building dams and roads have explosives.
Disney has fireworks, not explosives.
(Example, for anyone who has a pistol. The fact that one has ever had a "kaboom" on a range doesn't mean that pistols can be called explosives.)
Disney has no excuses, though they'll claim everything. "Family" entertainments with preying felons in the shadows making life rough for people going to and coming from their facilities and parks. If they haven't noticed, the surrounding Orlando area isn't exactly crime-free. And, that little law they're pointing to is state-wide.
I hope this fellow either has plenty of money or someone to back him because it is going to take a lot to challenge disney and they are not going to settle given their past positions.
As a retired mining and tunneling engineer I have to agree with CCW9mm that there is a distinct and verifiable difference between fireworks and explosives. However, both Disney and the media know that the general public does not understand that and are using in an attempt to sway public opinion, as well as defend a weak stance.
Also in the wording of the poll as well as most of the articles I have read, they neglect to mention that the law is to keep the firearm locked in the vehicle in the parking lot while the owner is inside the facility, at work. All most refer to is to "take a gun to work " with them.
Once again the media spining the facts to serve their agenda in its simplest form.
Actually, the corporate rats might -- if they are contacted by enough pro-rights potential customers who say they and their families will boycott Disney parks and products so long as the corporation discriminates against those who exercise their rights.
The real influence might be with Disney's subsidiaries, like ABC. Don't write only to ABC -- write to their advertisers and tell them why you aren't watching that network any longer.
Inspector Gadget Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:54 am
From WFTV Channel 9 Orlando
“Security Guard Plans To Challenge Disney By Bringing Gun To Work”
This violates the US Constitutions right to Self Defense, Florida Constitutions Right to self defense and specifically Edwin Sotomayer’s right to defend himself IAW Heller during his commute to and from work. This is not about having a Gun at your desk “Guns to Work”, it is about having a way to defend yourself when you go home at 2 in the morning in a high crime area.
My question is will you (ACLU Lawyers) be defending his right to self defense under the BOR or will you be defending Disney. I see 1 of three things happening:
1. You defend Disney and the Gun Banning Groups. (Expected)
2. Remain silent and not Defend in court a man that wants a way to defend himself from criminals during his work commute through a high crime area. (Possible).
3. ACLU Vigorously and Publically defends Edwin Sotomayer’s right to self defense (Unlikely, even with both Heller and Warren (Warren v DC 1981 which concludes that no individual has a right to individual protection by the police.))
? Do you stand for the Bill Of Rights or do you stand for Left Wing Anti Gun agendas ?
I posted this question to the ACLU I am curious how people react there?
I also posted this under the ACLU Blog thread. I an not sure if posting twice in 2 seperate relevant threads is considered OK or not. If so could a moderator let me know and I will not do it again?
The whole Disney attitude bothers me. They seem to think they are above the law and that their faithful workers are just peons. They do not need my family's business.
This is not Disney's biggest problem. I think they will start feeling the crunch of losing business from the general public. For example, it would cost a family of four about $2,000 just to fly there, not to mention their exhorbitant admission, lodging, and food prices.
I think if our economy keeps deteriorating like this, most theme parks will start to have major financial problems.
Voted. 93% yes
7% no
To add some information about the search of his vehicle, the new law also states that employers may not search employees' vehicles for a weapon. Searches may only be conducted by LEOs and I think even they still need probable cause to do so.
My understanding is that after the refusal to search he went on to his post and then was suspended a few hours later. Now during those few hours I am sure the rat lawyers were busy researching their position and then came to a decision. It really doesn't say why he was suspended and doesn't say if he was fired. Was he suspended with pay? There is a lot of unknowns in this case as far as the public but I am sure the rat lawyers know the details. It is going to be interesting and unless someone with money steps up this will never make it to trial. Back in about 1776 a group challenged the establishment and suceeded. A few years later in about 1860 another group tried the same thing and failed. When you challenge the law just make sure that if you don't suceed you are willing to pay the price.
Yes 11329 94%
No 776 6%
Not surprised he was fired.
Disney's opinion has always been "If you don't like it, there's the door."
Toe the Party line, comrade.
Or else.
He should have allowed them to search his car and cooperated in every way. Had he done so, Disney could have only fired him for the gun......as it is, they fired him for failing to cooperate with an investigation. They'll never admit that it was because of the gun, and he won't be able to prove otherwise.
Choice Votes Percentage of 12288 Votes
Yes 11475 93%
No 813 7%
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Defensive Carry
5.4M posts
117.5K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to defensive firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about everyday carry, optics, holsters, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!