Tennessee legislators clash in gun rights versus property rights dispute

[jpak]

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2012/feb/12/tennessee-legislators-clash-in-gun-rights-versus/

NASHVILLE — A new effort is under way toward passage of legislation that pits the interests of gun rights advocates against the property rights of businesses, a politically volatile mix that was apparently a factor in a public confrontation between two legislators.

Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey last week declared he strongly supports passage of the key proposal, which would authorize handgun permit holders to take their weapons to work — provided they are left in a locked car — even if the permit holder’s employer prohibits guns on company property.

<snip>

In the House, no vote has been scheduled yet, but the parking lots bill has been the subject of much discussion — including an angry argument in the Legislative Plaza cafeteria between Senate Speaker Pro Tempore Judd Matheny, R-Tullahoma, and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Niceley, R-Strawberry Plains.

According to various accounts, Harwell had admonished Matheny for soliciting other legislators during a House floor session to sign up as co-sponsors of Bass’ bill in apparent violation of a policy against those holding leadership positions advocating a bill when there is no House Republican Caucus consensus on the legislation. Matheny apparently believed Niceley — mistakenly, said Niceley — had reported his actions to Harwell.

<more>

Luckily, the morans didn't shoot each other.

yup

[spin]

1. Florida passed this law in 2008...

Employers In Florida Face New "Take Your Gun To Work" Law

Details

On April 15, 2008, Florida Governor Charlie Crist signed into law Florida Statute §790.251 over the objections of several business associations and companies. While the bill is formally titled "The Preservation and Protection of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Motor Vehicles Act of 2008," pundits have dubbed the legislation the "Take Your Gun to Work" law. The new law, already the subject of a federal lawsuit, could potentially alter the workplace for any company with Florida facilities and operations.

The substance of the new law prohibits a business or employer from precluding employees (including independent contractors), customers and other invitees from bringing concealed firearms onto business property, such as a parking lot, providing the bearer has a valid permit for the weapon and the firearm is stored out of sight. Additionally, the law prohibits employers and business operators from making inquiries regarding the presence of a firearm in a motor vehicle on the business property or searching the vehicle to ascertain the presence of a firearm. Employers are also prohibited from conditioning an offer of employment on the fact that an applicant does or does not have a permit to carry a firearm, and may not require an employee to refrain from lawfully keeping a firearm in their personal vehicle. Most notably, the law prohibits an employer from terminating or "otherwise discriminating" against an employee or customer for possessing a firearm so long as the firearm is not exhibited on company property for "any unlawful purpose." The law applies exclusively to firearms and ammunition and not to other types of weapons such as knives or explosives.

Certain types of businesses such as schools, nuclear power plants, national defense contractors and properties where explosives or combustible materials are located are exempt from the law. Remarkably, businesses such as day care centers, hospitals, nursing homes, restaurants and shopping malls are not exempt. Employers or business operators who violate the new law are subject to suit by the state's attorney general or by private individuals.

Employers with facilities in Florida should be aware that under the provisions of the new law they can no longer enforce policies that prohibit employees with valid permits from bringing firearms into facility parking lots. Moreover, as the law is written, employers cannot discipline an employee with a valid permit for carrying a concealed weapon into the actual business facility. Employers may still have a policy that prohibits an employee from carrying a firearm into its facility, but employers will no longer be able to discipline the employee if she or he violates that policy.
http://www.thompsonhine.com/publications/publication1429.html

When I first came to Florida it was common practice for many gun owners to have a car gun and even if you didn't have a carry permit, you could have a firearm in your car in the company parking lot. Companies became concerned about liability issues and many created policies that stated that employees could not have firearms in their vehicles parked in the company parking lot.

I drove to work for on the graveyard shift and passed through several dangerous neighborhoods on the way. When my company passed its no-guns in the parking lot policy, I simply ignored it as did many other workers. Management was well aware that I had a firearm in my car but never pushed the issue. It simply was a "don't ask don't tell" policy.

I personally feel that the new law is an improvement as one of the requirements is that the worker who has a firearm in his car at work must have a concealed weapons permit. While people with such licenses are not angels, they commit far less crimes and are far more law abiding and responsible than others who own firearms but have not passed the requirements to carry concealed.

[gejohnston]

2. locked inside the car

IIRC, autos are part of your domicile. Locked inside a car, I fail to see where the employer has a valid case. Sounds like you are turning more pro corporate employer controlling what the individual can keep in his vehicle. Corporations over individuals is never a liberal value.
property rights over individual rights is ummmmmm so libertarian.

[msongs]

3. let them shoot at each other until one is left to claim victory nt

[rl6214]

5. Only an anti-gun zealot would propose something like this

[Nuclear Unicorn]

10. Yes, but they would be at a distinct disadvantage in the ensuing fight.

just sayin'

[rl6214]

15. I'm trying to stay within the guidelines

and not have the post blocked because someone gets butthurt and claims it is a personal attack.

[Remmah2]

18. I grew up with three sisters.

Each tougher that the previous. We traded days on who got buttkicked.

They handle their husbands quite well.

[SteveW]

7. You advocate mass shootings, and are a gun-controller? strange. nt

[Glassunion]

9. There can be only one!

Whenever I get a package of plain M&M's, I make it my duty to continue the strength and robustness of the candy as a species. To this end, I hold M&M duels. Taking two candies between my thumb and forefinger, I apply pressure, squeezing them together until one of them cracks and splinters. That is the "loser", and I eat the inferior immediately. The winner gets to go another round. I have found that brown M&Ms as a race are tougher, and the newer blue ones are genetically inferior. I have hypothesized that the blue M&Ms as a race cannot survive long in the intense theater of competition that is the modern candy and snack-food world.

Occasionally I will get a mutation, a candy that is misshapen, or pointier, or flatter than the rest. Almost invariably this proves to be a weakness, but on very rare occasions it gives the candy extra strength. In this way, the species continues to adapt to its environment.

When I reach the end of the pack, I am left with one M&M, the strongest of the herd. Since it would make no sense to eat this one as well, I pack it neatly in an envelope and send it to:

M&M Mars, A Division of Mars, Inc.
Hackettstown, NJ 17840

Along with a 3x5 card reading, "Please use this M&M for breeding purposes."

This week they wrote back to thank me, and sent me a coupon for a free 1/2 pound bag of M&Ms. I consider this "grant money". I have set aside the weekend for a grand tournament. From a field of hundreds, we will discover the True Champion. There can be only one.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

11. "...until one is left..."

Ah, if it was only that simple.

You know who's going to inherit the Earth? Arms dealers. Because everyone else is too busy killing each other. That's the secret to survival. Never go to war. Especially with yourself.

[PavePusher]

4. Sure, let'em restrict their parking lots....

As long as they provide full security for the journey to and from work, every day, and are legally liable for any harm/damages to their workers during said journey. (Including all incidental errands/side-trips.) The companies must also be held liable for any/all harm that may occur at the work-place.

You know, since it's about "safety"....

[GreenStormCloud]

6. We have that law in Texas and...

...nothing has happened. Still waiting for those shoot-outs over parking spaces. Waiting...waiting...NOT holding my breath...

[SteveW]

8. OP misses the real issue here: Anti-union/worker sentiment by corporations...

House Speaker Beth Harwell said she is concerned that the proposal could conflict with her overall priority of making Tennessee “the most business friendly state in the union,” but believes some compromise can be reached.

“It’s not a priority to me this session,” she said in an interview. “I want to be sure not to do anything detrimental to business ... (but) I think we can work something out.”

The corporatist Harwell evidently sees workers as something to be controlled by corporations, even before they enter the workplace. It ain't property rights. It's keeping workers under COMPLETE control.

The 1%'s ultimate solution for the 99%: Gun control.

[mvccd1000]

12. OP appears to support rights of corporations over rights of people.

Interesting what some of these posts reveal about gun control advocates.

[Remmah2]

14. Corporations run by 1%ers.

No respect for the 99's.

[Glassunion]

16. Ban Employers... It's the only way we'll be safe.

[kwikrnu]

17. I have no problems prohibiting guns on private property, but...

the property owner needs to be held responsible if the person prohibited from defending himself is harmed.