'Take Gun To Work' Bill Clears Hurdle

[The Straight Story]

'Take Gun To Work' Bill Clears Hurdle
Opponent Calls Measure 'Take Uzi To Work Bill'

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- The much-debated "take your guns to work" bill cleared a key Senate committee on Tuesday, with one opponent labeling it the "take your Uzi to work bill."

The 7-4 vote went on party lines, with Republicans rejecting amendments that were intended to stop gun owners from bringing "assault rifles" and other weapons with large magazines or clips to their jobs in their cars. The bill allows gun owners to lock guns in their vehicles, forbidding employers from banning guns on company property, Local 6 News partner Florida Today reported.

The bill has failed two years in a row but Sen. Durell Peaden, a Crestview Republican and sponsor of the Senate version of the bill, said the climate is different in this election year. He also predicted that, rather than causing tragedies or accidental shootings, his bill will prevent gun violence if criminals know someone in a workplace might have a gun nearby.


A House companion for the bill is set for debate in the full House on Wednesday.

http://www.local6.com/politics/15705560/detail.html

[Pavulon]

1. Don't get fired during deer season bill..

a person coming to work to kill people is not worrying about that rule. A person who want to go hunting before/after work and not get fired will appreciate that.

[MadMaddie]

2. It figures the Republicans in Florida are setting the stage

for "Postal" rampages. When innocent people get killed because of this bill I hope all of the state of Florida pays it's respects to all of the Florida Republicans voting for this bill.

[michreject]

43. How did any of the Anti gun laws

stop any of the other mass shootings?

[northzax]

69. Well, there's the catch-22, ain't it?

you can never know. The only way to do such an epidemiological study is with a before and an after. How do we know that smoking causes cancer? Because people who smoke are more likely to get cancer, all other factors controlled for. How do we know that access to birth control and good sex-ed reduces teen pregnancy? We compare those that have it, to those that don't. Since there is no other similarly developed country with such firearm penetration, we have nothing to compare ourselves to. Well, except for all those countries with strict gun laws and resulting non-existent gun violence, that is.

[Oeditpus Rex]

3. 'his bill will prevent gun violence

if criminals know someone in a workplace might have a gun nearby."

Since virtually everyone who goes on a shooting spree where they work ends it by taking their own life, I'd say Peaden's logic is pretty flawed.

[Richard Steele]

20. None of the over 20,000 "gun laws" on our nation's books have ever PREVENTED jack shit.

[northzax]

70. bullshit

I will give you one example from personal experience. My uncle is bi-polar. Once, in a downswing, he decided to kill himself. So he went out to buy a gun. There was a three day waiting period. If he had been able to buy a gun, on the spot, he would be dead (his words) so that's one life saved

[Richard Steele]

76. Yeah, they haven't prevented BULLSHIT either. Good point!

[northzax]

77. talk to anyone who deals with depression

they'll tell you a similar story. It's not uncommon. You claimed gun laws have never prevented anything, I was simply pointing out that absolute blanket statements like that are ridiculous.

[varelse]

4. Does this bill also release employers from liability

for any gun-related injuries that might occur on their property?

[BattyDem]

5. Does anyone else think this is a massacre waiting to happen ...

or is it just me? :shrug:

[MiniMe]

6. You aren't alone

[varelse]

7. I had to walk around police tape to get to work one day

a supervisor the factory next to the one I worked at, had been struck down in a "postal style" homicide. Fired worker came back with a gun shot him to death right there. It's hard to imagine employers being happy about not being able to ban guns from their parking lots... but then I'm in California, not Florida. Attitudes are probably different there.

[fascisthunter]

10. We Have Enough Massacres As It Is

[blues90]

57. guns have one purpose , to kill things .

And people think we are an advanced society . People rave against the smoker and it's banned but yet a gun is acceptable . Makes a lot of sense to me . So I guess people who don't want a gun are just shit out of luck and have no right .

[fascisthunter]

8. Really Stupid and Irresponsible

Just so ya can bring a gun to work? Is it really that necessary to be able to bring your gun to work..? Society doesn't need more guns with people everywhere, it fine as is without guns with folks everywhere. You will not make life safer by doing so, but you will be making society less safer and ya know it. It's been proven a society with out guns has less gun violence. We know this, so why is this crap necessary?

[Pavulon]

9. Tennessee

this is about deer rifles in cars and trucks. Not concealed weapons.

Pretty common in many places.

[fascisthunter]

12. To Work with You?

Is it really essential? I guess in some locals people need to bring their guns with them to work before hunting.....:shrug:

[Pavulon]

19. I have done it, not against policy..

but if going hunting left stuff in the truck. I have left a shotgun in a company suburban before. Used it to pull a boat and my buddies on a duck hunting trip.

Again my employer is private and not particularly concerned with this.

My thinking is a person who is intent on murder is not going to worry bout this policy.

[derby378]

13. 40 years of increasing gun control have made America a more dangerous place...

We warned you. You didn't listen. Now, the most dangerous places to live in America are the cities with the toughest gun laws.

So what if I were to keep a rifle in the trunk in a parking lot that has security to begin with? Big freakin' deal.

[Indenturedebtor]

16. Really?

NYC for one? I don't believe you. Really I don't. And even if it were so... what do you think came first? The violent crime or the gun laws? Seriously.

I don't want guns at work. I don't want guns anywhere.

Maybe I should walk around all day with a machete in my hand just to show people that they should take me seriously. Whatdya think?

[Pavulon]

21. As long as you are chopping tree branches

go for it. Your INTENT with the machete is my concern.

This is a southern thing. If you are in the northeast dont worry about it. A deer rifle in some guys truck is the least of your concerns.

[fascisthunter]

29. These folks don't live in cities

and they could give two shits of the repercussions of deregulation. They'll cherrypick stats and figures to argue with, but we all have to live and die by their need for more guns everywhere. Fuck em... seriously.

[Redneck Socialist]

14. What business is it of my employer what I have in my car? n/t

[fascisthunter]

32. It's The Business of Americans Who Want to Live in a Society Without Guns

being everywhere. People like you just don't give a shit about society... most folks do. Your desire for guns everywhere endangers everyone else. It's an unecessary desire that infringes upon our rights as citizens to live in a safer society. You could care less about that fact. And your need to carry a gun is quite petty compared our rights to live free of guns and safe from gun violence.

I see you guys as wanting to militarize America and push gun sales. It's not about rights for you aren't on any other thread discussing them. Only when it comes to guns....

[Redneck Socialist]

41. So your employer should be able to dictate what you carry in your vehicle?

I find that idea rather frightening.

[fascisthunter]

49. No But The Law Already Does to an Extent

You can't transport a pound of weed nor a kilo of coke... so why is it a problem with guns? There are laws against carrying guns in your car in many parts of the country unless you have a permit. The one arguing against you carrying a gun in your car was an employer but that doesn't mean this is soley an issue of your employer "dictating" what you can and cannot carry in your car. Nice try though...

[benEzra]

61. Florida law has always recognized the right to have a gun in your vehicle...

as long as it is not on your person. This proposed law would grant no new rights; it merely preserves existing ones against corporate encroachments.

[michreject]

42. Then move

It's The Business of Americans Who Want to Live in a Society Without Guns

Me and my guns are staying here.

[fascisthunter]

47. Nah... You'll Have to Put Up with Me and Millions of Others

never get too far ahead of yourself and tell people to leave so you can hug and hold your guns due to paranoia and self-indulgence. More people live in this country who don't own guns than those who do..

[michreject]

74. Well me and another 100 million gun owners

are staying here also. Get use to it.

[Mountainman]

11. I'm a gun owner and I think anyone taking a gun to work is a gun nut.

How many will have a safety on? I don't think I want to work at a place were freeper type gun owners take their guns to work.

[sergeiAK]

15. My boss does, quite frequently

During hunting season, his rifle is always in his car. I see no problem with it. Then again, if I was as scared as you seem of the possibility of my coworkers having a weapon, I wouldn't work there in the first place.

OTOH, this is something of a violation of employers property rights.

I'm undecided, as bringing guns to work is quite convenient for me (and many others at my company) as the shooting range opens after work and is very close to the plant, but employers should (IMO) have the right to decide what happens on their property.

[RamboLiberal]

26. A safety on? Huh? Guns with safety off don't go bang on their own

You know it still takes someone/something to pull trigger.

[Mountainman]

40. If you are driving around in your car with a loaded gun, no safety on, I think you are not

like most of us. Is that politically correct enough ?
I really feel that if someone is so paranoid that they have to carry a loaded gun, ready to fire, there is something wrong.

So I didn't use offensive words but you can get the point.

[michreject]

44. So I take it you're against CCW laws

Since I carry a loaded 1911, cocked and locked.

[Mountainman]

52. Yes, unless you have a job or situation where there is a good percentage that you could get shot.

It is just plain logic, the more guns there are being carried the more chance there is of people getting killed.

I don't trust everyone with the smarts to carry a gun. Too many people carry a gun as a means of feeling powerful. They scare the hell out of me. So many bystanders are getting shot today.

[sergeiAK]

56. Except that it's not "plain logic"

I challenge you to find a citation for CCW permit holders committing murder at or above the general population rate. Good luck.

[michreject]

75. Since it's legal to do so

and not likely to change, I will continue to carry weather you like it or not.

[sergeiAK]

48. You are aware

That many police departments issue pistols with no safety? I don't mean that they keep it off, I mean that there is no manual safety lever at all on them.

[Mountainman]

53. I'm not talking about police. I'm afraid of the knuckle dragger types who carry guns.

People who need a gun to feel powerful. Not just for self defense.

[spin]

63. The gun I carry concealed or leave in the car has no safety...

It's a S&W revolver. When loaded, if you pull the trigger it makes a loud noise. With a revolver, you are the safety. Works fine for me.

I'm primarily a wheel gunner. I don't believe in the spray and pray theory that a lot of high capacity semi auto owners follow. My revolvers fire at the most 6 rounds before they run dry. To me, the object is to make every round count.

I might add I'm a civilian with a concealed carry permit. If I was in law enforcement I'd carry a high capacity semi auto with a revolver as a backup. Different stokes for different lifestyles.

[aikoaiko]

34. Where then should one have a gun that wouldn't make them a gun nut to you?

I wish people would hold off on the name calling for people who wish to have a gun safely stowed in the car or house.

For example, would it add anything for me to say that people who fear fellow employees with guns in cars are worrisome wussies? Probably not.

[KG]

36. some worrisome wussies might answer: how about where the sun don't shine?

[aikoaiko]

37. Wow, I didn't know this was going to change into a sex thread

;)

[KG]

38. sorry, bro. it was too easy.

:shrug:

[Mountainman]

39. I use to be in a group of gun owners. One guy imported rifles from overseas and sold them.

He loaded his own ammunition. Once he was unpacking a shipment of rifles and one was loaded. He shot out his patio window and into the neighbor's garage. The cops were called and they discovered enough gun powder stored in the guys garage to blow up his and most of his neighbor's houses. He had loaded guns in every room and a three year old daughter.

I think he was a gun nut.

I'm sure other people carry guns in their cars to work and I don't know about it. I am afraid of the one person who goes nuts and out to the car to get the gun and shoots up the place killing lots of people.

I am a gun owner. My guns have locks on them. The barrels are removed if they have them. I would never think of taking one to work. I can't see the need to do it.

I don't fear for my life and don't feel I need to carry a gun. I think the more people carry guns the more people will get shot. It only makes logical sense.

[napi21]

17. Are these people INSANE? How many pissed off employees

will shoot the person who fired them? Geesh! And they say Californians are crazy. With all the insanity that has happened in Fl. in the last 8 years, I'll take Calif. over Fl. any day!

[knight_of_the_star]

18. If this was ust about hunting

Then the amendments that would stop gun owners from bringing high-capacity firearms with them to work would have been approved.

[Pavulon]

22. Political add ons to kill the bill..

amendments added to make a point. It is about not getting fired for having a gun in your car.

Not a rule someone bent on murder will really consider any way.

[sergeiAK]

23. You're right

It's not about hunting. ~25% of gun owners hunt, I'm not one of them.

The reason I bring guns to work is because the range opens at 6pm, and is closer to work than home. OTOH, my employer doesn't care.

[knight_of_the_star]

24. What do you shoot with?

I fail to see the need to take a 20+ magazine round gun to work with you, range shooting doesn't need that many rounds at a time unless you're talking that one range in Tennessee I think that lets people play with .50 cals.

[sergeiAK]

46. You don't sound like someone who shoots

I've never seen a .50 with a mag larger than 10 rounds (unless you count the beltfed ones :P). Most ranges (mine not included, as it's indoors) allow .50s, though there's only one local range that's long enough to bother bringing a .50 out to.

As for what I shoot, AR15s mostly. Some pistol, some old military rifles, and a few interesting oddities picked up here and there.

There is no real reason to limit magazine capacity, despite what the Brady group says. If you're going to allow the gun there, it really doesn't matter how big the mag is, as it only takes one round (assuming decent aim) to kill.

[knight_of_the_star]

51. I don't shoot no

I'm thinking the specific range that lets people play with belt-feeds and AKs.

Still, I would think for safety reasons I would think it would be sane at least to require while at work those guns be stowed in a locker monitored by company security. It only takes one nut who wants to go postal to make a mess regardless of how many law-abiding owners there are.

[sergeiAK]

54. Knob Creek?

I thought that was in KY, but I'm too poor to go, so I never really looked into it.

As far as "one nut who wants to go postal", he's gonna do it. Regardless of company policy, the law, etc, he'll find a way. If you mandate storage of weapons in company lockers (which would cost the company significant space and money), that one nut will just leave his in the trunk of his car. Sure, it's against policy, but you won't find out until it's far too late, unless you have daily searches, which would, I'd wager, not exactly endear you to your staff.

[knight_of_the_star]

55. Yeah that's the one

Heard about it on Mail Call.

Personally if I was going to work I would feel better if guns were allowed on the premises if they were kept in a locker of some kind. That and there is the potential of people breaking in, if you have guns out in the trunks of even a quarter of the cars in the parking lot that makes things all kind of interesting and potentially nasty.

[benEzra]

62. Practically all ranges allow AK's (all civilian AK's are non-automatic).

I'm thinking the specific range that lets people play with belt-feeds and AKs.

Practically all ranges allow civilian AK's (all civilian AK's are non-automatic). I own one; it's my primary target and competition rifle.



Non-automatic, and my standard competition magazine is 20 rounds. And yes, I occasionally go to the range with friends after work.

Military automatic AK's are extremely rare (NFA Title 2/Class III restricted, $15,000-$20,000 for a civilian transferable pre-'86 and possession without a BATFE Form 4 is a 10-year Federal felony), but hundreds of ranges across the country are open to Title 2 weapons if you have the paperwork. My local range here in NC is, as was my local range in FL when I lived there.

The most popular target rifles hold 20 to 30 rounds, FWIW.

Still, I would think for safety reasons I would think it would be sane at least to require while at work those guns be stowed in a locker monitored by company security. It only takes one nut who wants to go postal to make a mess regardless of how many law-abiding owners there are.

And why do you think a nut willing to commit mass murder would obey a company rule about not having a gun in the car?

Such rules aren't aimed at preventing mass murder; they are aimed at preventing licensed CHL holders from carrying before/after work, and hassling lawful shooters who wish to hunt or go to the range before/after work. That's why Weyerhauser conducted their parking lot sweeps on the first day of hunting season, and fired anyone who refused to consent to having their car searched or who had a firearm lawfully secured in the car.

[RamboLiberal]

25. I'm in favor of these laws - as a CCW holder where the state

has vetted my record and determined I'm allowed to carry a weapon why should an employer disallow me my right to self-defense weapon on my commute?

As someone who often works late and alone at night and am female I appreciate my employer has not made this an issue.

And personally I think its no damn business of my employer if my firearm is in my locked car.

As far as a worker going postal - what's to prevent that worker from going home and getting the gun?

IMHO employers are meddling to much now in employees private lives.

[bushmeister0]

27. Another reason I left Florida after 30 years, as if I needed one.

The Dumbshine State: You all just kill shoot at the whites of their eyes and let God sort them out later. You must be very proud.

[MadHound]

28. Once again, peoples' rights are being trampled underfoot in the rush to

insure that gunners can have their precious weapons available at all times.

If I'm an employer, where is my right to a gun free workplace and gun free campus? What about the whole notion that we're now making it easier for people to go postal?

But no, gunners are willing to trample everybody else's right in pursuit of their own selfish ends.

[benEzra]

64. You can have a gun-free workplace...

you just don't get to search my car (my property) for stuff you don't like if the car is in a publicly accessible lot.

[MadHound]

65. If that car, with a gun inside,

Is on my parking lot, then no, I don't have a gun free workplace. The workplace isn't simply the inside of a building, it is the entire grounds of the business, including the parking lot.

Like I said above, this is trampling on the rights of others, all to insure that gunners can have their precious security blankets available at all times.

If you want to park on a public street or parking lot, fine. But you don't have the right to bring a weapon onto my property if I don't want it there.

[benEzra]

66. Only if it's a closed lot, not a publicly accessible one.

And most of the corporations are not sole proprietorships; they are corporations--NOT individuals. Corporations are not people. When you form a corporation in order to shield yourself from liability, you make tradeoffs; corporations are not persons and do not have all the rights that persons have.

The Weyerhauser incident was not an owner of a business searching cars in his own gated privately owned parking lot. It was a mega-corporation demanding unlimited right to search employee vehicles without probable cause, on a publicly accessible lot, on the first day of hunting season.

[MadHound]

72. Corporations do have the right to own, and control private property

Including their own parking lot. The Weyerhauser incident took place on their own private lot <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weyerhauser#Employee_Firearms_Policy> The corporation, as with any individual owner, was well within their rights to do what they did. The employees knew the policy, and if they didn't like it, they were free to go find employment elsewhere.

If an employee of Weyerhauser had parked on a public street and was subjected to the same search, then that employee would have every right to seek justice. However since this all too place on private property, the employees have no case. Two courts in the Weyerhauser case upheld the corporations policy, and I imagine that any legislation in any state that tries to force employers to allow employees to carry guns onto the employer's property is going to go to court. In fact it will be real interesting when state governments get to go up against employers who are backed by the US government. I can think of one(and there are many) instance where this will happen, and that's at a nuclear plant. DOE and NRC policy specifically prohibit any guns, anywhere on the grounds of any nuclear plant for safety reasons, and these regulations were strengthened after 911. The only guns allowed are those carried by fully vetted security officers, or in an emergency, members of the military. Ordinary employees have to leave their guns at home. There are many other instances like this, with specific federal or state regulations regarding gun possession, and who do you think is going to win that legal battle?

Again, this sort of "take my gun anywhere I want" bullshit is trampling on the rights of others. The second amendment does not take precedence over other amendments or laws of the land, despite the gunners' feverent belief that it does.

[benEzra]

78. Case law has long established that the corporate right of property is subject to exceptions

Case law has long established that the corporate right of property is subject to exceptions, restrictions, and regulations, and the contrary position (that corporate property rights supersede privacy and other rights of individuals) has long been a conservative objection to a whole slew of regulations on corporate property and behavior. Your corporation may own that parking lot, but the state and the Feds can tell you how wide the sidewalks should be, how wide the doors should be, the steepness of the ramps, the I-value of the windows, what signs you have to post, and so on; so the state can damn well tell your corporation that you are not allowed to search private vehicles in non-gated lots without probable cause. Since the corporation is a legal construct (in most cases created by state law), then the state can certainly set conditions on its behavior. I suppose when the subject is "OMG GUNZ!!", though, then traditional progressive views of regulation of corporate property go out the window.

If your local bank decided to institute backscatter X-ray scanning of every vehicle that enters its parking lot (its property, after all), without notification (its property, its rules), you'd be OK with that? How about your person? (On their property, after all...)

FWIW, the Florida law under consideration does make exceptions for Federal facilities, high-security facilities, jails, schools, etc., and the protections only apply to those state licensed to carry a firearm, not to everyone (at least in the version I looked at).

[MadHound]

79. Your case law argument is ludicrous in light of the fact that in the Weyerhauser case

Two courts of law both found for the corporation, not the individuals. There are numerous other cases that also carry out this precedent, and these cases aren't limited to gated lots, since that isn't the issue, but non-gated lots, just so long as they are the property of the corporation. If you're barking up the tree of precedent and case law, you're barking up the wrong tree because the majority of precedent and case law has found for the corporation, not the individual.

As far as regulating the width of sidewalks, doors, ramp pitch, etc. etc., all of these are applied to the property of private individuals also, or have you never heard of health codes, building codes, fire codes, ADA legislation, etc? It all applies to private individual's property as well as corporations.

And while my bank has yet to install backscatter X-rays, there are other places of business that have, including airports and other transportation points. If you don't like, you have the option of not visiting those places.

And frankly, if this law goes through in Florida, I imagine that you'll have a quick case coming up challenging the constitutionality of the law. On private property, whether it is owned by an individual or a corporation, the person or entity that owns that property has the Constitutional right, up to a point, to set the rules as to what goes on that property. The second amendment, despite the fevered wishes of gunners, does not supersede those rights. And if you wish to carry a gun and are confronted with a piece of property where guns aren't allowed, you have two choices, either leave your gun at home(or at least off of said property), or don't go on the property.

I'm tired of gunners thinking that the Second Amendment is the supreme Constitutional law of the land, it isn't, it is but one of many and frankly gunners need to learn to deal with that.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

30. Remember when Republicans were for "small government?"

So if I'm a small business owner, I MUST allow individuals to bring firearms onto my property. I no longer control what happens in MY WORKPLACE because the Republicans want the government to decide that for me.

[Junkdrawer]

31. Just think...In a short while, Hometown, USA will look like Baghdad....

Won't it be wonderful...:loveya:

[Indenturedebtor]

50. Yeah you know what just occured to me

That's REALLY fucked up?

Why in the hell can't I smoke a joint in the privacy of my own house (because i'll possibly get piss tested), but I can carry an assault rifle to work with me?!?!?

What the fuck?

[benEzra]

58. You can have an unloaded rifle locked in your trunk...

which is legal in most states. This legislation was prompted by a Weyerhauser search in Oklahoma on the first day of hunting season, in which anyone who refused to open up their car for a company search, or who had a gun legally locked in their car, was summarily fired.

[aikoaiko]

33. Its a reasonable compromise. Especially since the opposite only worked with the good guys.

[madinmaryland]

35. Is this an attempt to legalize "going postal"

Wonder what the US Postal Service has to say about this?

[LanternWaste]

45. Another good reason for me to avoid Florida.

Another good reason for me to never work Florida. Or vacation in Florida. Or go to Florida.

[spin]

59. Before I retired I carried a firearm to work in my car in Florida...

I worked graveyard shift at a defense contractor in the Tampa Bay area of Florida. The neighborhood I lived in had turned less peaceful through the years and several bump and rob incidents had occurred in my immediate area. (A car bumps into you at a stop light. When you get out, you get robbed.) Gang activity was increasing in the area. A drive by shooting happened two houses from me. (No one was hurt, the shooters hit a front porch and a tree.) I had witnessed police with drawn weapons chasing preps once on my street and twice with two blocks of my home.

So many of you might call me paranoid, but having owned and practiced with firearms for years, I decided to carry a firearm in my car's glove box just in case. Many other people at work also had weapons in their vehicles. (You can carry a loaded weapon in your car in Florida legally as long as it is properly secured.)

Rest assured, I didn't have a gun in the car because I felt I might need it it to shoot my fellow workers and management in a moment of rage. I don't suffer from anger management problems. I just carried it as my insurance policy to make it safely to work. I have a fire extinguisher eight feet from me right now, not because I fear the house is going to catch on fire. But if it does, I'll be able to take action...and not merely run about failing my arms in terror.

So I had made a carefully considered decision that a firearm in my car might help save my life or my health on the way to work. For many years the company had no problems with this decision. The guards at work were well aware of the firearm in my vehicle. In fact I bought a stainless S&W .357 revolver from the Sergeant of the guard for the express purpose of carrying it in my vehicle as it was less likely to rust when left in the cold overnight. On several occasions we joked about the possibility of an unarmed guard borrowing the weapon in case of need. I always said that they could borrow the firearm if necessary, but I came attached.

My company was bought out by another. The new company was far less employee friendly than the original. For example, the new vice president installed bullet proof glass around his office. We all felt that at the worst this was a really bad sign of how we might be managed in the future. In reality, the new management, from out of state, probably just didn't understand the gun culture in Florida. Since this happened after 9/11 it is also possible they feared a terrorist attack. (Obviously, I wasn't impressed with either their management skills or their intelligence.)

Eventually the company came out with a new policy that said "No firearms in vehicles in the company parking lot". The stated reason was company liability.

Of course I felt that the company was trying to restrict my legal rights in Florida (as did many of my fellow employees). We felt our cars were private property similar to our houses and the company should not be able to dictate what was legally in either our cars or our houses. They argued that because the cars were parked on their property, they should have the right to determine what we could possess in our cars. We felt that they wanted to overturn the Florida law that allowed us to carry weapons in our cars. They basically said that if we didn't like their policies, we could always leave and don't let the door hit us in the ass on the way out.

Fortunately, after 37 years of working for this company, I was eligible to retire with a pension. Having had the intelligence to not buy into the credit card philosophy of life we are are taught by the media, I owned everything I had. So, being financially able, I was on my way. No, the door didn't hit me in the ass and I left with a wide smile on my face. I have to admit, I feel sorry for the compatriots I left behind.

So I support the Florida "take your guns to work" bill. If I would decided to stay at work and comply with company policy and been seriously injured or killed on my way to work by a criminal with a weapon, a lawsuit against the company would have resulted. If I had died, my daughter assured me she would sue as soon as I was six feet under.

For most people unfamiliar with Florida and other states with or considering similar laws all this will sound terrifying. Strangely enough, honest sane citizens with guns are not a major problem...people with serious mental problems or criminals are.

I realize people who live in areas with very restrictive gun laws have far different ideas on gun ownership. Fine, pass draconian laws where you live. If they reduce violence and save lives, good for you. (The statistics don't appear to show this, but maybe stronger laws will work...who knows.) I would also suggest that if your are uncomfortable around people who own firearms, don't move to Florida. I go out of my way to avoid living in or visiting gun unfriendly states.

Somehow, I feel the real solution to violence begins with finding the root causes and working to cure them. There are no simple "feel good" solutions to the violence problem in our society. However, if we work together to elect people with the willingness, the desire and the intelligence to solve problems, rather than use them as wedge issues to gain votes, we may live in a better world. Some problems that need solved are education, equal opportunity, a fair wage, medical and mental care, and a real solution to the drug problem (might involve legalization of some common drugs).

Less violence should decrease the demand for guns. Fewer guns in the hands of people would reduce senseless violence and accidents. It would be nice if only those who desired guns for pursuits such as hunting and target shooting or collecting would be interested in owning them.

I'm not opposed to reasonable gun laws. In fact, I would like to see a requirement that anyone who purchases a gun must first pass a gun safety class, have a thorough background check that would also reveal treatment of serious mental problems, be fingerprinted, and provide a picture to be used on an identification card. Without that ID card and a telephone call to the NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) you don't get the gun. This requirement would also cover private purchases and gun shows. What I'm suggesting is similar to the requirements for a concealed carry permit...a drivers license for guns. For those who fear the government compiling a list of gun owners, I would point out that with modern data mining capabilities, they already know who owns guns. Privacy laws don't appear to be sacrosanct under the current administration.

[RamboLiberal]

60. Great Post - I completely agree with you n/t

[apocalypsehow]

67. This will have the "guns everywhere all the time under any circumstances" crowd here all tuned up

for a long night of stubby clubbing - this kind of thing makes them pant and drool like a fourteen year old boy with his first Hustler magazine.

[Brigid]

68. We'll see how long this lasts.

It'll last until the first time two workers get into an argument at work, and one of them pulls out a gun. Overactive imagination, you say? I say, what's to stop it?

[sergeiAK]

71. You both realize

This is perfectly legal in many states already? Like mine, for example. And somehow people aren't dying from arguments at work, blood isn't running in the streets, and my boss has yet to shoot me for surfing the web at work.

[benEzra]

80. This law perpetuates the status quo.

Residents of most states (including Florida) have always had the right to have a firearm locked in the vehicle, and it was only recently that a few corporations started doing mass vehicle searches in open lots. The law was sparked by a case in another state in which Weyerhauser did a mass vehicle search on the first day of deer season and fired anyone who either refused a search of their car, or who had a legally possessed firearm secured in the vehicle.

[goodgd_yall]

73. How convenient

Any "going postal" won't even have to try to hide the gun.