SB 199 issue at work

This forum is for discussion of general issues regarding Concealed Carry in your everyday life. This forum is not intended to be political or for discussing legislation.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Brian D.
Posts: 16229
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by Brian D. »

JustaShooter wrote:
schmieg wrote:
JustaShooter wrote: But, the new law appears pretty clear in that it applies to any "public or private employer". So, when such apparent conflicts exist in the law, how does one decide which has precedence? In this case, the state has said the new law applies, and I suspect they've had their lawyers look things over. But I'm still curious, it seems there must be a mechanism to use to determine which applies.
There is. It's called court.
You mean to tell me that there is no specified method to resolve conflicts in the law itself like this one outside of court? Like, the most recently enacted section wins, or the section that falls later in the law, or the least / most restrictive, etc.? Seems that would be a standard part of the body of law since conflicts like this are unfortunately inevitable.
Hey, you wouldn't want to see a bunch of lawyers out of work, would ya? We gotta stay up to our armpits in gators..litigators, that is.
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!

********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
User avatar
JediSkipdogg
Posts: 10257
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:03 pm
Location: Batavia
Contact:

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by JediSkipdogg »

Brian D. wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:You mean to tell me that there is no specified method to resolve conflicts in the law itself like this one outside of court? Like, the most recently enacted section wins, or the section that falls later in the law, or the least / most restrictive, etc.? Seems that would be a standard part of the body of law since conflicts like this are unfortunately inevitable.
Hey, you wouldn't want to see a bunch of lawyers out of work, would ya? We gotta stay up to our armpits in gators..litigators, that is.
The worst part is, if it's won in court, it still doesn't automatically change the law. It simply creates "case law" which is even harder to dig up than "ORC law." I'm not sure if it's still on the books, but there use to be a law that municipalities can't enforce traffic laws on highways if they don't have a direct on or off ramp in their jurisdiction. Obviously, that set a lot of places off because when you have 5 jurisdictions in 1 mile, you can't expect them to all have on and off ramps. The Ohio Supreme Court struck the law down but I know for at least 10 years it was still on the books and still being brought up by defendants in court only to be told by the prosecution the law was struck down.

SB199 is a perfect example of how sloppy the elected are. Governments can allow carry by passing an ordinance but they still must post signs saying no carry allowed. And that is why we have attorneys and why they charge so much. They get the job of digging through all this legal BS that gets passed.
Carrying Concealed Handguns - Signage Answers

Ohio Concealed Carry Classes in S/W Ohio
http://www.ProShootersTraining.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am not a lawyer. My answers are based on research, knowledge, and are generally backed up with facts, the Ohio Revised Code, or the United States Code.
Brian D.
Posts: 16229
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by Brian D. »

Yeah but Jedi, many if not most of those elected to the Statehouse are lawyers themselves. They have other lawyers and staff available to them any dang time, to figure out if a bill they're working through--in Lee Majors/Steve Austin super slo mo--is ultimately legal and workable. And you make it sound like the way to fix it is..bring in more lawyers.

Sometime when you're working on your property, digging a hole, and find you're in so deep you can't climb out, ring me up and... I'll bring you a bigger shovel. :lol:
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!

********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
M-Quigley
Posts: 4782
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by M-Quigley »

JustaShooter wrote:
M-Quigley wrote:
38smith wrote:It is voluntary but if you don't sign to their stipulations then you can't bring your firearm. Nothing new from our union. Idk if it came from corporate or Totino bigshots within the plant. Ufcw 1059 is about worthless so I'm sure they won't help.
According to who? How would they find out? Car searches? Even if they discover someone legally has a gun in their car, then what? They are just going to ignore the new law?
No, they will fire you for not following the company policy that requires you to fill out & sign the form, not for having a gun in your car.
So what happened to the "voluntary" part, if that is the case?
User avatar
JustaShooter
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5800
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by JustaShooter »

M-Quigley wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:
M-Quigley wrote:38smith wrote: "It is voluntary but if you don't sign to their stipulations then you can't bring your firearm. Nothing new from our union. Idk if it came from corporate or Totino bigshots within the plant. Ufcw 1059 is about worthless so I'm sure they won't help."

According to who? How would they find out? Car searches? Even if they discover someone legally has a gun in their car, then what? They are just going to ignore the new law?
No, they will fire you for not following the company policy that requires you to fill out & sign the form, not for having a gun in your car.
So what happened to the "voluntary" part, if that is the case?
Simple - if you don't want to store your gun in your car, don't fill out the form. Completely voluntary. </sarc> But unfortunately, the way I read the new law, completely legal.
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
M-Quigley
Posts: 4782
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by M-Quigley »

JustaShooter wrote:Simple - if you don't want to store your gun in your car, don't fill out the form. Completely voluntary. </sarc> But unfortunately, the way I read the new law, completely legal.
I'm not a lawyer, but when I read the law on parking lot storage I didn't anything in reference to "with permission of the employer" or other similar language.
User avatar
djthomas
Posts: 5961
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by djthomas »

JediSkipdogg wrote:SB199 is a perfect example of how sloppy the elected are. Governments can allow carry by passing an ordinance but they still must post signs saying no carry allowed.
Perhaps they didn't bother with the sign part because they figured it was a moot point. :evil:
38smith
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:17 pm
Location: Wellston, Ohio

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by 38smith »

One team leader made the comment that the gun has to be unloaded because if they walk a person out and they have a loaded gun in their vehicle then they could use it. Um it takes a while 5 seconds to load a gun so I don't agree with his thinking.
User avatar
djthomas
Posts: 5961
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by djthomas »

38smith wrote:One team leader made the comment that the gun has to be unloaded because if they walk a person out and they have a loaded gun in their vehicle then they could use it. Um it takes a while 5 seconds to load a gun so I don't agree with his thinking.
Duh, that's why you walk them out to their car and tell them to stand there and count to 100 without looking while you flee back to the building.
User avatar
JustaShooter
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5800
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by JustaShooter »

M-Quigley wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:Simple - if you don't want to store your gun in your car, don't fill out the form. Completely voluntary. </sarc> But unfortunately, the way I read the new law, completely legal.
I'm not a lawyer, but when I read the law on parking lot storage I didn't anything in reference to "with permission of the employer" or other similar language.
As long as the policy doesn't prohibit you from storing your firearm in your vehicle, I see nothing that prevents them from requiring notice - recall, the law says you must have a CHL, so they would appear to be with the letter of the law to require you to show you are eligible.

Again, badly written law. Blame the lawmakers.
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
Buckeyedoc
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:20 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by Buckeyedoc »

So, what is required of a vehicle that does not have a locking compartment inside the vehicle and does not have a trunk? Based on how the current law is worded, I can't secure my firearm in my van.
User avatar
JustaShooter
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5800
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by JustaShooter »

Buckeyedoc wrote:So, what is required of a vehicle that does not have a locking compartment inside the vehicle and does not have a trunk? Based on how the current law is worded, I can't secure my firearm in my van.
Correct, as I read the law. Get a gun safe for your van.
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
curmudgeon3
Posts: 6534
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:31 pm

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by curmudgeon3 »

JustaShooter wrote:
M-Quigley wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:Simple - if you don't want to store your gun in your car, don't fill out the form. Completely voluntary. </sarc> But unfortunately, the way I read the new law, completely legal.
I'm not a lawyer, but when I read the law on parking lot storage I didn't anything in reference to "with permission of the employer" or other similar language.
As long as the policy doesn't prohibit you from storing your firearm in your vehicle, I see nothing that prevents them from requiring notice - recall, the law says you must have a CHL, so they would appear to be with the letter of the law to require you to show you are eligible.

Again, badly written law. Blame the lawmakers.
Job security; confidentiality agreement in the fraternity of lawyers/legislators, the more confusing/complicated the laws, the more lawyers are required. Judges (lawyers themselves) won't allow any defense to proceed unless proper protocol is followed by a "trained" lawyer. It's futile to try to deny or ignore this reality.
User avatar
BecauseICan
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:52 pm
Location: Toledo,Ohio

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by BecauseICan »

I just got an email from our union today regarding this. I was planning a consult with DeBrosse and it appears our local has allocated funds to do the same. I didn't want to go to the company myself of course.

My employer wants us to fill out a form and give them a copy of our permit. The information could include model and serial number. This info goes to a private security company we use that hires people that dont look old enough to buy a handgun to begin with. They have no vested interest in the company and would know who has a gun in their vehicle, where they park, when and how long they are working. I think that is a security issue itself.

They are also requiring the gun to be unloaded while on the property and it cannot physically be loaded, unloaded or otherwise manipulated while on the property. We are a private company but fall under homeland security regulation as well. They also already do dog searches randomly. Local PDs train their dogs here so simply "keeping my mouth shut" doesn't work unfortunately because that is my normal modus operandi.

I am hoping to have some answers soon to post here. It could have a statewide affect whatever we come up with.
CHL since '08
Primarily carry a XDM or a Judge
38smith
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:17 pm
Location: Wellston, Ohio

Re: SB 199 issue at work

Post by 38smith »

Our union and company tried to come to a decision about the new law and I guess they are above Ohio law. They say since it is Company wide that no firearms are permitted then it also applies to our parking lot. It's their property so they can decide not to allow it. I always thought state law was to be followed.
Post Reply