Individual Rights vs. Property rights POLL

[Tweed Ring]

I wonder if the "property rights " folks think fire regulations, parking requirements, ADA, zoning, and elevator codes......should all be done away with on an employers 'private' property?
At some point the lack of common sense is comical, especially on a supposedly pro 2A forum.

Those things are imposed by various levels of government - not by the employees.

I do agree about the lack of common sense.

[curmudgeon3]

Last I checked, this is a discussion forum mostly populated with pro-gun "regular folks" and definitely not the floor of the General Assembly.

I do wonder...
How would Rickey Henderson fare in politics?

Ever wonder if a member of the OGA is an anonymous poster herein?

I think they assign party acolytes to do that menial information gathering and tamping down; they're easy to discern here on this forum.

[Sevens]

I can't say that I do.

I stick to my initial idea...
Less laws covering every abstract detail of our existence is my preference. Sort of a "big picture" kind of view.

[Imcrazy]

Employees should be allowed to carry concealed in the business too, it's truly no ones business but my own what I keep out of sight on my person.

[carmen fovozzo]

If the government is willing to pay my rediculous property tax on my business property, I might change my mind..
If they won't, then my property my Freaken rules...
They should also ban in resturants men in tank tops with hairy arm Pitts.....and women that don't wear bras, well maybe just the guys and not the ladies..

[WY_Not]

Also known as hypocrites. The supporting of rights selectively and when it suits them or their wants.

Everyone blindly supporting this bill are selfishly looking at it from their view of what they want and to hell with someone else's rights.

[DontTreadOnMe]

Also known as hypocrites. The supporting of rights selectively and when it suits them or their wants.

Everyone blindly supporting this bill are selfishly looking at it from their view of what they want and to hell with someone else's rights.

Can we tone down the rhetoric a bit? I could easily say "everyone blindly opposing this bill are selfishly looking at it from their view of what they want and to hell with someone else's rights".

I don't say that, because I understand this is a question of competing rights. I come down in favor of the bill because the harm to property ownership rights is very minor, while the harm to individual rights is (IMO) much greater. Again, because the requirement to not have a gun in my vehicle at work also means I cannot have a gun for personal protection from the moment I leave the house in the morning until I come home at night. Where I work (and I know many others are in the same position) there's simply no option to park anywhere except in the company parking lot.

[Tru-Heathen]

With HR180 in the works, and this being apparently such a divisive issue between the two camps, I created this poll to get a feel for where the people on these forums fall in these regards.

There are a couple of active threads discussing this issue already so no real need to elaborate on the discussion here, but a vote either way would be appreciated.

Which way do the scales of justice tip for you? Thanks.

See how well that request by the OP was followed !

Seriously, now where's that stick, that carcass needs beaten a bit more.

[gaptrick]

And what about home based businesses..If some here supporting this owned one would they be so gung ho about parking lot carry?..Would you like just anyone carrying a firearm on your property?..Remember, some folks may not have the common sense God gave a grasshopper, but have a good work ethic and are valuable as an employee...I just think there's a line there and if I owned a business, I should be able to run it how I see fit..Even if it is run into the ground.


Everyone blindly supporting this bill are selfishly looking at it from their view of what they want and to hell with someone else's rights.

Why would ANYONE have a problem with their employees wanting to travel to and from safely whether it be a home based mom and pop OR a multi billion dollar conglomerate?

Do you suggest an IQ test prior to purchasing a firearm? How else would we weed out the grasshoppers? The highlighted text above has you sounding like just another anti, while we all know you are not.

[Tweed Ring]

Unless specified, the employer has none and assumes no responsibility for the employees’ commute. None.

[carmen fovozzo]

Why are property rights not on par with individual rights.....I am a individual aren't I ?

[gaptrick]

Unless specified, the employer has none and assumes no responsibility for the employees’ commute. None.

And again, no responsibility of the owner implied or desired. It is about the hindrance of a safe commute that is the responsibility of the employee alone...

[Tweed Ring]

Again, the employer is simply not hindering your commute. If you truly believe the employer is hindering the commute, call the police or file a civil suit.

One could find another method of transporting oneself to-and-from one’s workplace, or find another place to park, or flaunt the employer’s rules, or file an employee grievance against the employer, or bring suit against the employer, or convince the OGA to change the law, or find another employer, or engage in a combination thereof. Plainly, it’s just that simple.

Please. When you told your employer that said employer was hindering your commute, what was the employer's response?

[Qfac]

Why are property rights not on par with individual rights.....I am a individual aren't I ?

There is and must be a hierarchy of Rights and the right to life and the right to maintain that default state is number one. It is an inalienable Right and it is not given to you by a piece of paper, the paper (State or Fed) just acknowledge it and prevent its suppression.

[Bama.45]

And what about home based businesses..If some here supporting this owned one would they be so gung ho about parking lot carry?..Would you like just anyone carrying a firearm on your property?..Remember, some folks may not have the common sense God gave a grasshopper, but have a good work ethic and are valuable as an employee...I just think there's a line there and if I owned a business, I should be able to run it how I see fit..Even if it is run into the ground.


Everyone blindly supporting this bill are selfishly looking at it from their view of what they want and to hell with someone else's rights.

Why would ANYONE have a problem with their employees wanting to travel to and from safely whether it be a home based mom and pop OR a multi billion dollar conglomerate?

Do you suggest an IQ test prior to purchasing a firearm? How else would we weed out the grasshoppers? The highlighted text above has you sounding like just another anti, while we all know you are not.

I am far from an anti... But I do hold that folks property rights are just as sacred as gun rights.. And no I don't agree with anyone's rights trampling another persons... Your rights stop where mine begin.. As far as the IQ test no I don't think there should be one.. And there are plenty of book smart intelligent folks that have no business owning a firearm... Just look on YouTube at the idiots looking down the muzzle of guns etc...Like I said would you want someone careless with firearms to have one on your property, around your family?...I don't and I am sure most of us know folks that need a gun about like they need another hole in their head... And you're right there shouldn't be a test for the grasshoppers, but I should be able to say who carries a firearm on my property, business or not... If I don't know someone I don't want them armed in my house period.. And when it comes to employees sometimes no one knows about them, not even co workers.