Individual Rights vs. Property rights POLL

[Tweed Ring]

Typically, some rights may conflict with other rights.

In a universe, you cannot have both existing an immovable object – and – an unstoppable force. One must be supreme. Same thing with the various rights we enjoy.

I believe an employer’s right to exercise reasonable control over their property supersedes the employer’s right to keep personal weapons in their vehicles, while said vehicles are parked on the employer’s property.

I eagerly await the employer’s response after the gentle poster advises his or her employer that said employer is hindering his or her commute.

[curmudgeon3]

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.

FWIW, the other 26 States who passed legislation similar to SB180 had clauses to ameliorate employer civil liability,
which is the way it should have been in the first place. What other hangup would there be if not for that ?

[Werz]

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.

All those limitations on property rights are by statute, passed by a majority of the legislature, just like the Framers of the Constitution intended. The same can apply to employee parking, if the Ohio General Assembly can be convinced it is the will the people (i.e., the voters).

The Second Amendment is not a magic talisman, and when people stop deluding themselves that it is, maybe we can get more accomplished in the legislature.

[Tweed Ring]

All roads lead to Columbus, Ohio. As I have said, repeatedly, the game is not won or lost with emotional proclamations on various Internet bulletin boards.

Rather, it is won or lost by lobbyists and by other influential people in the OGA.

Have at it.

[gaptrick]

Typically, some rights may conflict with other rights.

In a universe, you cannot have both existing an immovable object – and – an unstoppable force. One must be supreme. Same thing with the various rights we enjoy.

I believe an employer’s right to exercise reasonable control over their property supersedes the employer’s right to keep personal weapons in their vehicles, while said vehicles are parked on the employer’s property

I eagerly await the employer’s response after the gentle poster advises his or her employer that said employer is hindering his or her commute.

Ha ha...! Await no more!

This gentle poster is the owner of his business and parking lot and believes he has no business sticking his nose into his employee's property to look for items legally owned.

I encourage my employee's to return tomorrow for another days work. I've invested time and treasure into their skill set that in turn pays dividends and I will not hinder their return by disarming their commute.

I find no reason to disarm them merely because "I can" . In no way does their desire to carry and stow in their cars affect my business.

[Tweed Ring]

Good for you. Choice is a wonderful thing, is it not?

Addendum. Would you allow my church to hold an outdoor service, after work hours, of course, in your privately owned parking lot? We would shower you and the parking lot with our blessings.

I guess I await again.

[gaptrick]

I regretfully have to inform you that I would not let you and/or your church/coven on my property. I would believe it to be a distraction to the employees and the surrounding neighborhood. You and your purple hooded followers are simply not invited onto my property, be it during, or be it after hours. Terribly sorry...

But...!

If you were to apply for a position, then deemed suitable for employment and invited to work at my establishment, you would be held bound by our company handbook, where, luckily for you, you MAY transport and stow in your personal vehicle any legally owned item you may wish to convey while in the company parking lot (...no need to park outside the gate here by golly!).

WARNING... As stated in the company handbook, no wearing of purple hoods while operating machinery. Our HR department has advised this could be a safety issue... Thought to make that clear ahead of time in case it would be an issue.

[Tweed Ring]

I regretfully have to inform you that I would not let you and/or your church/coven on my property. I would believe it to be a distraction to the employees and the surrounding neighborhood. You and your purple hooded followers are simply not invited onto my property, be it during, or be it after hours. Terribly sorry...

But...!

If you were to apply for a position, then deemed suitable for employment and invited to work at my establishment, you would be held bound by our company handbook, where, luckily for you, you MAY transport and stow in your personal vehicle any legally owned item you may wish to convey while in the company parking lot (...no need to park outside the gate here by golly!).

WARNING... As stated in the company handbook, no wearing of purple hoods while operating machinery. Our HR department has advised this could be a safety issue... Thought to make that clear ahead of time in case it would be an issue.

No need to apologize. I understand when people do not give the same regard to our First Amendment’s freedom of religion, but again, religious intolerance is still legal in our country. Moreover, I see you agree with me the employer’s ability to choose is still a wonderful thing.

You have exercised your right to choose and I honor same. I shall ignore the brief whiff of hypocrisy; you elect to choose but deny that same ability to other, less grand employers, in controlling their private property. Alas, such is life and I should expect some disappointment as I age.

Moreover, I would hate to distract your employees from their assigned duties. I care not at all for your neighbors, as they are not compensated by you, and are simply on their own.

My flock eschews purple hoods except on our most holy of days. Our Day of Celebration is April 3rd. and our Day of Mourning is April 12th. of each year. Merely provide the address of your mighty empire, and we shall be sure to stop by and prey for all so gainfully employed by you next year.

Thankfully, my days of work are long behind me as I now subsist comfortably on Irish Welfare. However, if you could match or surpass my requirement of $15.00 per hour, I might be tempted to reconsider, were my terms and conditions of employment joined. Moreover, as my forebears were Irish, I’m just not good around machinery. Too, I am a bit of a Wobblie, so beware the black cat.

[gaptrick]

Mr. Ring,

May I say here and to all that you sir are a true blast and highly appreciated. I fully enjoy our back and forty on this issue.
It is clearly obvious that I will not ever get the chance to employ you. This is almost as unfortunate as you never getting me to don the purple shroud and join your church, as tempting as it might be. Sometimes things are what they are.

I hope there is a time you and I could hoist a cold soda together be it in the passing or the defeat of 180.

I too am of Irish ancestry, but unfortunately no one ever told me to stay away from the machinery, so at the grindstone I still toil.

[curmudgeon3]

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.

All those limitations on property rights are by statute, passed by a majority of the legislature, just like the Framers of the Constitution intended. The same can apply to employee parking, if the Ohio General Assembly can be convinced it is the will the people (i.e., the voters).

The Second Amendment is not a magic talisman, and when people stop deluding themselves that it is, maybe we can get more accomplished in the legislature.

....... after the 2016 elections, of course.

[WhyNot]

ahh! gaptrick understands the nexus between someone being on property as a viable function i.e. employee, vs. as a random placement for fundraiser, or worship service. Or personages w/ cardboard signs.
Correctly discerning the differences of split beans from coffee is NOT the same as apples from carrots, and, singularly, a welcomed humorous momentary distraction from topic at hand.

Enjoy!

[Bama.45]

The thing is..I am glad that gaptrick made the choice he has and allows his employees to carry in their car..But the ones that doesn't want guns on the property that they bought and pay taxes on should have the same right to make the choice not to allow firearms on their property..I don't agree with employers that do this, but I do agree with them having the right to make this choice without being forced to allow something by a govt entity...The more you start forcing folks to do things against their will, the more repercussions will start to follow..You start forcing big corporations hands..They start spending big bucks lobbying..And it could come back to bite 2nd amendment rights in the backside...Ohio is not like a lot of the states that passed parking lot carry laws..There is a lot of liberalism in Ohio..

And even if there wasn't, I don't agree with anyone being forced to do something against their will..It's just plain wrong whether it's under the disguise of supporting a right or not. Now folks that work for public, govt entities should be allowed to carry in the parking lot. We the taxpayers pay for those buildings and parking lots. And I will go as far as to say the big banks and other companies that have gotten bailed out on the taxpayer's dime should be forced to allow employees/citizens to carry in their parking lot, because they aren't 100% privately owned anymore unless they have paid the taxpayers back.

[Tweed Ring]

Sure. I, too, support the gentle poster’s decision to allow his employees to maintain their personal weapons, in their personal vehicles, while parked on his property.

Choice is a beautiful thing.

[curmudgeon3]

Yes, it is ......

"Employees of a private business should be allowed to safely keep any legally owned items in their vehicle while parked on company property while on the clock.
65
76%
Private business owners should retain the right to dictate what their employees possess in their vehicles while on their private lot
20
24%"

Implementation of SB180 will proably carry along with it a clause to ameliorate civil liability for the employers' legal-eagles.

[Tweed Ring]

Good. Next, please poll employers who own the properties.