Florida lawmakers pass "take your guns to work" law

[Napoleon II]

Roundeye

We're not talking about at the side of the road or on the way home from work. We're talking about an employer's parking lot, or indeed any parking lot. And the owner of that lot is free to set the conditions upon which people use his property and park on his land, including banning the carriage of firearms in vehicles to be stored on his property.

Don't like it? Fine - park somewhere else. It really is that simple.

[Xargos]

And the owner needs to be held responsible for the safety of the employee to and from work.  If the employee is carjacked and killed going to work, then the family should be paid by the business owner for their loss since the owner prevented the employee from being able to defend himself.

And if the employee is not killed, then the business owner needs to pay for a new car, not the employees car insurance company.   

[Roundeye]

Roundeye

We're not talking about at the side of the road or on the way home from work. We're talking about an employer's parking lot, or indeed any parking lot. And the owner of that lot is free to set the conditions upon which people use his property and park on his land, including banning the carriage of firearms in vehicles to be stored on his property.

Don't like it? Fine - park somewhere else. It really is that simple.

Most of the time, you do not have a choice.  If you park in another lot, that property owner can have your car towed (legaly) and usually will if it is a small business which you are taking a space up and walking to another business.  Or, it may be a mile or more to the next lot.  Which leaves you to park on the road (getting towed also), or make an afternoon hike out of it.

So, your options are this:  Leave your protection at home and throw yourself at the mercy of every thug out there,  Park in another lot and possibly get your car towed, leave an hour early to allow hike time, or exercise your right (at least in my state) and go to just about anywhere armed.  If you conceal properly, they won't know anyway.

You can chose to be another victim if you want, I don't.

[Jackal1]

True, but criminals are going to know that there's a much higher chance of finding a gun inside a car, once the law is passed. It doesn't need a freaking sign. 

The criminals for car break ins are also devout cowards for the most part also. Otherwise they would nut up and find a more lucrative form of crime.
This will mean for some and already is my state that Joe Crackhead going after the cellphone, music player or stereo for some quick rock exchange is going to question whether the guy pulling into the parking space next to his target or down the row also might have a gun. Bad news for Joe. The armed criminal will always have and has always had guns to ply their trade. This just allows the average citizen the opportunity to have an even break and the tools to defend against the ones who , up until this point, has had an easy path and been protected by laws that never applied to them. Criminals are not bound by laws.
I have never got a grip on the reasoning...or total lack of reasoning behind the fear of giving the law abiding citizen the tools to defend against the violent criminal. Why would someone wish to have the public at the mercy of gangers, dealers, robbers and so on?
The only ones who would have any need for fear of this would be the violent criminals themselves.

[Roundeye]

Basically, it's like this Napoleon:

  I see your point, but do not agree with it as it would put me, my family and those I am obligated to protect in danger.  As has been well stated, the criminals do not abide by the rules, laws and regulations set forth by any government, entity or individual.  Banning citizens from being able to protect themselves places them at risk.

Take this parking lot thing for example.  If I were a criminal and was wanting to score some easy loot/cash and stop at nothing to get it, I'm taking the path of least resistance.......like doing my evil deeds in a parking lot that bans firearms.

To prove my point, tell me how many people you have heard of being assaulted, robbed, raped or murdered in the parking lot of a gun store, firing range, gun club or NRA convention?

[lasersailor184]

Basically, it's like this Napoleon:

  I see your point, but do not agree with it as it would put me, my family and those I am obligated to protect in danger.  As has been well stated, the criminals do not abide by the rules, laws and regulations set forth by any government, entity or individual.  Banning citizens from being able to protect themselves places them at risk.

Take this parking lot thing for example.  If I were a criminal and was wanting to score some easy loot/cash and stop at nothing to get it, I'm taking the path of least resistance.......like doing my evil deeds in a parking lot that bans firearms.

To prove my point, tell me how many people you have heard of being assaulted, robbed, raped or murdered in the parking lot of a gun store, firing range, gun club or NRA convention?

This is why a parking lot owner must accept all responsibilities for the rules he places on his land.

[FrodeMk3]

This is why a parking lot owner must accept all responsibilities for the rules he places on his land.

But see, here's the funny thing. They don't. Lot's of business's, including contractor's I have worked for in the past, have you sign a hold-harmless agreement in your prehire paperwork, wherein you don't hold said contractor responsible for damages to you or your vehicle whenever you are on their property (like the parking lot.) Which makes things' kind of a pain.

[Napoleon II]

See Rule #7

[lazs2]

so napolean..  If the employer had a "no cell phone" restriction.. could he tell you not to have a cell phone in your car in the parking lot?   so what if you had an emergency or..  felt you might have an emergency that you needed one.. not his problem right?   Don't like it?  park somewhere else.

Not only that but.. in some cases the employer was saying no guns even if your car was parked on public streets..

Nope.. the NRA was and is right on this one.  Your car and what is in it is none of your employers business.  It is a very bad precident to set to allow every parking lot in the country the right to tell you what you can have in your car. 

Do you feel that an employer should have the right to search your car at any time?  even the police have rules on that.

lazs

[Jackal1]

The best I can get from it is that Nappy thinks that only the violent criminals should have firearms and that the every day guy and gal should not have the tools to defend themselves, their family, property and those around them.
We certainly wouldn`t want to give the law abiding citizens an even playing field. That would put a lot of the criminals in a bad position.

[Roundeye]

Probably the same number - zero - who get robbed raped or murdered in any of the (relatively) gun free countries I listed in my first post ^.

So you claim that no people get robbed raped or murdered in counrties that ban guns?  I throw the BS flag on this one.  Criminals will always find firearms no matter how/where you ban them.  Gun crimes occur all over the planet, what changes are the people who are allowed to defend themselves, or are forced to become victims by a rule/law.

Apply your arguement to drugs......nobody has a drug problem in the US because drugs are illegal.


Let me guess, you are a property owning Democrat, right?

[Jackal1]

Apply your arguement to drugs......nobody has a drug problem in the US because drugs are illegal.

The war on drugs didn`t work? 

[lazs2]

If you go to nationmasters... http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_ass_percap-crime-assaults-per-capita

You will see that for all types of violent crime except homicide.. of which about 20% of our population (by race) commits about 60%....that the english speaking countries including england and America have about the same number.

That being said.. I think I would just as soon have a gun to defend myself in any of those countries.  It is foolish to think that you are safe from violent crime in any country.  You are fooling yourself.  thumb up your butt and big stupid grin on your face.

If you look at the robberies per person you will see less in the US..  "manslaughters"  the US is not even listed it is so low..  it is not safer to live in other countries.. even rapes is about the same even tho... again.. most rapes are commited by one small percent of the US population.. by race.

Burgalaries..  3 times more likely in oz and twice as likely in england.. 

How safe do you guys feel now?

lazs

[Napoleon II]

so napolean..  If the employer had a "no cell phone" restriction.. could he tell you not to have a cell phone in your car in the parking lot?   so what if you had an emergency or..  felt you might have an emergency that you needed one.. not his problem right?   Don't like it?  park somewhere else.

Stretching the point a little lazs, but technically, yes - on the grounds that an employer is not compelled to offer parking facilities to his employees, and therefore can set the terms and conditions under which anyone parks on his land. He could refuse access to his parking facilities without giving any reason at all, come to that. It would be a different matter if employers had a legal obligation to provide parking for employees, or employees had a legal right to expect parking facilities to be provided by their employer. I do not know of the existence of any such laws. If you know different, post a link.

But going back to your cell phone example, airlines stipulate that you must turn off your cell phone when on board the aircraft. Do you think they would allow you to keep yours turned on, provided it was in your pocket, on the basis that what's in your pocket is none of their business? Good luck with that! 


Roundeye

So you claim that no people get robbed raped or murdered in counrties that ban guns?  I throw the BS flag on this one.  Criminals will always find firearms no matter how/where you ban them.  Gun crimes occur all over the planet, what changes are the people who are allowed to defend themselves, or are forced to become victims by a rule/law.

OK, my example was not perfect, but I'll bet a week's wages that gangbangery and all the evils that go with it (robberies, assaults, drugs, murders, gun crime, rapes) are much, MUCH worse in poor urban ghettos than in rural areas or small townships. I would also suggest that these problems are negligible in countries like Japan, where there are only about 20 homicides a year. Crime is also pretty much negligible in countries like Switzerland. Ah - I hear you say - that's because there are lots of guns in Switzerland. Possibly true, but that's not the reason for their low crime. If crime levels were inversely proportional to the number of guns in circulation, the US would be virtually crime free. It isn't. Go figure.

[Roundeye]

Roundeye  OK, my example was not perfect, but I'll bet a week's wages that gangbangery and all the evils that go with it (robberies, assaults, drugs, murders, gun crime, rapes) are much, MUCH worse in poor urban ghettos than in rural areas or small townships. I would also suggest that these problems are negligible in countries like Japan, where there are only about 20 homicides a year. Crime is also pretty much negligible in countries like Switzerland. Ah - I hear you say - that's because there are lots of guns in Switzerland. Possibly true, but that's not the reason for their low crime. If crime levels were inversely proportional to the number of guns in circulation, the US would be virtually crime free. It isn't. Go figure.

The reason some countries have low crime rate is NOT because of guns being allowed or dis-allowed.  It is the poeples mindset.  This country has alot of criminals, therefore the people can choose to be victims, or defend themselves.  I choose to defend myself. period.

As for an individual wishing me not to have a firearm in MY VEHICLE on his property...too bad.  What he doesn't know won't hurt him and he has no legal right to find out.  All he can do is suspect.  Whats he going to do, break in and search it?  At that point he would become a criminal himself.  He can call the police, but they can do nothing, as (in my state) carrying a firearm in a vehicle with a permit is legal and they would not have probable cause to search it anyway as no CRIME has been commited or suspected to have.  A gun-banner's rule about his property is not a law.

The ironic thing is this:  If a workplace shooting erupted at his gun-banned business, the owner and everyone there would be hiding under a desk praying for it to end.  An armed citizen could be the one to stop it.  It's happened before. 


You can choose to hide under a desk......I'm returning fire.  I usually have one on me, but even if I had to escape and go to my car, I would return to put a stop to it.  Vigalate, you say?  No.  It's basic human decency.  There is no way I would run away knowing my friends and co-workers were being slaughtered like sheep when I have the means to stop it.