-
2nd amendment V private comapny
story
A question to pro 2nd amendment US citizens:
Do you think it is unreasonable for a company to have a policy prohibiting guns on it's premises?.
The NRA is organising a boycott of ConocoPhillips after an employee was dismissed for breaking company policy by having legally owned guns in their cars in the company car park.
I am not keen on the gun culture as it stands and think the original intention of the 2nd amendment has been "pushed to the limits", but I do not wish to ban gun ownership.
I do strongly believe though that people have the right to not allow guns on their property and if one disagrees with a company policy like this then don't work for that company or park off premises.
ConocoPhillips are not trying to stop their employees owning guns so I am at a loss as to the argument the NRA is making.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
story
A question to pro 2nd amendment US citizens:
Do you think it is unreasonable for a company to have a policy prohibiting guns on it's premises?.
The NRA is organising a boycott of ConocoPhillips after an employee was dismissed for breaking company policy by having legally owned guns in their cars in the company car park.
I am not keen on the gun culture as it stands and think the original intention of the 2nd amendment has been "pushed to the limits", but I do not wish to ban gun ownership.
I do strongly believe though that people have the right to not allow guns on their property and if one disagrees with a company policy like this then don't work for that company or park off premises.
ConocoPhillips are not trying to stop their employees owning guns so I am at a loss as to the argument the NRA is making.
I have no problems with any company not wanting firearms on their property. I can see the danger, especially when it comes to "disgruntled employees" Having been in the position of having to terminate someones employment, firearms don't belong there at all. I agree with you though, I think this is a step overboard by the NRA :huh:
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
story
A question to pro 2nd amendment US citizens:
Does that mean just US citizens can post here.
Or can anyone join in.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
i suppose a paranoid loony should be allowed to leave it in their car for the journey to and from home justincase they get hijacked
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
That seems to be open forum then.
If the gun is legal then how have they the right to sack someone for having it in his car, even if it is their car park.
Just because they have a policy does not mean that the policy is fair and reasonable. One assumes he is claiming unfair dismissal.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPerry
I have no problems with any company not wanting firearms on their property. I can see the danger, especially when it comes to "disgruntled employees" Having been in the position of having to terminate someones employment, firearms don't belong there at all. I agree with you though, I think this is a step overboard by the NRA :huh:
I tend to think that your exact reasoning is why some people are dismissed by "impersonal" methods such as E.mail or telephone followed by an official letter instead of calling them into the office and explaining why.
There is a right to carry arms but there are also right places to have them and the company was clear on this.
I do agree that any private citizen has the right to not patronise any company, I just feel that this reason just exposes the NRA as being an extremist group than a common sense group.
I may make a point of filling up at their stations from now on.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Many Government Departments or "Outsourcers" in the USA, especially in the USA have similar policies with regard to camera's or mobile phones with camera's. If caught with one on government/company property, its a sacking offence with no appeal. Just ask Mathea :(
If he knew the policy, then he can have no complaint about about it.
They werent trying to stop him having a gun... just not bring one onto their land. I would have thought that most employers would have similar policies due to Health and Safety legislations.. If someone did go nuts, they'd be sued, im sure.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
i suppose a paranoid loony should be allowed to leave it in their car for the journey to and from home justincase they get hijacked
They can hide it outside the parking lot, like. In secret. Maybe a few extra guns, just to be sure.
It's about firearms tho', so swords are ok, right? :unsure:
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
So how can you justify sacking someone for doing something which is (presumably) perfectly legal.
If they ban biscuits on their land and someone has some in his car is that also a sacking offence.
Nah, that makes no sense.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
So how can you justify sacking someone for doing something which is (presumably) perfectly legal.
If they ban biscuits on their land and someone has some in his car is that also a sacking offence.
Nah, that makes no sense.
If it's part of the code of conduct or whatever the company calls it, then yes.
You abide the companies rules for employement.
I cannot work for another telephone company or do any business that my company does or I'm fired.
Companies are justified in barring weapons or cameras on their property.
There isn't a distinction between the parking lot and the office. It's company property.
So if guns are NOT banned on their parking lot, then they aren't in the office and the fella is free to bring guns into his and other's cubicles.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
So how can you justify sacking someone for doing something which is (presumably) perfectly legal.
If they ban biscuits on their land and someone has some in his car is that also a sacking offence.
Nah, that makes no sense.
If it's part of the code of conduct or whatever the company calls it, then yes.
You abide the companies rules for employement.
I cannot work for another telephone company or do any business that my company does or I'm fired.
Companies are justified in barring weapons or cameras on their property.
There isn't a distinction between the parking lot and the office. It's company property.
So if guns are NOT banned on their parking lot, then they aren't in the office and the fella is free to bring guns into his and other's cubicles.
So if they ban biscuits then "possession of a biscuit" is a sackable offence.
Kewl employment legislation you have there.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
If it's part of the code of conduct or whatever the company calls it, then yes.
You abide the companies rules for employement.
I cannot work for another telephone company or do any business that my company does or I'm fired.
Companies are justified in barring weapons or cameras on their property.
There isn't a distinction between the parking lot and the office. It's company property.
So if guns are NOT banned on their parking lot, then they aren't in the office and the fella is free to bring guns into his and other's cubicles.
So if they ban biscuits then "possession of a biscuit" is a sackable offence.
Kewl employment legislation you have there.
sorry to agree with busyman, but yeah. if it's in the rules, it is
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
If it's part of the code of conduct or whatever the company calls it, then yes.
You abide the companies rules for employement.
I cannot work for another telephone company or do any business that my company does or I'm fired.
Companies are justified in barring weapons or cameras on their property.
There isn't a distinction between the parking lot and the office. It's company property.
So if guns are NOT banned on their parking lot, then they aren't in the office and the fella is free to bring guns into his and other's cubicles.
So if they ban biscuits then "possession of a biscuit" is a sackable offence.
Kewl employment legislation you have there.
Nahh that's what unions are good for.
Alcohol is perfectly legal yet I can't take swig at work or have it on the property.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
So if they ban biscuits then "possession of a biscuit" is a sackable offence.
Kewl employment legislation you have there.
sorry to agree with busyman, but yeah. if it's in the rules, it is
So if it's a rule it must be right, sorry I never knew that.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
So if they ban biscuits then "possession of a biscuit" is a sackable offence.
Kewl employment legislation you have there.
Nahh that's what unions are good for.
Alcohol is perfectly legal yet I can't take swig at work or have it on the property.
Drinking alcohol has a detremental effect on your ability to do your job = Having a legal weapon in your car, in the car park, has a detremental effect on your ability to do your job.
How does that work.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Nahh that's what unions are good for.
Alcohol is perfectly legal yet I can't take swig at work or have it on the property.
Drinking alcohol has a detremental effect on your ability to do your job = Having a legal weapon in your car, in the car park, has a detremental effect on your ability to do your job.
So do painkillers. Your point?
Alcohol can have a detrimental effect on me doing my job.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Drinking alcohol has a detremental effect on your ability to do your job = Having a legal weapon in your car, in the car park, has a detremental effect on your ability to do your job.
So do painkillers. Your point?
Alcohol
can have a detrimental effect on me doing my job.
A gun, in a car, in a car park, can't, your point.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
So do painkillers. Your point?
Alcohol can have a detrimental effect on me doing my job.
A gun, in a car, in a car park, can't, your point.
Of course it can. Especially since in Oklahoma, to legally have it in your car, it must be in plain sight (not unless that's changed recently). Break-ins, break-ins.
Also a company should not be responsible for whether a person legally has a gun or not.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
A gun, in a car, in a car park, can't, your point.
Of course it can. Especially since in Oklahoma, to legally have it in your car, it must be in plain sight (not unless that's changed recently). Break-ins, break-ins.
Also a company should not be responsible for whether a person legally has a gun or not.
If it's legal to own a gun then what's the difference between that and a biscuit.
Or can't you leave biscuits in your car either.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Of course it can. Especially since in Oklahoma, to legally have it in your car, it must be in plain sight (not unless that's changed recently). Break-ins, break-ins.
Also a company should not be responsible for whether a person legally has a gun or not.
If it's legal to own a gun then what's the difference between that and a biscuit.
Or can't you leave biscuits in your car either.
Guns are weapons, biscuits are not...unless I made them.
Legal weapons are still classified as weapons. Many companies prohibit weapons on their property.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
if i had a job and the rules said no biscuits. i wouldn't take in biscuits. i don't need them. i'm not gonna complain about my human rights or civil liberties if it's their private preference and i don't have to work for them. if i get sacked for it, it's my own stupid fault. if i was a bit crazy and wanted to take a gun into work where i wasn't allowed one. i wouldn't take it, because i don't need it and it's against the rules
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
If it's legal to own a gun then what's the difference between that and a biscuit.
Or can't you leave biscuits in your car either.
Guns are weapons, biscuits are not...unless I made them.
Legal weapons are still classified as weapons. Many companies prohibit weapons on
their property.
So companies can make prohibitions re items, so long as they are considered weapons, but not biscuits.
What about an umbrella, can they sack you for having one in your car, in their car park.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
I can't wear shorts or muscle shirts at work. :(
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Guns are weapons, biscuits are not...unless I made them.
Legal weapons are still classified as weapons. Many companies prohibit weapons on their property.
So companies can make prohibitions re items, so long as they are considered weapons, but not biscuits.
What about an umbrella, can they sack you for having one in your car, in their car park.
No not to my knowledge.
To add to this fiasco, the fella knew what company policy was and broke the rule anyway.
Wanna do away with a rule, fight to have it changed.
There different rules in my company than when I started well over a decade ago. Some of folks that broke the rules back then would probably still have their job by today's rules and vice-versa.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
if i had a job and the rules said no biscuits. i wouldn't take in biscuits. i don't need them. i'm not gonna complain about my human rights or civil liberties if it's their private preference and i don't have to work for them. if i get sacked for it, it's my own stupid fault. if i was a bit crazy and wanted to take a gun into work where i wasn't allowed one. i wouldn't take it, because i don't need it and it's against the rules
What if they banned the word "The", would you not use it.
Human rights be damned, the employer's word is law.
No wait, shit loads of people went thro' serious hard times to stop that kind of servile thinking. At least they did where I come from.
http://www.sfu.ca/~rptoews/hardie.jpg
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
So companies can make prohibitions re items, so long as they are considered weapons, but not biscuits.
What about an umbrella, can they sack you for having one in your car, in their car park.
No not to my knowledge.
To add to this fiasco, the fella knew what company policy was and broke the rule anyway.
Wanna do away with a rule, fight to have it changed.
There different rules in my company than when I started well over a decade ago. Some of folks that broke the rules back then would probably still have their job by today's rules and vice-versa.
So what if company policy is "no umbrellas on company property".
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
if i had a job and the rules said no biscuits. i wouldn't take in biscuits. i don't need them. i'm not gonna complain about my human rights or civil liberties if it's their private preference and i don't have to work for them. if i get sacked for it, it's my own stupid fault. if i was a bit crazy and wanted to take a gun into work where i wasn't allowed one. i wouldn't take it, because i don't need it and it's against the rules
What if they banned the word "The", would you not use it.
Human rights be damned, the employer's word is law.
No wait, shit loads of people went thro' serious hard times to stop that kind of servile thinking. At least they did where I come from.
http://www.sfu.ca/~rptoews/hardie.jpg
Over here, that's why unions exist.
Our unions wouldn't get far if they shitfit over things like carrying a gun and companies wouldn't if they harped on the word "the".
In absence of unions, your only recourse is the court.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
No not to my knowledge.
To add to this fiasco, the fella knew what company policy was and broke the rule anyway.
Wanna do away with a rule, fight to have it changed.
There different rules in my company than when I started well over a decade ago. Some of folks that broke the rules back then would probably still have their job by today's rules and vice-versa.
So what if company policy is "no umbrellas on company property".
Go to court. The umbrella is not classified as a weapon. It's primary purpose is to keep rain off of you when......uh...going to parking lot from the office and vice-versa.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
if i had a job and the rules said no biscuits. i wouldn't take in biscuits. i don't need them. i'm not gonna complain about my human rights or civil liberties if it's their private preference and i don't have to work for them. if i get sacked for it, it's my own stupid fault. if i was a bit crazy and wanted to take a gun into work where i wasn't allowed one. i wouldn't take it, because i don't need it and it's against the rules
What if they banned the word "The", would you not use it.
Human rights be damned, the employer's word is law.
No wait, shit loads of people went thro' serious hard times to stop that kind of servile thinking. At least they did where I come from.
http://www.sfu.ca/~rptoews/hardie.jpg
http://image.basspro.com/images/images2/82000/82242.jpg
you gotta be
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Over here, that's why unions exist.
Our unions wouldn't get far if they shitfit over things carrying a gun and companies wouldn't if they harped on the word "the".
To be fair, I have no idea what that means.
I suspect you have the same sensation re the concept of abstraction.
What if a company banned red socks, would that be OK.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
A pathetic use of the rod to attempt a rod.
V Poor.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
What if a company banned red socks, would that be OK.
yes.
a companys rules are rules. they don't even need a reason. unless it's a personal thing. like banning the name David, it's fair
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
Quote:
What if a company banned red socks, would that be OK.
yes.
wrong
a companys rules are rules.
wrong they don't even need a reason.
wrong unless it's a personal thing. like banning the name David, it's fair
wrong
Today's winner in the being wrong competition.
We gave that type of thinkng up decades ago. Why were you not informed.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
STFU n00b :lol:
i'm leaving :dry:
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Over here, that's why unions exist.
Our unions wouldn't get far if they shitfit over things carrying a gun and companies wouldn't if they harped on the word "the".
To be fair, I have no idea what that means.
I suspect you have the same sensation re the concept of abstraction.
What if a company banned red socks, would that be OK.
It means the negotiations between the union and the company would go to shit.
Regarding socks, yes if there is a dress code that prohibits it. Personally it would suck.....to wear red socks. Again everything comes down to what's negotiated and agreed upon.
Red underwear would have been a better example since it is pretty much sight unseen JP. :dry:
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Regarding socks, yes if there is a dress code that prohibits it.
What if it's a black face.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Regarding socks, yes if there is a dress code that prohibits it.
What if it's a black face.
that's racist and the victim can't do anything about it.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Regarding socks, yes if there is a dress code that prohibits it.
What if it's a black face.
A black face is not an article of clothing unless it's a mask.
Just don't wear the mask to work.
Otherwise it's against the law......and one should bleach their face white or any other color.
Tbh, most folk don't have black faces. I have a caramel complexion.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
What if it's a black face.
that's racist and the victim can't do anything about it.
So you can't abstract either, OK. (Which specific race is black of face, btw and why is it racist to mention the colour of their face.)
Let's keep it simple then. If we have to work on a basic level.
What legal right does a company in the USA have to forbid it's employees to bear arms.
-
Re: 2nd amendment V private comapny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
What if it's a black face.
A black face is not an article of clothing unless it's a mask.
Just don't wear the mask to work.
Otherwise it's against the law......and one's bleach their face white or any other color.
Tbh, most folk don't have black faces. I have a caramel complexion.
Just don't wear the red socks, let your boss tell you what do, even if it has nowt to do with doing your job.
Like having a gun in your car.
