Skip to main content

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Capt James T:
Originally Posted by mad American:

So, if this law fails to pass, is the employer responsible for injuries resulting from a possible car-jacking that could have been prevented if an employee was armed?

 

 

Of course not    

 

Thats exactly the point that Bedford is trying to make.  Since they are not responsible for you on your way to and from, they should not prevent you from protecting yourself by banning weapons in your vehicle. 

_______________________

 

OMG! we better get a law, so we can carry guns at school and church! people get attacked there, too! and we HAVE got to protect ourselves! people are going to attack us everywhere we go! it's like the old wild west around here! heck, we may as well just go back to the low slung hip holster!

 

(if you travel for work, does your employer provide for your protection during travel? we gotta have a law for that too! you never know when someone will attack! )

Why would you care if someone carries a gun for their on protection if they have a CCW and leave it in their car while at work.

i havent checked alabama yet, i dont have kids in public school here, but in TN a CC permit holder can have their gun on school property if it is locked in your vehicle and out of site (cannot be on your person in the vehicle, must be in the console or glovebox if i remember correctly.)

 

and folks would be surprised by how many people carry at church.  My .380 slips in my pocket and you cant tell its there (that is the point of CC, afterall.)  Doesnt take much for someone to rob you in the dark parking lot after evening service.  Churches are far from immune from crime, sad to say.

What do you know - in Alabama there is NO law against carrying concealed on public school property.  You can carry into your kids classroom if it is concealed.  Apparently, they are trying to pass a law to require it be locked in the car similiar to the TN laws.  

 

http://blog.al.com/breaking/20...legislator_work.html <---- kindof old but i dont think the law has changed yet from what ive read

Last edited by Capt James T
Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Capt James T:
Originally Posted by mad American:

So, if this law fails to pass, is the employer responsible for injuries resulting from a possible car-jacking that could have been prevented if an employee was armed?

 

 

Of course not    

 

Thats exactly the point that Bedford is trying to make.  Since they are not responsible for you on your way to and from, they should not prevent you from protecting yourself by banning weapons in your vehicle. 

_______________________

 

OMG! we better get a law, so we can carry guns at school and church! people get attacked there, too! and we HAVE got to protect ourselves! people are going to attack us everywhere we go! it's like the old wild west around here! heck, we may as well just go back to the low slung hip holster!

 

(if you travel for work, does your employer provide for your protection during travel? we gotta have a law for that too! you never know when someone will attack! )

Why would you care if someone carries a gun for their on protection if they have a CCW and leave it in their car while at work.

_____________________

 

why would you want to carry a gun to work, if your company expressly forbid it?

why would you want the government to take that right away from them?

Originally Posted by Capt James T:
Originally Posted by Seven:

I've noticed TD does this often. I also thought the way the poll on the front page the other day was worded also made it sound like people would be carrying guns inside the workplace. I see that this is not the case now though.


This whole issue kinda seems like a moot point since many people who have a gun permit and I imagine even many who do not already have their gun in their vehicle at work and everywhere else they go. 

I dont carry mine to work with me out of fear that it will be found and I will lose my job.  I carry company owned equipment in my vehicle with me for work - if my car was ever broken into and that equipment stolen along with my pistol, I would have to report all of it to the police and risk losing my job when they get a copy of the police report.

 

So for some of us it is not as simple as hiding it in your car......

I hear you. Nothing is a really ever as simple as it might seem on the surface. Every individual has different circumstances. 

Originally Posted by Seven:

This is an interesting discussion. I enjoy discussions where people can state their opinions and not be childish or mean spirited about it and start name calling and pointing fingers. We are all adults here as far as I know. Why can't we just act like it more often? 

 

Just my 2 cents worth. Nothing more, Nothing less. 

Oh well, It was a nice thought anyway. 

 

Y'all have fun! 

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

I have no idea how often you resort to name calling, I'd have to do a search if I was interested. I do know you posted a lie about me the other day. I called you on it and you "went quiet".  YOU got snippy with me because I didn't answer a PM from you. A PM that I thought, at the time, you had sent to me in error, didn't answer and forgot about. Then I posted a discussion, asked for other's opinions about it and YOU posted a snarky little remark along the lines of "oh so now you want opinions" and went on about how I didn't "bother" to answer that PM, and you did call me rude or some sort of thing for not answering it. I searched through my PMs and found it, read it again and realized you were trying to pull me into the feud some of you have going on here. A feud that I have no interest in joining. So imo you are in no position to tell me how to conduct myself on these forums. 


 It is a shame that we agree on the principal of this topic, but you still have to nit pick on something as simple as the way an article is written and you have to resort to calling names. this is a prime example of how a sore looser you are!

Now you want to go back to something that was said several months ago and now read the pm I sent you? In no way do I have any intent to drag you into something I have nothing to do with, I sent you the pm only as a friendly gesture because I thought I may know you from your posting style. Now tell me, how come you don't snub your nose and ignore me now like you did when I was trying to be friendly with you?

Just be advised that you have now struck the wrong cord with me so don't be surprised if I call you out on your paranoid lies when you least expect it. Yes, I will go back and find the post you made concerning what you called me a bold faced liar over, I will do it at my own time though.

 I see now that you are not capable of acting in a friendly manner  while on these forums! If you have any desire for the both of us to keep dignity here, then you will let this mess end right here. Nobody else cares anything at all about having to see this kind of dialog carried out on this public forum.

I really wish you would check your drama at the door! 

Truce?

This is just one more case of the left starting to turn one group against another. They leave out facts, pretty important facts, and that slants the story and makes it appear that people want to be able to carry their guns while they work. Then comes the "concerned" citizens that want people to believe that all people at work are all wound up and stressed out, and if they are "allowed" to carry their guns they'll be shooting up the place. This is just how the left operates, they get others to "do their dirty work." Now obama can look all innocent and declare he doesn't want to take your guns, while all his toadies are on forums, tv, all over, spreading the misinformation. Just like he pitted the "rich" against the "poor". I still can't figure out exactly who are the rich and who are the poor in this little war. I saw one figure of $250,000.00 a year.  Really? That's poor??? Oh well, math is not the demos strong suit, that's been proven time and time again.

 

But the beauty of the democratic party, if you can call it that, is how they're able to make lemonade out of lemons. They have someone in their party that does something wrong or illegal, and by george they can justify it and try to make the one reporting it the bad guy. Then they run and drag out everything they can find about the Republicans, Tea Party, anyone that opposes them, and hiss and spit and declare that it was "covered up" and look how awful they are!!! 

They're the party of criminals. One of the latest examples-Jessie Jr.-crook. Could be going to jail. Not a word about his criminal activities, just "you have something against people who have mental issues"? Then they'll run make a thread about something a republican did and it's egregious!!! Egregious I tell you!!

 

You will never see one post about the black panthers or any of the other radical groups that support democrats, but they will tell you how the republicans support the kkk and all other groups along those lines. Voter fraud? LOL!!! Voter fraud is one of the mainstays of the democratic party, yet they have the nerve to claim that it's the republicans doing it!! They ignore it even when it's done by a democrat running for office.

They love g a y people, unless it's a g a y republican. They love black people, unless it's a black republican, they love religion and use it quite well during elections telling everyone who jesus wants them to support, but it's wrong for republicans to be religious and say they will vote their "religious" views.

 

Now comes this gun issue. Do they care that there is a need for some people to carry guns? Do they care that more laws against legal gun ownership does nothing towards "fixing" crime committed with guns? They do what they do because their party supports banning guns. I wonder why all the anti-gun nuts aren't going into the areas where the gangs are all armed and telling those people to get rid of their guns. Do they go in and do their "big" talk to the gangs and thugs that are armed and tell them to get rid of their guns? Would they go into those gang owned and controlled areas unarmed? LOL!! Of course they wouldn't. They wouldn't go at all because they know what would happen to them in those places. They call gun owners all sorts of names, but in reality they're the weak ************. They save all their big talk for the ones they think they can bully.

 

This is why I say that in a "real" election very few, if any, democrats would ever be put in any office, and obama most certainly would never have been in the oval office for one term much less two.

Originally Posted by unclegus:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

I have no idea how often you resort to name calling, I'd have to do a search if I was interested. I do know you posted a lie about me the other day. I called you on it and you "went quiet".  YOU got snippy with me because I didn't answer a PM from you. A PM that I thought, at the time, you had sent to me in error, didn't answer and forgot about. Then I posted a discussion, asked for other's opinions about it and YOU posted a snarky little remark along the lines of "oh so now you want opinions" and went on about how I didn't "bother" to answer that PM, and you did call me rude or some sort of thing for not answering it. I searched through my PMs and found it, read it again and realized you were trying to pull me into the feud some of you have going on here. A feud that I have no interest in joining. So imo you are in no position to tell me how to conduct myself on these forums. 


 It is a shame that we agree on the principal of this topic, but you still have to nit pick on something as simple as the way an article is written and you have to resort to calling names. this is a prime example of how a sore looser you are!

Now you want to go back to something that was said several months ago and now read the pm I sent you? In no way do I have any intent to drag you into something I have nothing to do with, I sent you the pm only as a friendly gesture because I thought I may know you from your posting style. Now tell me, how come you don't snub your nose and ignore me now like you did when I was trying to be friendly with you?

Just be advised that you have now struck the wrong cord with me so don't be surprised if I call you out on your paranoid lies when you least expect it. Yes, I will go back and find the post you made concerning what you called me a bold faced liar over, I will do it at my own time though.

 I see now that you are not capable of acting in a friendly manner  while on these forums! If you have any desire for the both of us to keep dignity here, then you will let this mess end right here. Nobody else cares anything at all about having to see this kind of dialog carried out on this public forum.

I really wish you would check your drama at the door! 

Truce?

===============================

 I think leaving out facts, and by that omission the story is slanted, is a bit more than a little difference in the way a story is written, and questioning why it was done isn't nit picking. It appears they copied the story word for word except for those important facts. You keep harping on "name calling". Exactly what name calling are you referencing? Sore loser? What did I lose? As far as bringing up the PM, I did that simply because you went off the deep end about the fact I didn't answer it, and YOU started the name calling, but you keep whining about me calling names.

Now you tell me if it was you or me that started this back and forth. You sure seemed to want my attention going by the way you post your snarky remarks about the things I post.  I'm supposed to be friendly with someone that does that?  Do you honestly think I give a flip about "striking a cord" with you? I don't post lies, paranoid or any other, so you won't have anything to "call me on". Nothing you post would "surprise" or matter to me, so maybe you should get over yourself and leave your drama at the door. My dignity is intact, worry about your own. Let what mess end here? Do you mean let you and others post whatever you want and don't respond. Not happening. Why don't you block my posts if they upset you so?

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Capt James T:
Originally Posted by mad American:

So, if this law fails to pass, is the employer responsible for injuries resulting from a possible car-jacking that could have been prevented if an employee was armed?

 

 

Of course not    

 

Thats exactly the point that Bedford is trying to make.  Since they are not responsible for you on your way to and from, they should not prevent you from protecting yourself by banning weapons in your vehicle. 

_______________________

 

OMG! we better get a law, so we can carry guns at school and church! people get attacked there, too! and we HAVE got to protect ourselves! people are going to attack us everywhere we go! it's like the old wild west around here! heck, we may as well just go back to the low slung hip holster!

 

(if you travel for work, does your employer provide for your protection during travel? we gotta have a law for that too! you never know when someone will attack! )

Why would you care if someone carries a gun for their on protection if they have a CCW and leave it in their car while at work.

_____________________

 

why would you want to carry a gun to work, if your company expressly forbid it?

why would you want the government to take that right away from them?

I already stated why several times I have to drive thru some of the worst parts of Memphis during the times of 2400 and 0500.  Believe me if you break down/have a flat in that part of Memphis at 0300 you want protection.  I do not want to carry into work just to leave it in the car locked up.

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

Hiflyer, a jailhouse lawyer I'm not, but I do believe the SCOTUS decision you referred to from 2008 applied only to guns in home for self defense--not carrying concealed in a vehicle.

Yes but I was referring to Puppys post saying since he was not militia he was not covered by the 2nd amendment.  SCOTUS confirmed that the 2nd amendment was a individual right not related to a militia.

Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:
Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

Hiflyer, a jailhouse lawyer I'm not, but I do believe the SCOTUS decision you referred to from 2008 applied only to guns in home for self defense--not carrying concealed in a vehicle.

Yes but I was referring to Puppys post saying since he was not militia he was not covered by the 2nd amendment.  SCOTUS confirmed that the 2nd amendment was a individual right not related to a militia.

----------

Yo, Fly.....Gitcher s#*! straight..... That wasn't MY post. I was agreeing with LAL on another point.

Originally Posted by Road Puppy:
Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:
Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

Hiflyer, a jailhouse lawyer I'm not, but I do believe the SCOTUS decision you referred to from 2008 applied only to guns in home for self defense--not carrying concealed in a vehicle.

Yes but I was referring to Puppys post saying since he was not militia he was not covered by the 2nd amendment.  SCOTUS confirmed that the 2nd amendment was a individual right not related to a militia.

----------

Yo, Fly.....Gitcher s#*! straight..... That wasn't MY post. I was agreeing with LAL on another point.

Sorry no way to tell since you quoted the whole thing and agreed with it.

Wyo. man kills 2, self; attack locks down school


CASPER, Wyo. (AP) — An attack at a small community college and a nearby neighborhood left three people dead, at least one from a sharp weapon as police tried to figure out how the violence unfolded in the community in the middle of Wyoming.

Police found the suspect and one of the victims dead at a science building on the Casper College campus, which was locked down for about two hours, school and police officials said. The other victim was found about two miles away. One of the two killed was a faculty member.

Authorities say the suspect used a sharp-edged weapon in at least one of the deaths.

 

 

http://news.yahoo.com/wyo-man-...-down-213946487.html


Originally Posted by LAL:
Originally Posted by wright35633:  
Originally Posted by LAL:

I do not think that guns should be allowed in a workplace. I think that it will be more killings and more people getting hurt. The things that are going on now a days, having guns in the workplace would make people pull a gun every time they got angry at someone. It is enough shootings now without guns in workplaces. I do not think that we need this.

You must have an irrational fear of guns. The law proposed won't make it a Wild West Saloon at the nearest Walmart. Employees will be responsible for keeping their firearm secured. Archie Bunker said it best in his spiel about gun control. "Would it make you feel any better, little girl, if they was pushed out of windows?"

I got your little girl, Wright.  I did not say that I didn't believe in carrying a gun, I have a 38 special, but I keep it in my car. I have a taser that I carry on me. If you gave a business, or you are a cop, yea, but I do not think that it is a smart ideal to carry a gun inside the workplace. Some employee will be responsible, but what about the other 99% of them. You can keep it in your car. Would it make me feel better if they were pushed out of windows or if I pushed you out the window? Tuff question.

I wasn't insulting you LAL. I was quoting a line from  a television show. Hence the quotations marks and credit to the originator. No need to be snippy and threatening. You mention keeping it in your car. That is the purpose for the law. Most employers have policies against it.

Update:

Bow-and-Arrow Attack: Man Kills Father in Front of Horrified Class

 

A bow-and-arrow attack has stunned a Wyoming community as a man reportedly shot his father in the head in front of his class mates on Friday.

Police have released more information of the attack on Saturday that took place at a Wyoming community college.

It has been confirmed that a man shot his father in the head with a bow and arrow in front of a computer science class, leaving students horrified and stunned. The man had fatally stabbed his father's live-in girlfriend just before at their home just a few miles away from the school.

Police have said that they believe Computer science instructor James Krumm, 56, saved other deaths from taking place as he tried to fight off his son's attacks on Friday, giving vital time for the other students to flee. The teacher was attempting to fend off an attack by his own son, Christopher Krumm, 25, of Vernon, Conn., Casper Police Chief Chris Walsh has said, according to the Associated Press.

Walsh said, "I can tell you the courage that was demonstrated by Mr. Krumm was absolutely without equal."

Police have said that they are still investigating why the man attacked his own father and his girlfriend, who was also an instructor at the college. She has been named as 42-year-old Heidi Arnold, a math instructor.

 

Officials have said that the body of Arnold was found just outside the home she shared with the man's father. She had been stabbed to death.

Police have described the attack on the father, saying that the man shot his father in the head with an arrow before stabbing himself. A struggle then ensued between the father and son in which the father was stabbed fatally.

Those that fled called 911 and when police arrived they found the father and son both on the verge of death. The son died soon after police arrived. In the aftermath the entire school campus was placed in lockdown for two hours, according to AP.

Police say the killer carried a bow and arrows, as well as two knives during his attack.

 

 

<noscript>&amp;amp;lt;a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/N7241/jump/cp_global/ART_L336x280_B;sz=336x280;ord=[timestamp]?"&amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;lt; img src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/N7241/ad/cp_global/ART_L336x280_B;sz=336x280;ord=[timestamp]?" width="336" height="280" /&amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;lt;/a&amp;amp;gt;</noscript>

Michigan Republicans are moving forward with a couple of bills that will make it easier to get handguns in our state and to ease restrictions on where concealed weapons may be carried.

Apparently, one of Michigan’s biggest problems is that it’s just too ****ed inconvenient to get a gun and who wouldn’t want concealed weapons in churches, schools, bars, and stadiums?

like i said... we take them to work... then, it'll be school, church, the stadium.... i just don't see how that is going to be a good thing!

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

Michigan Republicans are moving forward with a couple of bills that will make it easier to get handguns in our state and to ease restrictions on where concealed weapons may be carried.

Apparently, one of Michigan’s biggest problems is that it’s just too ****ed inconvenient to get a gun and who wouldn’t want concealed weapons in churches, schools, bars, and stadiums?

like i said... we take them to work... then, it'll be school, church, the stadium.... i just don't see how that is going to be a good thing!

 

I CCW everywhere, except schools.....even to church. It's no coincidence that a lot of mass shootings occur at places that forbid firearms on the premises (some churches, schools and malls).  Most individuals involved in such shootings are cowards at heart and fear being confronted by someone armed and prepared to defend thenselves and others.

 

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

Michigan Republicans are moving forward with a couple of bills that will make it easier to get handguns in our state and to ease restrictions on where concealed weapons may be carried.

Apparently, one of Michigan’s biggest problems is that it’s just too ****ed inconvenient to get a gun and who wouldn’t want concealed weapons in churches, schools, bars, and stadiums?

like i said... we take them to work... then, it'll be school, church, the stadium.... i just don't see how that is going to be a good thing!

then, it'll be school - not illegal in the state of Alabama, most schools that have a policy against it, it only applies to students and faculty.  Alabama is attempting to pass a law requiring CCW permit holders leave them secured in their vehicle similar to the bill discussed here. 


church - not illegal in Alabama, you'd be surprised how many are carried to church concealed.

 

the stadium - again, not illegal


CCW permit holders carry to these places every day already.....

 

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
 

and you've never seen those HUGE RED SIGNS at EVERY SCHOOL prohibiting carrying a weapon... anywhere on the campus?

You did read the link I posted a few pages back, didnt you?  In case you didnt - 

 

http://blog.al.com/breaking/20...legislator_work.html

 

'But there is no book to throw in Alabama. According to state law (Sec.13A, 11-72c), it is legal to take a loaded gun on to school property providing the person has a permit.


While federal law does prohibit taking a concealed weapon on a campus, Muncey advised school officials it would be relatively futile to turn to federal authorities, "because there was no intent to do bodily harm," one of the stipulations in the federal law.'


My understanding is the only thing that the schools that post those signs can do (here in Alabama) right now is have you arrested for Trespass if you refuse to leave or ban you (depending on their internal policies).  

 

'"We don't want to take away anyone's right by state law (to carry a gun)," said Fowler. "But we did the most we can do according to our policy (prohibiting a person from coming on campus for up to a year), which we have done.'

 

Wasnt it you that mentioned that the signs have no legal bearing?  Let me look back and confirm that......

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

where on earth do you stop, between home and work, that you may be attacked?

statistics say ... most people will be shot with their own gun!

be it accident or whatever!  and as far as gun signs...

 

The sheriff of a county, upon the application of any person residing in that county, may issue a qualified or unlimited license to such person to carry a pistol in a vehicle or concealed on or about his person within this state for not more than one year from date of issue, if it appears that the applicant has good reason to fear injury to his person or property or has any other proper reason for carrying a pistol, and that he is a suitable person to be so licensed. The license shall be in triplicate, in form to be prescribed by the Secretary of State, and shall bear the name, address, description, and signature of the licensee and the reason given for desiring a license.

______________________________________________________

 

Do “No Gun Signs” Have the Force of Law?
“NO”

I may have misread the above to be your thoughts on the 'No Guns Signs', was I mistaken?

Lots of articles on the lack of a state law preventing carrying on campus from the beginning of 2012 - anyone know if the law was ever passed, I cant seem to find anything concrete either way.....

 

http://fox8.com/2012/02/29/ala...er-chardon-shooting/

 

http://www.cbs42.com/content/l...54kS-NuoFCbuSVg.cspx

 

Here is a response from the legislator who was pursuing the bill saying he would no longer push to have it passed:

 

" Due to your responses I WILL NOT PURSUE ANY LEGISLATION TO BE PASSED!" - Rep Mac McCutcheon (quoted from the blog listed below)

 

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_31/482732_.html

 

Last edited by Capt James T
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
 

 anywhere on the campus?

 

And, just to show that Alabama is not the only state that allows you to have your loaded weapon on campus, some documentation on TN as well - 

 

It is not an offense for a nonstudent adult to possess a firearm, if such firearm is contained within a private vehicle operated by the adult and is not handled by such adult, or by any other person acting with the expresses or implied consent of such adult, while such vehicle is on school property.


http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/tennessee.pdf


So, in Tennessee, a CCW permit holder can have their gun on campus as long as it remains in the vehicle and is not handled while the vehicle is on school property......

Here is one school shooting you dont hear about very often:

 

The moment Myrick heard shots, he ran to his truck. He unlocked the door, removed his gun from its case, removed a round of bullets from another case, loaded the gun and went looking for the killer. "I've always kept a gun in the truck just in case something like this ever happened," said Myrick, who has since become Principal of Corinth High School, Corinth, Miss.


 

Woodham knew cops would arrive before too long, so he was all business, no play. No talk of Jesus, just shooting and reloading, shooting and reloading. He shot until he heard sirens, and then ran to his car. His plan, authorities subsequently learned, was to drive to nearby Pearl Junior High School and shoot more kids before police could show up.

 

 

But Myrick foiled that plan. He saw the killer fleeing the campus and positioned himself to point a gun at the windshield. Woodham, seeing the gun pointed at his head, crashed the car. Myrick approached the killer and confronted him. "Here was this monster killing kids in my school, and the minute I put a gun to his head he was a kid again," Myrick said.



http://www.davekopel.com/2a/ot...rincipal&gun.htm

 

How many more stories like this might there be if more folks carried concealed in their vehicle?  Rapists and thieves ignore locked doors, bank robbers ignore the 'federal offense' signs and wording at the entrance to most banks, and serial killers and shooters ignore no weapons laws.  Thats not an opinion, its a fact..... 

Originally Posted by Capt James T:

i havent checked alabama yet, i dont have kids in public school here, but in TN a CC permit holder can have their gun on school property if it is locked in your vehicle and out of site (cannot be on your person in the vehicle, must be in the console or glovebox if i remember correctly.)

 

and folks would be surprised by how many people carry at church.  My .380 slips in my pocket and you cant tell its there (that is the point of CC, afterall.)  Doesnt take much for someone to rob you in the dark parking lot after evening service.  Churches are far from immune from crime, sad to say.

What good is guns if they are lock away in a car?  What are you going to do, tell the other person with the gun ready to shoot you to  "HOLD ON MAN, LET ME GET MY GUN OUT OF THE CAR".

Originally Posted by wright35633:
Originally Posted by LAL:
Originally Posted by wright35633:  
Originally Posted by LAL:

I do not think that guns should be allowed in a workplace. I think that it will be more killings and more people getting hurt. The things that are going on now a days, having guns in the workplace would make people pull a gun every time they got angry at someone. It is enough shootings now without guns in workplaces. I do not think that we need this.

You must have an irrational fear of guns. The law proposed won't make it a Wild West Saloon at the nearest Walmart. Employees will be responsible for keeping their firearm secured. Archie Bunker said it best in his spiel about gun control. "Would it make you feel any better, little girl, if they was pushed out of windows?"

I got your little girl, Wright.  I did not say that I didn't believe in carrying a gun, I have a 38 special, but I keep it in my car. I have a taser that I carry on me. If you gave a business, or you are a cop, yea, but I do not think that it is a smart ideal to carry a gun inside the workplace. Some employee will be responsible, but what about the other 99% of them. You can keep it in your car. Would it make me feel better if they were pushed out of windows or if I pushed you out the window? Tuff question.

I wasn't insulting you LAL. I was quoting a line from  a television show. Hence the quotations marks and credit to the originator. No need to be snippy and threatening. You mention keeping it in your car. That is the purpose for the law. Most employers have policies against it.

All is well, get a little edgy sometimes.  

Originally Posted by LAL:
Originally Posted by Capt James T:

i havent checked alabama yet, i dont have kids in public school here, but in TN a CC permit holder can have their gun on school property if it is locked in your vehicle and out of site (cannot be on your person in the vehicle, must be in the console or glovebox if i remember correctly.)

 

and folks would be surprised by how many people carry at church.  My .380 slips in my pocket and you cant tell its there (that is the point of CC, afterall.)  Doesnt take much for someone to rob you in the dark parking lot after evening service.  Churches are far from immune from crime, sad to say.

What good is guns if they are lock away in a car?  What are you going to do, tell the other person with the gun ready to shoot you to  "HOLD ON MAN, LET ME GET MY GUN OUT OF THE CAR".

Once again, the object is for the CCW permit holder to be able to carry to and from work without fear of being fired if anyone found out the gun was in his car.  When i stop at CVS on my way home, i want to exercise my right to carry my weapon into the store with me.  I cant do that if I'm forced to leave it at home when i go to work.

 

Lets assume, while i am at work, someone breaks into a bunch of cars on my employers property and steals my gun in the process.  If my employer asks to see the reports and notices my gun was stolen, i get fired just for having it in the car.  This law would protect a legally licensed CCW permit holder from being fired - thus enabling me to carry my weapon into CVS on my way home without fear of being fired for having it in the car during the day.

 

As for what good they are in the car if something happens at work - probably not much good at all.  But i bet there are some parents in Pearl MS that were glad Mr Myrick had his in his car that day......

I happened to be in Judge Jones' Court-room one day about a year or so ago and there was a trial involving Joe Wheeler State Park. There were three or four employees of the Park who testified at trial.  All of them, I say again, all of them were armed.  Now, I know you say they were security personnel and you would be partially correct.  One was a book-keeper/accountant and he was armed.  I recall he testified that most staff at Joe Wheeler are armed.  Why?  Who knows?  I do know that I resolved right then never to go back to Joe Wheeler Park.  Either their crime rate is through the roof or they have a bumper crop of Barney Fife wannabes.

Originally Posted by LAL:
Originally Posted by wright35633:  
Originally Posted by LAL:

I do not think that guns should be allowed in a workplace. I think that it will be more killings and more people getting hurt. The things that are going on now a days, having guns in the workplace would make people pull a gun every time they got angry at someone. It is enough shootings now without guns in workplaces. I do not think that we need this.

You must have an irrational fear of guns. The law proposed won't make it a Wild West Saloon at the nearest Walmart. Employees will be responsible for keeping their firearm secured. Archie Bunker said it best in his spiel about gun control. "Would it make you feel any better, little girl, if they was pushed out of windows?"

I got your little girl, Wright.  I did not say that I didn't believe in carrying a gun, I have a 38 special, but I keep it in my car. I have a taser that I carry on me. If you gave a business, or you are a cop, yea, but I do not think that it is a smart ideal to carry a gun inside the workplace. Some employee will be responsible, but what about the other 99% of them. You can keep it in your car. Would it make me feel better if they were pushed out of windows or if I pushed you out the window? Tuff question.

 

Ya because i'm going to try and hit someone with a taser and they have a gun. 

That makes a lot of **** sense. 

 

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×