In the past, I have worked for firms that posted big “no guns allowed” signs, clearly advertising to any who might do grave evil that the office where I worked was full of the unarmed and comparatively defenseless. Before I had my concealed carry permit, I didn’t think much about this but now that I can legally arm myself, I find it troubling.
Tennessee legislators are grappling with this thorny gun-rights issue. From KnoxNews.com:
A new effort is under way toward passage of legislation that pits the interests of gun rights advocates against the property rights of businesses, a politically volatile mix that was apparently a factor in a public confrontation between two legislators.
Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey last week declared he strongly supports passage of the key proposal, which would authorize handgun permit holders to take their weapons to work — provided they are left in a locked car — even if the permit holder’s employer prohibits guns on company property.
“It almost negates even having a permit if you can’t do that (keep a gun in car),” said Ramsey in an interview.
House Speaker Beth Harwell said she is concerned that the proposal could conflict with her overall priority of making Tennessee “the most business friendly state in the union,”
I have a strong libertarian streak and am inclined to let property owners have final say as to who and what enters their property. I am fortunate that pretty much everywhere I go, I can remain armed. But just a few months back I was at the mercy of my employer’s anti-carry whim.
Furthermore, I stay away from those sorts of places where trouble tends to cluster. I may get mugged in the parking lot of Home Depot, but generally the places I am statistically most likely to be presented with the need to defend myself or my loved ones is in a workplace or church.
My guess is that a “no guns” policy is borne out of concerns for liability or a misguided view of what might happen if employees pack their heaters. It seems to me that a workplace where it is understood that anyone might be armed at any given time is a safer one than a similar place of business that announces to the world that only a would-be murderer will have a gun.
Normally I am loathe to abide legislation that crimps the property rights of anyone, even my douchebag anti-gun boss. Should the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms trump the 1st, 4th and 5th Amendment rights of property and due process, as found in case law forbidding discrimination in public accommodations? Should people employed by an anti-gun business owner just suck it up or find another job? What do you think?