Home Forums Miscellaneous Topics Second Amendment Cannot have firearms or ammo in your vehicle in the parking lot!

I once got a ticket in Illinois for having an uncased bow in my car. I told the officer that he was being "over the top" and he said "No it is just a safety thing."

I replied "Yeah, you are right. It might go off by accident."

He never even blinked.

It's called giving tickets to raise revenue every state does it.

....I personaly would like to see folks who were, for example, victims of shootings, or thier survivors in the case of persons killed,SUE the businesses who prevented them from exercising thier right of self defense by declaring the second amendment 'nul and void'in that area. I'd like to see citizens sue MANY of our legislators for violation of thier oath of office for having passed legislation in violation of our constitution and bill of rights!...But then I've always been a trouble maker when it came to the 'king' and his minions. With our founding fathers as my guiding role models, I can't even feel any shame for it!...At some point we've just got to separate the sheeple from the people, I suppose...

The local Target shares a large parking lot with a dozen other businesses. I wonder how they'd enforce a ban without painting lines on their part of it.

Dick

....How do they enforce such a ban without a search warrant to search an automobile?

F em do the right thing... Let common sense be your guide and hope I'm on the jury when you sue there commie asses.

The Bill of Rights was designed to protect individuals from the �Government�...NOT from their fellow citizens or from their employers. Businesses and employers have traditionally been allowed to place �reasonable� restrictions on both their customers and their employees on their business premises.

When it comes to private, non-governmental interactions we all have the �choice� to refrain from going places where restrictions we don�t care for are in place.

....For "ME" abridging a law-abiding citizen's right to defend his life (a GOD granted inalienable right)doesn't fit in the "reasonable" category. I doubt it would with those who plead the business owners property rights, if and when they found themselves threatened by a gun wielding criminal or terrorist. Some folks give up protection of thier lives more easily for property than I'd be willing to do. No ABSOLUTE right or wrong here perhaps, beyond the wrong of TAKING away "another" persons right of defending thier life because "we" believe we have the right to do so...That's what the bill of rights is all about! Certain inalienable rights granted by GOD to every "individual" Who no individual or group of individuals has a right to abridge (infringe). When we start placing "property"* (*GOD OWNS, we have a lend lease on it for a short while) above the right to defend our most precious gift of life itself , we're pretty much in league "thinking wise" with those who defend abortion and infanticide as personal choice over our own bodies.As life is sacred, so also is a person's right to defend it. Believe me that simple fact is RECOGNIZED when it comes to the president's life, but not the 'common' person be they father, mother, sister, brother, or friend to those who love and need them...
.....Property is the safer, guarded by the majority good and decent amoung us anyway!

I don�t disagree with your views on self defense...only your incorrect use of the Bill of Rights and the 2nd amendment to promote them.

The Bill of Rights also lists freedom of speech as a �God-Given Right� but anyone who has ever been employed, married,attended a meeting, gone to school, or been a child with parent knows that their freedom of speech can and will be restricted at certain times by certain people.

Even here on the old internet. Try typing a response to this using foul language and see what the owners of this web site do to your �freedom of speech.�

The RKBA is guaranteed by the constitution.
Private property rights are not.
We are letting them use non-constitutional rights to overthrow constitutional ones. Private property rights are important, but not at the expense of the constitution.

Dick

Sorry...but that doesn�t change the FACT that the Bill of Rights ONLY places restrictions and prohibitions on the GOVERNMENT...NOT on individuals.

Most gun laws are pretty silly but trying to apply the 2nd amendment to anyone or anything other than the legislative branch of the government is just as silly IMO.

Your employer cannot have you arrested if you have a firearm in your car...nor can they confiscate your firearm. What they can do is fire you for violating a company policy. Same is true with your 1st amendment rights while at work. Call your boss or a customer an idiot and see how fast you loose your job, and see how far you get with a court by claiming your 1st amendment rights guaranteed in the constitution.

The constitution also prohibits the government from establishing �religious tests� for those seeking elected office...but there is nothing to prevent an individual voter[s] from refusing to vote for someone because of their religion or lack of. Again, the constitution and the bill of rights restricts the actions of the government...NOT the individual.

It's pretty simple to me. If you don't want obey your employer's rules, work for someone else. It's just their way of insuring they don't get sued for a nut going postal in the work place. Me, I don't leave home without it.

Wayne

Amen, brother!

IMO, what is needed is recognition of RKBA as something similar to civil rights. Recognition of civil rights took a long, long time and universal acceptance is still a goal in some areas.

Employers fall all over themselves creating a workplace free of harassment and other forms of civil rights infringement. They don't want the lawsuits that would follow if they didn't.

So, I agree that a long history of lawsuits for violating an individual right is probably what will be necessary. If that ever occurs, employers will (strangely) reverse course and adopt policies to make sure they don't infringe on the newly recognized rights. Financial suicide if they don't.

However, we ain't there yet.

A lot of companies have to do this because of insurance purposes.

What are the legal ramifications if any of someone with a concealed carry permit not being allowed to leave his/her CCW in their vehicle, basically being disarmed for the trip back and forth to work. If something happens to them that could have been prevented by their having their CCW with them in the vehicle? tom

I brought that up at the crew meeting when they informed us of the new (at the time) No Firearm Policy. Told them I'd never thought of owning a plywood mill but I could see it being very possible in that situation. There was a quick huddle with the 3 supervisors and HR director and then we were told that "of course this is a "Don't ask/Don't tell" policy. If we were ever to actually have a firearm in our vehicle,they don't want to know about it.
Well m'kay.

Roger that! I was a cop in the USAF and I could not carry to and from work. When I entered base I was under their rules and I could have faced a court martial if I did it. I know my example is on fedderal property but still I was a Senior NCO and a cop to boot!

I'd start leaving spent brass in the parking lot...