Reply to Thread

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Message: <blockquote data-quote="boomerPI" data-source="post: 912141" data-attributes="member: 9749">IANAL - just my .02, but the businesses in Oklahoma are going to have to address this issue. I agree that the only reasonable and least-liability way would be for the company to change their employee policy. If they change their employee policy, that does not mean that they have to change the policy governing customers, re: no weapons sign.Just off the top of my head, I would think that a policy change as already stated to exclude CCL from the policy would be sufficient, then a copy of the CCL should be in the employee file. However, I also believe that an additional CYA for the company would be to also include a liability waiver for all employees to sign that indicates the company policy re: CCL exclusion to no weapons policy and that the employee is aware of this policy. This waiver should also absolve the company of any actions not sanctioned by the company by anyone, including a CCL using a weapon in an SD situation. This way, if law enforcement calls it a good shoot, no problem. If it is not determined to be a good shoot, the company can still limit their liability with a phrase such as "all normal and usual efforts are made to ensure employees' safety on our property."</blockquote>