Employers can forbid guns, a judge rules, issues an injunction against OK law.

[DBW]

I've heard this before. I suspect if those who tout it were to get a chance to appear before those 9 justices, they'd quickly find they were in over their preverbial heads, particularly when it came to distinguishing what contitutes "legislation from the bench" and "adjudicating law". Generally speaking from what I've seen, those who like the rulings of SCOTUS call it one thing, and those who don't like their rulings call it another. Both labels are convenient if nothing else.

Regardless of what it's called, it likely won't be favorable. Imagine the turmoil that a positive ruling (an individual right) will cause with the 20,000+ gun laws in force... including the clause in our own state constitution I mentioned earlier. Nope, I don't see SCOTUS upholding the 2A as an individual right.

 

[mons meg]

I'm actually more optimistic. Legal scholars on both sides of the fence are starting to agree with the individual rights interpretation. The more honest leftists admit it, and say we should repeal it. I've seen predictions it may not be a 5-4 decision, as Ginsburg (of all people) would actually fall in line.

Who knows...it's interesting times, to be sure. Just remember that all but a handful of states now have some form of legal concealed carry on the books, with 40-ish of those being "shall-issue". 13 states are in open rebellion over REAL ID...if the wrong (or right) person gets in the White House...we might see a state or two tell FEDGOV to keep their durn highway funds.

 

[DBW]

I'm optimistically pesimistic.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Y'all have to remember something: Corporations are a construct made possible by state and some federal law. Corporations and the like do not have rights. They only have those powers granted to them in that law that allows for their creation. A corporation may own the land that you park your car on, but it does not own the air space above that ground - ground the corporation has set aside for you to park your vehicle upon. That ground has no other but that one purpose. When you park your car on that property, your car does not become the property of the corporation. The company does not have the power to seize your vehicle or anything in it. Logically, the only power the company might have is the power to ask you to remove your vehicle from their property, or limit how much your vehicle can weigh so as to avoid damaging the surface of the lot, or limiting the size of your vehicle so you don't take up too much room.

Woody

 

[Stephen Cue]

As for now employers can search cars, they cannot destroy cars. So in my opinion if they cant find a gun, no matter what a dog does, they cant fire you, so just hide it well. But if an employer wants you gone, they will find a way, gun or not.

 

[underdog]

Does is scare the hell out of anyone else that we have Edmondson and Henry pleading an important gun rights case? Edmondson's ego is large enough, he might give it his best shot, though.

 

[ExSniper]

This is not a gun rights case, it is a property rights case. If you do not want the government saying what you can or cannot do on your property, you should hope that this law is struck down.
I should have the right to control what happens on my property and so should Weyerhauser and the other corporations. Yes I think it is a stupid rule to not allow guns in the cars in their parking lot, but it is their parking lot! Since they deprive their employees of the ability to defend themselves from the time they leave home to go to work until the time they return home, the employer may well have to accept responsibility for anything that happens to said employees that a gun might have prevented!
Do you want someone else deciding what the rules are in your back yard?

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

This is not a gun rights case, it is a property rights case. If you do not want the government saying what you can or cannot do on your property, you should hope that this law is struck down.
I should have the right to control what happens on my property and so should Weyerhauser and the other corporations. Yes I think it is a stupid rule to not allow guns in the cars in their parking lot, but it is their parking lot! Since they deprive their employees of the ability to defend themselves from the time they leave home to go to work until the time they return home, the employer may well have to accept responsibility for anything that happens to said employees that a gun might have prevented!
Do you want someone else deciding what the rules are in your back yard?

Ex, re-read post #84. Your property rights are secure and you can control whoever carries a gun on your property. You are not a construct of government law. You are a person and you have property rights if you own property. A company (C-Corp, S-Corp, LLC, Partnership, or any other business or incorporated entity) that owns property in the name of that entity may only do with that property that which is specifically allowed by law.

Woody

 

[1shot(bob)]

Do you want someone else deciding what the rules are in your back yard?

They already tell me I can't burn trash and debris, build what and where I want, and do what I want. In BA I can't even park a boat in my own driveway. There are many limitations on what I can do on my own property, so striking down this ridiculous lawsuit wouldn't bother me at all.

bob

 

[Glocktogo]

This is not a gun rights case, it is a property rights case. If you do not want the government saying what you can or cannot do on your property, you should hope that this law is struck down.
I should have the right to control what happens on my property and so should Weyerhauser and the other corporations. Yes I think it is a stupid rule to not allow guns in the cars in their parking lot, but it is their parking lot! Since they deprive their employees of the ability to defend themselves from the time they leave home to go to work until the time they return home, the employer may well have to accept responsibility for anything that happens to said employees that a gun might have prevented!
Do you want someone else deciding what the rules are in your back yard?

That's right, it is a property case. In this case my car is my property. Not yours Not the company's. Neither you nor any company should have any right to tell me what I may or may not have in my property that isn't otherwise illegal. This law does not infringe in any way whatsoever on property rights. It specifically disallows the infringement of property rights by others. It positively upholds the property rights of individuals which have heretofore been infringed.

Anyone who believes otherwise is a petty tyrant. What's in my car that isn't illegal is none of your damn business.