Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

America Online Can Fire Gun-Owning Employees
NRA ^ | July 23, 2004 | NRA

Posted on 07/23/2004 6:56:58 PM PDT by TYVets

America Online Can Fire Gun-Owning Employees Utah High Court Rules Friday, July 23, 2004

Self-defense took a big blow this week when the Utah Supreme Court upheld the right of America Online (AOL), America`s largest on-line service provider, to fire three employees whose firearms were stored in the trunks of their cars in the parking lot of an AOL call center in Ogden, Utah.

In a decision that diminishes rights guaranteed under both the Utah and the U.S. Constitution, the court acknowledged the individual right to keep and bear arms, but said the right of a business to regulate its own property is more important!

Complying with this decision could potentially cost an employee his or her life--violent criminals certainly aren`t going to obey such a ban.

It may also diminish employees` abilities to hunt or target shoot after work.

The issue is becoming a hot legislative topic in the states. This year Oklahoma passed HB 2122 ensuring that employees with guns in their cars were not fired or harassed, and it was debated in several other states.

Please look to future editions of the Grassroots Alert for developing information on this issue.


TOPICS: Announcements; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aol; automobles; bang; banglist; concealedcarry; faol; guns; rhodesia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-268 last
To: sakic
And companies do not have rights under the Constitution, people do.
And yet they get enormous tax breaks unavailable to people. Go figure

And "the people" tolerate it. Because they get tax breaks from the government doesn't mean they have the same rights as individuals. We can make up the loss for their tax breaks and they can institute tyranny as a big "thank you."

261 posted on 07/26/2004 4:23:35 PM PDT by PistolPaknMama (www.cantheban.net --Can the "assault" weapons ban!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: PistolPaknMama
And "the people" tolerate it.

We don't tolerate it. The only two political parties with power ensure that that is the way it is and will be.

262 posted on 07/27/2004 5:40:12 AM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: PistolPaknMama

If the government owns an apartment building or house as sometimes happens, should they have the right to tell us what kind of sex we may engage in within that house?


263 posted on 07/27/2004 5:42:21 AM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: sakic

Sex is not a Constitutionally protected right. The right to bear arms is. You are trying to compare apples to orangutangs, or however you spell that! :-P


264 posted on 07/27/2004 2:56:45 PM PDT by PistolPaknMama (www.cantheban.net --Can the "assault" weapons ban!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: sakic
We don't tolerate it. The only two political parties with power ensure that that is the way it is and will be.

Exactly! Now you're starting to catch on. The people absolutely do tolerate it by sending the same members of the same two parties back to make the rules for them.

265 posted on 07/27/2004 3:01:29 PM PDT by PistolPaknMama (www.cantheban.net --Can the "assault" weapons ban!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: TYVets

Misleading headline. Owning a gun is not the reason; bringing it onto company property is.


266 posted on 07/27/2004 3:06:56 PM PDT by JimRed (Fight election fraud! Volunteer as a local poll watcher, challenger or district official.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

I didn't check the length of the thread before posting my reply; there are probably 40 more just like it...

;^)


267 posted on 07/27/2004 3:09:40 PM PDT by JimRed (Fight election fraud! Volunteer as a local poll watcher, challenger or district official.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: First_Salute
The court says mere citizens may not go armed in certain places, but the president and legislature have exempted law enforcement officers and former LEOs.

So we are witnessing the federalization of property rights as well.

268 posted on 07/29/2004 4:11:33 AM PDT by snopercod (Quatro por las quatro con la Quatro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-268 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson