Skip to comments.America Online Can Fire Gun-Owning Employees
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.
That could be, but I suspect you might be wrong. But on this one, rare as it may be, I could be wrong. Oh the horror. :)
Attention all potential criminals. If your looking to rob or rape anyone wait outside a AOL parking lot and follow your victim when they leave our parking lot. When they stop, do what you will with your victim. And next time your looking for a internet provider remember who disarmed your victims for you.
If they held pro-Kerry signs and shotguns but did so in a peaceful non-threatening manner (doubtful given that they are mean-spirited liberals), I don't believe I have a right to order them off my driveway if they just happen to be standing there and not obstructing anything. Maybe they are unhappy with my pro-Bush sign.
If they stand there too long, I will have them arrested for loitering.
But you are making an apples and oranges argument. An employer's rights are not the same as a homeowner's. As a business, you are subject to certain laws covering businesses that do not apply to homeowners.
True, employers can generally have the right to hire and fire as they please. My problem is with the specific policy they are trying to implement and the invasion of privacy they necessarily take to determine whether someone has a weapon in the locked trunk of their car.
Again, let's say they had marijuana (something that's illegal as opposed to guns) locked in their glove compartment. Does AOL have the right to break into your car and search the glove compartment in order to prove whether you have brought an illegal substance onto their property?
I didn't like the rules of the corporations I worked for. I left. As RR was wont to say, vote with your feet.
I also don't like anything about AOL but if you can bring your gun on AOL's property, then you can bring it on mine and I'm not having none of it. Unless of course, we were buds. :-}
I hope that property rights are soon recognized for bar and restaurant owners on the smoking issue. I prefer non-smoking restaurants, but I support the owner's right to make a market or preference based decision on whether to allow smoking. It just makes common sense.
As I read the Bill of Rights, most of the freedoms are applied to government action, not private action. For example, government has to give due process, but private individuals and businesses don't. The private sector can ban speech under its control, while government can't. We may disagree with private policies that restrict, say, gun ownership by hiring policies or free speech by editorial positions, but these don't rise to the level of constitutional violations since no government action is taken.
Will wonders never cease? :-}
My company does it too. If there were a shooting situation at work, the company can be held liable. Its standard CYA. If I can't deal with it, I can work somewhere else.
Sure. But you don't have a right to a job.
Well, one things for damn sure, one of us yahoos is wrong. LOL
Does this also mean they also own your car once it hits their property? Or they have a right to search your car for what ever reason they trump up? Screw AOL. They will never get my business.
Late at night, or daylight for that matter, have you ever driven though certain parts of Kansas City or St Louis, Missouri on your way home from work?
Personally, I would prefer an armed and armored motorcade.
The road, which I own, to my house is a quarter mile long. Which parts of it should I allow folks to carry guns on?
Well I am not going to bet. You are armed and dangerous when it comes to Constitutional Law. What little I know, I typically have to look up. And I am relying on memory on this one. That won't cut it.
Unless I'm thinking about another case I thought the employees in this one were not parked on AOL property but next to it in a lot some employees use when some liberal bed wetters saw the guns and whined about it.
IIRC the employees were transferring firearms from the truck of one car to trunk of another to go hunting.
What would be the situation if AOL had a policy of "no newspapers on the premises" and a few employees were caught with copies of the New York Times? Any difference you think?
First amendment/second ammendment.
I bet that if people would look at many of the larger corporations you'd find they have rules against employees having fire arms, alcohol, drugs, etc in their possession on the company property.... Thus in your car, locked up is in your possession and if it's on the company property [parking lot] then it's a violation.
No, but they do have the right to require you to submit to a search if you park on their property.
This is probably a situation where somebody "finked" on a fellow employee and started all this. AOL was probably more than happy to follow up on it.
But you really don't appreciate your rights as a property owner. You can require them to do anything you want as a condition of their existence on your property. The idea that you have to wait until they are loitering until a trespass law is violated is silly.
My point was to see where the property rights of the person who happens to be an employee ends (or starts) and the corporations starts (ends). If you assert that AOL controls anything on their property just because it's on their property that absurd.
This is dim. You have no "right" to drive you, your car or your gun onto my property. Just like you and your clothes have no right to walk in my house. But if you did, I would not be so kind as AOL was.
Tell ya what, the next time someone uses your driveway to turn around in please run out and douse the car with gasoline and set it aflame. To really test your "property rights" I suggest doing this with a police car. But call me first, I want to watch.
Sadly, in my neck of the woods, literally, you'd have to knock off three of those zeros. But I'm a happy guy nonetheless.
When the gov't protects and reinforces the Right of individuals to defend themselves, and their Right to not have their cars searched, absolutely, YES.
The primary purpose of gov't is to protect our individual Rights.
I don't give a rat's behind about corporations (they weren't even around at the time of our founding).
How about the New Hampshire resident that had a concealed carry permit, but worked in Massachusetts, he and 5 other people were killed in the work place?
Many employers can not protect employees on the job let alone to and from work !
I am sure A O L will protect their employees to and from work. (sarcasm)
You are evidently one of the only posters here with a brain. I just love the RINOS who defer to the lawyers and say their decision "protecting" Time-Warner and stripping the employee's right to defend themselves to and from work is the "right" decision. I thought this was a conservative website?
Come over any time. When somebody drives on my property uninvited and parks themselves on my posted raod they get a visit from me and ole betsy. No repeat customers so far.
It surely should be forbidden at postal offices...
Oh really? So I can put a sign in my yard saying that all women that came on my property had to buy me dinner, and then I can call the cops when they refuse?
No, but they do have the right to require you to submit to a search if you park on their property.
BS. Corporations don't have "rights". Only individuals do.
THIS AIN'T ABOUT HUNTING!!!!!!! And yes, I was shouting!!!!! It's about my personal right to self defense to and from work or any other place I may be!
Look up the history of the East India Company sometime.
And you're just ignorant about the law. Corporations have rights. The only BS is what you've posted on this thread.
Probably but the real question is should there be? Who controls your property? Me, the state or you?
What about in a situation where the gov't gives preferential treatment to one company, and detrimental treatment to others? And this is the case for ALL large industries, to some degree or another.
Isn't this essentially the same thing as the gov't taking action to deprive civil Rights, especially when the company that benefits is opposed to the Right of Free men?
Consider the airline industry, for instance. If United Airlines announced a policy that would allow all passengers with CCW "permits" to carry on board, do you really think the feds would allow that to happen? No. They would not let United fly. But some folks here are still under the illusion that our airlines are "privately owned".
I'll come over but only if I can bring my toys and point them the same direction you are pointing yours. We'll sit on the porch and make noise.
I sure hope that dang "assault ban" thing dies. I have a few things I'd like to take outside that have not been outside yet.
This is quite limited, and for good reason. Most signs that you or I post on our private property have no legal standing. (Even "no gun" signs here in Florida have no legal standing).
The rare exception to this is the "no tresspass" sign. And even those have to be a certain font, color, and location in order to have legal standing.
As individual private property owners, we can still ask them to leave for any reason, and then the law will back us up, but not before.
Corporations have rights
Only individuals have Rights. A creation of a group of individuals (be it a government, or a corporation, or a robot) has no inherent Rights.
I would have to disagree. The Constitution and the bill of rights note the rights of all and generally tell us that our rights end where those of another person begin. If you carry a weapon for personal safety and the employer can't garauntee your safety from their parking lot to your home, that is the issue. Infringing your right to carry at this point becomes an infringement on your ability to protect yourself. And you never know when you might need to pull the trigger.
I worked for Kmart Corp as my first fulltime job. While I was working for them, my district manager took a trip up north from here and was murdered in a parking lot. You never know when it might come in handy to have something to protect yourself with. And Liberals are trying to take that ability away from us. And it goes without saying that if you take away a people's ability to defend themselves, you also remove their abiltiy to be a threat collectively should you choose to exploit and subjugate them. Liberals aren't put off by your ability to protect yourself - it's your ability to defend against their attempts to subjugate that they resent.
how about...no homosexuals on my property or no black people?
Are my property rights secure?
Very well stated!
Here's one that'll p**s you off.
And some folks would apparently be a-ok with that.
Unless you offer your property up as a public accommodation, you are quite secure in whatever your prejudices. I don't like hawkers bothering me myself, whether it be for a product, religion, or political candidate. My policy is to not answer the door when the doorbell rings, unless I am expecting somebody. Call first, or I am not home.
Check this out ladies!
So, if I owned a company I could fire anyone who owned rap music? And I'd have the right to break into their car to see if they had any so long as they parked in a space on my property?
COOL! Think I'll start a business just to test this.
I'm also going to reserve the right to fire anyone wearing a tattoo. Makes no difference where or if it's covered up. I reserve the right to search you just because I don't like tattoos.
I think I'm going to like being a business.
Am I correct from your posts that, for you, the right of privacy trumps all other rights contained in the Bill of Rights?
Is this a tough sisters alert or something?
And keep your SUV, cell phone, fast food off my parking lot.
Don't you see a connection with your freedom to defend yourself and the erosion of your abilty to choose what you can own?
I'm sorry, but I do not understand how the sensibilities of a company has trump card priviledges over matters specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights.