NRA parking lot bill could be voted on Wednesday (GA Senate)

(This is an email sent out by the GA Chamber of Commerce, the link does not go back to this email but to their state website)

"Interesting to note that the NRA authored and passed gun rights legislation in Colorado a few years back that included the statement: "Nothing in this bill shall be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private property owner, private tenant, private employer, or private business entity." What the NRA believed was good for Coloradans apparently isn't good enough for Georgians."

We agree with the statement of Bob Thornton, vice president of the Georgia Sport Shooting Association, the NRA’s official state affiliate, and a member of the NRA, when he said: "I really object to the government getting involved to say what's allowed on my property. This law would stop me from saying what I could do on my own property."

Sent: Thu 1/10/2008 11:40 PM To: Grassroots Subject: NRA parking lot bill could be voted on Wednesday ... Have you called your state Senate contacts?

Two years after the Georgia General Assembly strongly re-affirmed its strong commitment to private property rights by strengthening protections for property owners against unjustified government exercises of eminent domain, the legislature is poised to shift course and pass legislation that would undermine the right of businesses to keep guns off their property if they deem necessary.

A vote on the NRA-backed government grab of property rights could come up for a vote in the Senate Rules Committee as early as WEDNESDAY.

If the pending proposal were offered by any other group than the NRA -- labor unions, for example (and the bill is supported by organized labor in Florida and certainly reads like a bill labor would offer) -- the measure to take away the right of employers to determine whether or not to allow firearms on their premises certainly would be overwhelmingly rejected. The NRA/big labor "workers rights" bill expressly forbids an employer from having policies requiring no guns in their parking lots.

But the NRA can be a scary organization, threatening Senators will political retaliation and "F" grades on campaign scorecards if they don't follow the NRA line. It's time for our Senate to stand up to these threats, assert their independence of the Senate from such tactics, and vote down a really bad bill.

Senators, your business supporters, the majority of gun owners in Georgia, we got your back.

All private entities and property owners have the right to decide whether or not others may bring guns onto their property. An individual has no more right to bring a gun onto another's property over the objection of the owner than an individual has the right to stand on another's property claiming the right to exercise their First Amendment right to free speech over the objections of the property owner.

Other than to please the NRA, what possible need has been demonstrated for this kind of dramatic change?

In Oklahoma, where the NRA first muscled its bill through, the law was immediately stayed, never put into effect, and later overturned by a judge. Only one other state's legislature has passed the bill. More than a dozen other states have rejected the idea!

The issue is simple: should a private business have the right to determine whether or not to allow guns on their premises? The obvious answer is yes.

There are good reasons why some businesses don't want guns at work. A single gun shot fired accidentally, for example, at work sites with highly explosive materials could literally jeopardize an entire community. Others may choose to welcome employees and guests to bring guns onto their property, into their parking lots. But that, simply, is a decision that is best made by those who are responsible for the safety and success of the company.

Overlooked by many in debate over the bill is the fact that the legislation the NRA is pressing includes "public" employers, meaning government, leaving all state and local entities powerless to decide whether or not employers can bring their guns to their jobs in areas not specifically prohibited under current law.

Call your Senate contacts today. Tell then NO to the NRA parking lot power grab.

“The NRA has gone from being guardians of the 2nd Amendment to just another strong arm lobbying group.”

The NRA isn’t the greatest guardian IMO, and hasn’t been for decades. They been a strong lobbying group for decades though.

This story was very confusing. If I read it right the NRA is being bashed because they are supporting the individual right to have a weapon for protection at work. usually these cases involve a firearm in the car not in the desk. Allowing individuals to protect themselves is a good idea. The property owner has rights but do those trump the individuals?

Sounds like the NRA has it right in this case.

So, do all of your God given rights end at anothers property line? Certaily note, so why should the right to defend oneself?

If My employer prohibits me from defending myself (with a firearm) then does he legally assume liability if someone threatens my safety?

If yes, then fine, where are the progessional trained security personnel? If no, then why are my basic rights to life liberty and property being denied?

If I work at a business, is that really private property? Just what is the definition of “public” mean? If we go too far with this, is not then the right to anything defined in teh BORs subject to proprty rights? After all, there is very little “non-private” property.

God Bless

This has been tried in Florida a couple of times and has again pitted property rights advocates against gun rights advocates. The ultimate problem is that most time out of the house involves trips to work, school and church. What good does a concealed weapons permit do when the permittee is not allowed to leave his or her gun in the car while at these places?

I understand the property rights issue- it’s the property owner’s perogotive to bar guns from his property. However does that apply to a privately owned vehicle belonging to the concealed weapons permit holder? Can an employer arbitrarily search any vehicle parked in his parking lot? Can a store owner search any vehicle parked in the lot he owns? There are limits to land owners’ rights when it comes to privately owned vehicles.

Before I can comment, I need to know something about the bill. Does the bill apply to private employers whose parking lots are employee-only, or does it apply to businesses whose parking lots are for guests and customers?

I support the right of a private employer who has an employee-only lot to restrict what the employers bring into the lot — mostly because employers have the right to fire people for any reason anyway, so if their rules say “no guns”, they can enforce that rule by firing you.

I OPPOSE the GOVERNMENT restricting their employees from leaving guns in their cars at GOVERNMENT parking lots, because the GOVERNMENT is ME, and I oppose anti-gun rules. As the owner of the government, I want it to welcome lawful gun owners carrying their weapons to and from work, so that if they stop at the mall on the way home, and there is a shooter, they will have their guns ready to protect us.

I OPPOSE government restricting VISITOR lots from having guns in the cars. The government is for the people, and the people have a federal right to keep and bear arms that the federal government and state governments can NOT infringe upon. Preventing a person from parking a car with a gun in it in a government-owned parking lot is an infringement on that right to bear arms.

(NOTE: I am willing to allow the federal government to restrict people bringing guns INTO buildings, but maybe that too is an infringement. I haven’t thought much about it, and it’s not the issue here).

I also OPPOSE even private businesses that are open to customers and visitors being allowed to ban guns in the parking lots. If you make public accomodation, you need to allow gun owners a way to be bearing their arms. If you don’t let them carry them in the store, they need to be allowed to leave them in the parking lot.

In Virginia, we’ve fought this battle. In fact, we’ve had a bill which allows the public to carry guns in their cars INTO SCHOOL PARKING LOTS when they are picking up and dropping off children.

Remember, your right to keep and bear arms is severely restricted if you can’t carry OR stow those arms when you get places. If ONE place you need to stop at refuses carry AND stowage, you essentially can’t have your gun for the entire trip.

This is also a major argument to oppose the DC gun ban. Nobody on any business that includes a trip into DC is allowed to carry their weapon at all.

I think employers should be sued for banning guns onsite and not allowing employees to protect themselves.

I disagree. It is private property after all.

The solution is, to change the wording of your sentence a little:

I think employers who ban weapons should be held responsible if anything happens because they didin't allow their employees to protect themselves.

This is AFTER the incident no doubt, but after one or two such incidents the word is out and the private property ower/employer will be forced to address this in a more reasonable manner that they are now.

That's a better solution thatn to strip even more rights from property owners.

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.