Posted on 04/17/2009 5:01:36 AM PDT by marktwain
A Senate committee narrowly approved a bill that would encourage companies to adopt policies that let workers keep guns in their cars.
The Senate State Affairs Committee voted 4-3 on April 16 to pass a measure that would provide legal protections to companies that “allow or (do) not prohibit” employees to store firearms in their vehicles. Those businesses could not face civil damages for such policies.
Rep. Jeff Thompson, R-Idaho Falls, said prohibitions on guns in employee vehicles infringe on the rights of hunters and people who carry guns for self-defense. But he said businesses that have such policies wouldn’t have to change their procedures because of the bill.
“We’re just trying to encourage employers to help employees practice their Second Amendment rights,” Thompson said.
Julie Pipal, a lobbyist for the Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce, also spoke in support of the bill. She said chamber members support any measure that provides protections for “those things beyond an employer’s control.”
The bill faced some tough questions from the committee and opposition from the Idaho Trial Lawyers Association.
Barbara Jordan said trial lawyers believe the bill should provide protections to all employers, “whether you have a policy that says yes or no.”
“What we have in our state are private property rights,” she said. “The employer has the right to dictate the policy on their property. What this bill says is that we would like to get around that private property right.”
Sen. Joe Stegner, R-Lewiston, asked the committee to amend the bill to also provide protections to employers who prohibit firearms on their property. His motion failed 3-4.
“Wouldn’t it be fair?” he said. “What should be good for the goose should be good for the gander. (The chamber) wants their members to have immunities from civil liability wherever they can get them. Wouldn’t it make sense to extend that?”
Sen. Kate Kelly, D-Boise, also said she didn’t see the need for the bill and rued the abundance of firearms-related legislation this session, saying “it’s been a banner year for gun bills.”
“This is the eighth bill that has been introduced this year and the seventh that has gone through the process,” she said. “I recognize that this issue is important to some people, but I’m questioning … the taxpayer money that needs to be spent year after year.”
The measure now goes to the full Senate. It passed the House on April 13.
No. Employers should not be given protection for making it hard to exercise Constitutional rights.
Every policy is not equal. Liberty is better than slavery.
We had a lawsuit here that settled the issue last summer. You can bring your weapon in your car onto employer property. It is contingent on having a CCW though.
Luckily, not all employers have written policies or signage.
I’m wondering about this whole thing. If it’s concealed, who’s going to know you have it in your belt holder, or in a gym bag under your desk or in your trunk of your car.
Doesn’t concealed mean CONCEALED?
Maybe someone can enlighten me ...
Employers should be held liable for attacks on their employees if they force them to disarm as a condition of employment. Self protection is an inalienable right and should never be surrendered by anyone for any reason. If an employer wants to remove guns from the office they should provide a armed guard on the premises to provide protection.
I’ll bet AOL won’t be happy about this. I can remember when they fired two of their employees for having firearms in their car. They were going to the Range after work,I think it was in Oklahoma.
If the concept works for zero’s military, it should work here: Don’t ask, don’t tell.
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.