Posted on 03/12/2010 5:46:42 AM PST by marktwain
By now most of you know about the shooting at Ohio State University early yesterday morning. At around 3:30am, Nathaniel Brown, who was reportedly serving a suspension for a poor job performance review, entered the university’s maintenance building and began shooting. Building supervisor Larry Wallington was killed and operations shift leader Henry Butler wounded. Brown killed himself before police could arrest him.
Gun control advocates will point to this as an example of why guns have no place in schools or the workplace. The problem with this logic is that it was already illegal for Brown to bring a gun into the maintenance building. Not only is it a violation of workplace policy but it is also banned by Ohio law since it is a building on school property. None of that deterred Brown from carrying out his murderous plan of revenge. The gun ban did, however, ensure that nobody was able to fight back.
Gun bans in the workplace do nothing to reduce violence. High-risk security expert Timothy Dimoff, President of SACS Consulting and Investigative Services, Inc., explains why.
If a person wants to bring a gun to work to shoot someone, it won't matter whether the company has a "no weapons on premises" policy or not...so it's NOT really a deterrent. When the CCW movement first started everyone was afraid of wild west type shootouts, but over the years we've found that to not be true. Letting employees with CCW permits bring guns to work, as long as they are left in the vehicle, will not result in workplace violence. Workplace shootings result from disgruntled employees or former employees, embittered spouses and for people looking for their "15 minutes of fame and policies mean nothing to these people.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
In a moral world, yes. In this world, no. Most states have laws that disavow any such protections to "the individual".
Of course, in a moral world, the right to self-defense would not even be an issue...
my office policy is the worst i’ve ever heard of. employees are not allowed to carry in the building.
but anyone else can.
Indiana passed a “Bring You Gun To Work” law last year. The day after it hit the Governors desk, there was a shooting at a workplace in Portage.
I can’t seem to find where Daniels ever signed or vetoed the bill.
At the last shop I worked for in LA, the owner came to me with a new policy for me to acknowledge; “if an employee is found to have firearms and/or ammunition on the premises, said employee would be subject to dismissal.” I opened the top drawer of my tool box, as if that was the only place I kept a pen, displaying my Colt Govt 1911, and signed the file bound sheet. Then I told him how his liberal policy was not going to get me killed on the job, and he could fire me if he wanted, but the pistol would remain in my toolbox. I did not leave the company until 6 years later when I relocated to another state.
I also carried concealed while living there. I lived and worked in areas that were crawling with gangs.
I won’t be following rules or laws that endanger me. Rights are not subject to permission, either by employers or governments.
Like shooting fish in a barrel.
duh...not enough coffee
THIS year!
Wow, what a great idea! I've heard of the Bring your kid to work type of thing but .... THIS! What an awesome idea. We could have special caliber days. Bring a 45 to work and win a prize. Or the most unusual: Bring your Tokarev 7.62x25 day.... Somebody get Travis McGee ....
It has to stay locked in your car while at work.
But they can’t keep you from having it on your commute.
"...Gun bans in the workplace do nothing to reduce violence. High-risk security expert Timothy Dimoff, President of SACS Consulting and Investigative Services, Inc., explains why:'If a person wants to bring a gun to work to shoot someone, it won't matter whether the company has a "no weapons on premises policy or not...so it's NOT really a deterrent. When the CCW movement first started everyone was afraid of wild west type shootouts, but over the years we've found that to not be true. Letting employees with CCW permits bring guns to work, as long as they are left in the vehicle, will not result in workplace violence.'..."
Why would a person with a CCW bring a defensive sidearm to work and subsequently leave it a quarter-mile away locked in a vehicle in a parking lot?
People carrying firearms on their person will not result in more workplace shootings. The same murderous swine will still be the only ones to try shooting up the place. That many others are armed will, with out a doubt, deter many if not most “wannabe” shooters. As evidence, I offer the fact that police stations and gun clubs are seldom the scene of robery or disgruntled people shooting up the place.
For the work place, the best policy is ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’. In my last job, I took a gun to work and kept in in my desk. After about a year, I was surprised to learn about half the staff did the same thing. One guy said he’s been carrying in the office for 15 years, and no one knew it. Discretion is the best policy. If some people are upset by it, don’t tell them. The office I was in had no policy, so state CCW law prevailed.
Amen...
The grabbers solution to that is to take guns away from every one every where...except...of course...the police.
Has anyone noticed there are never any mass shootings where there are a lot of guns around such as gun ranges, gun clubs, police stations, etc?
Mass shootings seem to be done where guns are banned - schools, government offices, etc. I think there’s a pattern there.
Yes you have.
After the "event" the lawsuits will begin.
A gun is THE great equalizer and proves itself to be, whenever it is used in self defense. What confounds is the liberal's committment to equality and egalitarianism in life's outcomes, yet their total abandonement of a tool that best procures such a state under various adverse conditions- namely, the gun.
Were they true-to-form (and they can't be 'cause they're hypocritical scum, mostly) they would Require each person carry an arm as they currently do insurance (auto, health, etc.).
Obama only wants to tax the $250k+ types against those making less to 'equalize' outcomes for the masses (spread the wealth around). Well, what's the difference between that and arming a 150lb. person to defend against the 250lb., hellbent-on-destruction, badass? Well, the difference is huge.
One comes from above (the tax) and one comes from below (the gun). Liberal/Socialist/Marxist/Collectivist/Communitarians are all about group 'control'. They fear the individual and work to dis-empower them whenever possible. They must remain 'above' the fray at all cost.
Conservative/Libertarian/Free People/Non-Slaves/Real Americans are about individual "rights" and the laws that protect them.
Without the 2nd ammendment, there is no America. Take a look around at what's happening in this country today and witness how badly off-course we've traveled, and then look at the disrespect gun owners have endured over the years. If you see no correlation, it's because you don't understand the essence of liberty- bottom up, given to all, denied to no one. But it is, has been, and will continue to be denied to gun owners.
This is America with a big piece of the puzzle missing. Funny, how Freedom spells Tyranny in it's absence.
Also, I know it would be true to the 4th ammendment were we to destroy every camera recording people in public, wherever they are. A musket in the face could get it done; sans 2A, 'smile- you're on Big Brother camera'. The abuses have only just begun. Can't spell begun without gun.
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.