Action Needed: Employer Parking Lots

[flintknapper]

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Actually, Texans have not been given a chance to vote on this, either directly, or vicariously through their representatives, because various combinations of Joe Strauss and the B&I committee who both seem to represent business interests very well have repeatedly made sure that The People never get a voice in the matter.

And we're not going to (AGAIN). Did no one anticipate that the bill might be put into B&I (thus insuring its death)? And IF so....wouldn't the time for "calling" have been BEFORE that happened (so maybe it wouldn't)?

The business sector...just handed us or butts (out influenced and maneuvered us). This was/is our best chance at it folks, make the calls (I will) but...I am not holding my breath on this one.

Hopefully, Campus Carry will prevail....so we'll have a bone to chew on for the next two years.

Get on the phone folks!

Flint.

[Texaspublican]

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Actually, Texans have not been given a chance to vote on this, either directly, or vicariously through their representatives, because various combinations of Joe Strauss and the B&I committee who both seem to represent business interests very well have repeatedly made sure that The People never get a voice in the matter.

And we're not going to (AGAIN). Did no one anticipate that the bill might be put into B&I (thus insuring its death)? And IF so....wouldn't the time for "calling" have been BEFORE that happened (so maybe it wouldn't)?

The business sector...just handed us or butts (out influenced and maneuvered us). This was/is our best chance at it folks, make the calls (I will) but...I am not holding my breath on this one.

Hopefully, Campus Carry will prevail....so we'll have a bone to chew on for the next two years.

Get on the phone folks!

Flint.

Your thought are worth reading, but the argument givin doesnt provide text for the bill.
When people cant seem to argue this bill in reference to is text, it is simply hopeless.
Just read the debate thats in this thread. People can even stay on subject.
Debating issues such as Minorities, handicap services, and the constituionality of this bill will get you a lot of attention.
This bill has nothing to do with anything you people bring to debate!
Show me what " Constitutional" Right supports this bill that infringes on private property ownership?
Pro gun or Anti gun, it is necessary to respect the wishes of the property owners. If you dont agree, you have the right to leave.
Your little internet group has no measure against Texas Business.

[74novaman]

Your little internet group has no measure against Texas Business.

That must be why you're trying so hard to convince us not to do anything, because we have no measure against you and your almighty friends.

Just for you, I'm going to call again tomorrow.

[G.A. Heath]

Your thought are worth reading, but the argument givin doesnt provide text for the bill.
When people cant seem to argue this bill in reference to is text, it is simply hopeless.
Just read the debate thats in this thread. People can even stay on subject.
Debating issues such as Minorities, handicap services, and the constituionality of this bill will get you a lot of attention.
This bill has nothing to do with anything you people bring to debate!
Show me what " Constitutional" Right supports this bill that infringes on private property ownership?
Pro gun or Anti gun, it is necessary to respect the wishes of the property owners. If you dont agree, you have the right to leave.
Your little internet group has no measure against Texas Business.

#1 Commercial property has been, currently is, and will be regulated. Examples are minorities, Handicap services, ect. That is the basis that this bill aims to operate under. The constitutionality of the bill comes in to play should the bill (as a law) go to court.
#2 Why should your private property rights over-rule someone else's private property rights (The vehicle is their private property) and their right to self defense (District of Columbia v Heller, McDonald v Chicago).
#3 if you feel it is necessary to respect the wishes of property owners then respect the wishes of people who own the property (Their Vehicle) where the firearm is stored.
#4 I suggest that you check your facts when it comes to the "little internet group", the TSRA (The major player supporting this bill) is an affiliate of the NRA one of the largest (if not the largest) lobbying organizations in the United States. In fact you must feel that this "little internet group" does pose a risk to your efforts to kill this bill or you wouldn't be here trying to discourage us from taking action.

I know I'm not going to change your mind, and I hope that you know that your not going to change mine (and most likely everyone else who cares about this issue). So I am going to continue with my efforts and you go ahead and continue with yours.

[74novaman]

One more thing Texaspublican. Please let me know what business you own so that I may be sure never to send you a cent of my money.

I'd like to support businesses that support my rights.

[Aggie_engr]

Your little internet group has no measure against Texas Business.

Where's a troll trap when you need one...

[Keith B]

I called every committee member today and also wrote them a letter. This bill infringes on Private Property Ownership. As a business owner, I find this kind of legislation offensive. I have no issues with guns inside of vehicles while on my property, but I have a serious issue with people who write such stupidity as this. Any bill that forces a private property owner to do something against their wishes is a Socialist Bill...
This bill is as good as dead! Texas business will not allow this to happen. The assumption that Legislative Committee will kill this bill makes me laugh. This bill has been thrown in the trash three times and it keeps comming back.
Get a clue! Texans do not want law's that infirnge on private property ownership!

The problem is, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You can't have it both ways with the way current laws are written. You want to be able to ban what you want on your property, but you allow guns for employees. That is fine on your property, but there is a method for others who don't want employees to have guns on their property to restrict and not only fire them, but have them arrested if they do it properly.

This bill is talking about employee rights also. As the employer you have an ethical and moral responsibility to make sure your employees are safe. This includes when they travel to and from work. Without this law in effect, employers have a legal means to force employees to be unarmed and be potential victims if they encounter a self defense situation that warrants it. That is just plain wrong.

Now, you say prohibit search of a vehicle. Well, that may be well and good, but that tramples on employer rights more than this issue does. What if an employee is suspected of having drugs in their car? I think you would want the capability of having them searched wouldn't you? What about a bomb? Same thing.

Bottom line, this bill is about keeping employers from trampling on employee rights by allowing them to have something they can legally own in their vehicle. Many employees have no other option than to park in the company lot. And don't even go down the road of 'you can go somewhere else to work' cause that dog don't hunt for many who have put in 20 - 30 plus years at a company. So, unless you can offer a better alternative solution to the issue, then I suggest you move on. Also, I don't think your one measly phone call will outweigh 1000's of calls from those who support employee rights.

[C-dub]

Texaspublican, while most or all of us disagree with you on this issue, I would encourage you to stick around. I sometimes feel we are preaching to choir and an opposing opinion can make everyone think a little more about their own position.

Your own posts are contradictory and it is a little difficult to determine which side of a point you are on from sentence to sentence.

G.A. Heath has given you four examples. I eagerly await your responses to them.


C-dub

[RHenriksen]

Charles, thanks for the heads up. I've called all the committee members, and spread the word to get additional calls made.

Regarding two of the committee members who are *not* co-authors of HB681:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interestingly, Rep. Garza's staffer volunteered that Garza 'fully supports the bill without amendments' - I didn't think to ask why, then, he wasn't a co-author?

The staffer at Rep. Workman's office said that he's pretty sure that Workman supports the bill as well, but didn't want to make that an Official Statement.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I called every committee member today and also wrote them a letter. This bill infringes on Private Property Ownership. As a business owner, I find this kind of legislation offensive. I have no issues with guns inside of vehicles while on my property, but I have a serious issue with people who write such stupidity as this. Any bill that forces a private property owner to do something against their wishes is a Socialist Bill...
This bill is as good as dead! Texas business will not allow this to happen. The assumption that Legislative Committee will kill this bill makes me laugh. This bill has been thrown in the trash three times and it keeps comming back.
Get a clue! Texans do not want law's that infirnge on private property ownership!

This may be the most absurd post I've seen from a new member. The bill was not thrown in the trash the last sessions. It died on the House General Calendar in 2009 along with 144 other bills because of Democrats "chubbing" to avoid a vote on Voter ID. We have more than 50% of the House as authors, joint authors, and co-authors so it will pass if it gets to the floor.

"Write such stupidity . . ." "Socialist Bill" Your arrogance is most enlightening. You speak not from confidence, but from desperation. Call the Committee Members, write them letters and faxes. You'll be more outnumbered than Custer was at the Little Big Horn.

Texans do want this bill passed, that's why it has overwhelming support. You are right, the business community doesn't want it and they throw millions of dollars into campaigns and expect "no" votes from their elected officials. While the gun rights community can't match their monetary contributions, we can put millions of voters in the voting booths and that's why we have over 50% of the Texas House signing onto the bill.

Private property rights my rear. This bill won't require you, if you really are a business owner which I doubt, do to anything, or spend one dime. It will merely keep you from disarming your employees while they travel to and from work. Your business property is already heavily regulated by both the state and federal government, but you don't seem to be screaming to repeal any of those regulations.

If you plan to stay a Member here, then change your attitude or I'll happily delete your registration and your insulting posts. You are free to express any opinions you wish, so long as those opinions and your method of delivery don't violate forum rules. At this point, you are most unwelcome.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I called every committee member today and also wrote them a letter. This bill infringes on Private Property Ownership. As a business owner, I find this kind of legislation offensive. I have no issues with guns inside of vehicles while on my property, but I have a serious issue with people who write such stupidity as this. Any bill that forces a private property owner to do something against their wishes is a Socialist Bill...
This bill is as good as dead! Texas business will not allow this to happen. The assumption that Legislative Committee will kill this bill makes me laugh. This bill has been thrown in the trash three times and it keeps comming back.
Get a clue! Texans do not want law's that infirnge on private property ownership!

If you are so resolute in your opinion and if you are truly a business owner as you say, then give us your real name and the name of your business so your fellow gun owners will know you.

I'll hold my breath.
Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Would it be of any use to contact Rep. Straus' office and express one's displeasure, politely, with this underhanded method of stalling the bill?

No, what's done is done. Wait until it hits the Calendars Committee.

Chas.

[carlson1]

If you are so resolute in your opinion and if you are truly a business owner as you say, then give us your real name and the name of your business so your fellow gun owners will know you.
I'll hold my breath.
Chas.

At this point, you are most unwelcome.
Chas.

[Skiprr]

Sent faxes to all committee members yesterday, as well as one to my Representative, who does not sit on the committee.

I received notification just minutes ago via Texas Legislature Online that HB681 has been scheduled for public hearing on February 28. Charles, does this mean it's actually cleared the Business & Industry Committee blockade, or do we need to plan on another round of follow-up faxes and calls next Monday?

[Charles L. Cotton]

Sent faxes to all committee members yesterday, as well as one to my Representative, who does not sit on the committee.

I received notification just minutes ago via Texas Legislature Online that HB681 has been scheduled for public hearing on February 28. Charles, does this mean it's actually cleared the Business & Industry Committee blockade, or do we need to plan on another round of follow-up faxes and calls next Monday?

It hasn't cleared the B&I Committee, but it means we have a very early hearing. The word I get from Austin is that the phones are ringing constantly and the fact that we have a hearing this quickly means our message is getting through.

Thanks for your efforts folks! Keep up the pressure by asking that it be voted favorably from committee during the hearing on Monday. We don't want it left pending; it's a delay tactic. When you call or write, thank the committee members for the early hearing.

Thanks for a job well done!
Chas.