Page 2 of 4
Re: HB 220 - Employer Parking Lots
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 2:34 pm
by stevie_d_64
Charles L. Cotton wrote:Added HB 220 by King re: employer parking lots.
I saw this one as well...
I wonder if the loophole will be if the "employee/employer" parking lot has a controlled and manned access gate where the general public may not be able to cross through unless they have business there in the first place???
If my parking area is beyond a controlled access like that, and I carry within that access (whether I am packing or not, or have by some company policy, forced to consent to a search etc etc...) I am wondering if this would help or not...
I mean I am all for the protection under this, but I just see businesses and other entities pushing the envelop back enough to be covered to restrict you still...
Every little bit helps, but I am afraid smart people might figure out a way to screw you over if they so chose to do so...
I'm sure going to look at this one even closer...
See, I just seem to gravitate into thinking like a bad guy for some reason...It helps me figure out if there's a work around (either way) sometimes in these bills...Thats all...
Sorry to be such a pain...
Re: HB 220 - Employer Parking Lots
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:40 pm
by kauboy
stevie_d_64 wrote:Charles L. Cotton wrote:Added HB 220 by King re: employer parking lots.
Every little bit helps, but I am afraid smart people might figure out a way to screw you over if they so chose to do so...
Yeah, but given the number of incorrect 30.06 signs we see all the time, smart people don't seem to be the norm in the anti-gun groups.
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 4:07 pm
by Charles L. Cotton
txinvestigator wrote:nitrogen wrote:Law and company policy are different things.
They can fire you for violating company policy, but thye cant file tresspass charges.
Actually this law would restrict the type of policy they could legally have.
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 00220I.doc
Correct. Texas is an
employment at will State, meaning an employer can fire someone for any reason that does not violate Texas or federal law, or no reason at all. There are exceptions, but they are not relevant for this discussion. This bill will make it illegal to fire someone for having a gun in their car.
Chas.
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 4:20 pm
by nitrogen
Charles L. Cotton wrote:txinvestigator wrote:nitrogen wrote:Law and company policy are different things.
They can fire you for violating company policy, but thye cant file tresspass charges.
Actually this law would restrict the type of policy they could legally have.
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 00220I.doc
Correct. Texas is an
employment at will State, meaning an employer can fire someone for any reason that does not violate Texas or federal law, or no reason at all. There are exceptions, but they are not relevant for this discussion. This bill will make it illegal to fire someone for having a gun in their car.
Chas.
Oh NICE!
I guess I should not have commented before I could have read the text of the bill.
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 4:30 pm
by Roger Howard
These bills are a big step in the right direction. I would still like to see some leglislation reducing the places we are prohibited from carrying. We still need a better definition of a school at a minimum.
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:12 pm
by stevie_d_64
Roger Howard wrote:These bills are a big step in the right direction. I would still like to see some leglislation reducing the places we are prohibited from carrying. We still need a better definition of a school at a minimum.
Remove "school" (however it is defined) and I bet it all goes away...
I have yet to see anyone with a CCW permit/license anywhere pull a massacre at a "school"...
And if for some absurd reason one does, whether or not they had a permit to begin with was not going to be a factor in the commitment of that criminal act anyway...
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:09 pm
by Tacomaoffroader
So our vehicles will be extentions of our homes if HB 103 is passed?
Will this be for CHL only or all citizens?
So citizens will be able to carry firearms in their vehicles w/o permits?... this could be good or bad!
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:26 pm
by oilman
[quote="kauboy"]Yeah but the proposed law states:
Sec. 411.203. RIGHTS OF EMPLOYERS; LIMITATION ON LIABILITY.
(a) This subchapter does not prevent or otherwise limit the right
of a public or private employer to prohibit persons who are licensed
under this subchapter from carrying a concealed handgun on the
premises of the business.
(b) Except as otherwise provided by this subsection, a
public or private employer may not establish, maintain, or enforce
any policy or rule that has the effect of prohibiting a person
licensed under this subchapter from transporting or storing a
concealed handgun in a locked vehicle in any parking lot, parking
garage, or other designated parking area. A private employer may
prohibit an employee from transporting or storing a concealed
handgun in a vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other
parking area the employer provides for employees if:
(1) the parking lot, garage, or other area is
completely surrounded by a gate and is not open to the public; and
(2) ingress to and egress from the parking lot,
garage, or other area are monitored by security personnel. (c) A public or private employer is not liable in a civil
action for damages resulting from an occurrence involving the
possession of a concealed handgun by a person licensed under this
subchapter.
(d) This section does not authorize a person licensed under
this subchapter to carry a concealed handgun on any premises where
the carrying of a concealed handgun is prohibited by state or
federal law.
/quote]
Unfortunately my employer does have a fence with security guys monitoring access. This does nothing to ensure my safety to and from work!
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 7:24 pm
by RKirby
(1) the parking lot, garage, or other area is
completely surrounded by a gate and is not open to the public;
Hmmmm.......kinda hard to surround a parking lot with a gate!!
I'm sure that was meant to read fence. Hope someone catches that mistake before it passes and becomes a useless piece of legislation.
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 8:09 pm
by quidni
Sec. 411.203. RIGHTS OF EMPLOYERS; LIMITATION ON LIABILITY.
(a) This subchapter does not prevent or otherwise limit the right
of a public or private employer to prohibit persons who are licensed
under this subchapter from carrying a concealed handgun on the
premises of the business.
(b) Except as otherwise provided by this subsection, a
public or private employer may not establish, maintain, or enforce
any policy or rule that has the effect of prohibiting a person
licensed under this subchapter from transporting or storing a
concealed handgun in a locked vehicle in any parking lot, parking
garage, or other designated parking area. A private employer may
prohibit an employee from transporting or storing a concealed
handgun in a vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other
parking area the employer provides for employees if:
(1) the parking lot, garage, or other area is
completely surrounded by a gate and is not open to the public; and
(2) ingress to and egress from the parking lot,
garage, or other area are monitored by security personnel. (c) A public or private employer is not liable in a civil
action for damages resulting from an occurrence involving the
possession of a concealed handgun by a person licensed under this
subchapter.
(d) This section does not authorize a person licensed under
this subchapter to carry a concealed handgun on any premises where
the carrying of a concealed handgun is prohibited by state or
federal law.
Would the State of Texas be considered a "public" or a "private" employer? I'm thinking "public" but I can see some admins trying to enforce this based on the "employees only, gated and monitored" clauses.
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:55 pm
by mrvmax
Charles L. Cotton wrote:txinvestigator wrote:nitrogen wrote:Law and company policy are different things.
They can fire you for violating company policy, but thye cant file tresspass charges.
Actually this law would restrict the type of policy they could legally have.
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 00220I.doc
Correct. Texas is an
employment at will State, meaning an employer can fire someone for any reason that does not violate Texas or federal law, or no reason at all. There are exceptions, but they are not relevant for this discussion. This bill will make it illegal to fire someone for having a gun in their car.
Chas.
I've been waiting for this one. I hate working for an employer that forbids weapons in vehicles.
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 10:42 pm
by Roger Howard
stevie_d_64 wrote:Roger Howard wrote:These bills are a big step in the right direction. I would still like to see some leglislation reducing the places we are prohibited from carrying. We still need a better definition of a school at a minimum.
Remove "school" (however it is defined) and I bet it all goes away...
I have yet to see anyone with a CCW permit/license anywhere pull a massacre at a "school"...
And if for some absurd reason one does, whether or not they had a permit to begin with was not going to be a factor in the commitment of that criminal act anyway...
I agree with you completely. I'm just saying if we can't get a removal of the restriction we should at least get a definition of school.
I personally feel that there shouldn't be restrictions.
Charles stated in another post that he would like to see the court prohibition stay because emotions can run high if the outcome is negative.
The problem is that we are dealing with peoples emotions on this subject. Not everyone thinks things through when it comes to concealed carry.
You want to be able to carry a gun around my child?? Oh no.. What if....??
It's not logic we fight but emotions.
All of the bills that are being introduced keep us moving in the right direction. We will have to take it one step at a time.
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:04 am
by barres
quidni wrote:Would the State of Texas be considered a "public" or a "private" employer? I'm thinking "public" but I can see some admins trying to enforce this based on the "employees only, gated and monitored" clauses.
I don't know the answer to whether the State is a public or private employer, but I don't know of any State agency that doesn't at least allow their employees to carry to and from work and store their weapons in their vehicles. Even TDCJ (the prison system) has a policy allowing its employees with CHL's to store their guns in their vehicles, and carry into a prison facility is statutorily prohibited.
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:48 pm
by wo5m
Charles L. Cotton wrote:
Correct. Texas is an employment at will State, meaning an employer can fire someone for any reason that does not violate Texas or federal law, or no reason at all. There are exceptions, but they are not relevant for this discussion. This bill will make it illegal to fire someone for having a gun in their car.
Chas.
You point out that Texas in the a employment at will state and that this new law would prevent people from firing people for having a gun in the car, but what happens when they fire you with out reason or some bogus reason altogether? One of the advantages(from the employer side) of being an employment at will state is you can fire someone with out reason. I like the idea but it just seems like there is a loophole that is not in our favor.
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 4:39 pm
by kauboy
Exactly! In Texas, they can simply fire you and give no reason whatsoever. So, even though they won't be able to have a policy to enforce, they can still fire you for "no reason" after learning of a handgun in your vehicle.
At least thats how I understand it. Is that right Charles?
I think its kinda funny how we are already shredding this bill and finding any and all possible backdoors, loopholes, and outright mistakes before its even made it to the floor for a vote.
