SIG Talk Gun Forum

Guns at the workplace.

This is a discussion on Guns at the workplace. within the Concealed Carry forums, part of the Gun Forum category; Bearone2, Yeah, I had an encounter with a guy working the gate at Ft. Jackson a few years back on that issue. I was there ...


Go Back   SIG Talk > Gun Forum > Concealed Carry

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-05-2012, 02:55 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: SC
Posts: 382
Bearone2, Yeah, I had an encounter with a guy working the gate at Ft. Jackson a few years back on that issue. I was there to pick up some meds for one of my parents. He asked if there were any weapons in the car, When I told him that I had a carry permit, and yes, my weapon was in the glovebox, he said that I would have to park at a nearby Wal Mart and walk in to the pharmacy.(About half a mile). It was an unpleasant lesson, but certainly preferable to being escorted to the stockade for trying to bring a weapon into a federal facility.
PA28FDO is offline  
Register

Welcome to the SIG Talk Forum dedicated to SIG Sauer Pistols and SIG Sauer Rifles.

We welcome everyone and the community is free to join so register today and become part of the SIG Talk Forum!

Old 09-05-2012, 02:57 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Bricktop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 414
Where I live it's 100 degrees + all summer and high humidity. None of my jobs would ever let me carry on prem. Stays locked in the glove compartment. As long as it's out of the sun, and you oil it at least once a month you shouldn't have a problem. I never have.
On prem I carry my folding knife so at least I have something. I don't know if that violates company policy because it only states information about guns so I don't care. I have to pay my bills so i abide by the no carry on prem rule. God forbid I print or show, accidentally, I'd be out the door. IN this economy that could mean bankruptcy, you never know.
Bricktop is offline  
Old 09-05-2012, 03:49 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Vetteguy904's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: florida
Posts: 890
IF i were going to carry at work I would get a subcompact like my 938 and front pocket carry. Not worth my job to do so. I move the car so it's literally just outside the front door, and the security guard is right there. would be a balsy MF to try anything
Vetteguy904 is offline  
Old 09-05-2012, 05:24 PM   #24
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SIGtalk.com
Posts: 1,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by bearone2 View Post
to me a federal firearms violations trumps 2nd amendment personal rights
To me a job that requires me to give up any Constitutional right is a job not worth having.
txshurricane is offline  
Old 09-05-2012, 05:55 PM   #25
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 54
I appreciate the spirit in which this comment is made, but Constitutional rights aren't absolute. See about yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.




Quote:
Originally Posted by txshurricane View Post
To me a job that requires me to give up any Constitutional right is a job not worth having.
evilted is offline  
Old 09-05-2012, 06:17 PM   #26
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 7
I work as an unarmed Security Officer (using the term guard is akin to calling a police officer a Barney) so it would be a felony for me to carry. I don't see a risk great enough to risk losing the right to own a gun, so I abide by the law. In fact I can see the logic in banning concealed carry by *unarmed* security. When you are representing some sort of official authority (and on property, I do have authority, albeit limited) you shouldn't have a hidden weapon, that's just bad form.

Quote:
Originally Posted by evilted View Post
I appreciate the spirit in which this comment is made, but Constitutional rights aren't absolute. See about yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
*eyeroll*

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!
ArmedNerd is offline  
Old 09-05-2012, 06:30 PM   #27
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SIGtalk.com
Posts: 1,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilted View Post
I appreciate the spirit in which this comment is made, but Constitutional rights aren't absolute. See about yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
If you want to yell "Fire!" badly enough, a theater is one place that you wouldn't patronize. Likewise, my desire to exercise my right to bear a firearm influences me not to bother working at places that prohibit it. That's all I'm saying.

But I'll go further and say that people who don't consider their God-given rights to be "absolute" are bound to lose them altogether. To each their own.
txshurricane is offline  
Old 09-05-2012, 06:36 PM   #28
Supporting Member
 
Siggybaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Georgia-North and East of The Big Chicken :-)
Posts: 3,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by txshurricane View Post
To me a job that requires me to give up any Constitutional right is a job not worth having.
I hate to break it to you, but most major corporations/companies do not allow employees to carry weapons of any type on company property.

Someone isn't going to give up a six-figure salary just to make a statement. No sane person anyways.
Siggybaby is offline  
Old 09-05-2012, 06:46 PM   #29
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 54
I think the point is that maintenance of individual rights requires responsible citizens to show some judgement in their exercise.

We can debate about where the line should be drawn, but society entails compromise.




Quote:
Originally Posted by txshurricane View Post
If you want to yell "Fire!" badly enough, a theater is one place
that you wouldn't patronize. Likewise, my desire to exercise my right to bear a firearm influences me not to bother working at places that prohibit it. That's all I'm saying.

But I'll go further and say that people who don't consider their God-given rights to be "absolute" are bound to lose them altogether. To each their own.
evilted is offline  
Old 09-05-2012, 10:09 PM   #30
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Montana
Posts: 78
Hurricane makes some points if he is willing to risk it then I say more power to him.

That being said i suggest filing a formal petition to allow Legal ccw holders to carry on premises. It probably won't effect anything other than gain you a few extra training sessions about company policies but if you can round up enough support who knows.
death2twinkys is offline  
Old 09-06-2012, 04:45 AM   #31
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SIGtalk.com
Posts: 1,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siggybaby View Post
I hate to break it to you, but most major corporations/companies do not allow employees to carry weapons of any type on company property.

Someone isn't going to give up a six-figure salary just to make a statement. No sane person anyways.
If you consider carrying your firearm a "statement", then by all means disarm yourself.

I'm not making a statement. I'm bringing the most effective tool available to protect myself, and I'm bringing it everywhere I go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by evilted View Post
I think the point is that maintenance of individual rights requires responsible citizens to show some judgement in their exercise.

We can debate about where the line should be drawn, but society entails compromise.
No, it doesn't. That's a farce from the people that want you to devalue your rights. Is it good for the public image? Yes. Does it keep the peace, politically? Yes. Does it weaken your platform to exercise those rights when you need them most? Yep.
txshurricane is offline  
Old 09-06-2012, 08:07 PM   #32
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by txshurricane View Post

No, it doesn't. That's a farce from the people that want you to devalue your rights. Is it good for the public image? Yes. Does it keep the peace, politically? Yes. Does it weaken your platform to exercise those rights when you need them most? Yep.

Well, even pro-gun Americans are not unanimous on a need to carry 24x7 to be safe, or that we'd be safer in actuality if we did. Negligent discharges and accidental injury and death are a real risk every time you handle a firearm, including those times you're tired or emotionally upset or otherwise distracted by things going on around you. Imagining a nation where ever adult non-felon goes armed all the time, I don't have any difficulty believing that death & injury by firearm unrelated will increase significantly.

And a gun isn't a magic shield of invulnerability. Nor does going about unarmed mean you have a 0% chance of survival in the event of a violent assault or attack. A gun is just a tool, and it's not always the appropriate tool or response even in a violent confrontation. You going to pull out your gun and blast away with a bunch of innocent bystanders around? If your response in any situation is always gun, gun, gun, then I submit you are a potential risk to public safety and likely to reverse the trend of expanded gun rights in America by creating a backlash that we'll all regret.

Some folks have a legitimate need to carry 24x7, but even then doing so entails risks and pretending otherwise -- like that the exercise of your unrestricted right is exclusive and does not increase risk for those around you -- is myopic and incredibly callous particularly as this concerns the life & well-being of others.

So, no, I don't feel a need to carry at work because the risk of violent crime occurring there is less than the risk of my creating a situation where I can't get my job done, or where I inspire some of my John Wayne wanna' be co-workers to start packing in order to feel safe around me and thus being indirectly responsible for any ND or injury one of them might cause. And I don't think I need to carry at my church, or at public government functions, and I certainly don't want you carrying at my kid's birthday party either.
evilted is offline  
Old 09-07-2012, 04:33 AM   #33
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SIGtalk.com
Posts: 1,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilted View Post
Imagining a nation where ever adult non-felon goes armed all the time, I don't have any difficulty believing that death & injury by firearm unrelated will increase significantly.
In that same world, violent crime would be reduced even more significantly. The scale would be tipped to the positive. I believe that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by evilted View Post
And a gun isn't a magic shield of invulnerability. Nor does going about unarmed mean you have a 0% chance of survival in the event of a violent assault or attack. A gun is just a tool, and it's not always the appropriate tool or response even in a violent confrontation. You going to pull out your gun and blast away with a bunch of innocent bystanders around? If your response in any situation is always gun, gun, gun, then I submit you are a potential risk to public safety and likely to reverse the trend of expanded gun rights in America by creating a backlash that we'll all regret.
You're missing the point, and you're eating the liberal plate that's set in front of you. It's not the gun that matters - it's the freedom to wield it, if you so choose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by evilted View Post
So, no, I don't feel a need to carry at work because the risk of violent crime occurring there is less than the risk of my creating a situation where I can't get my job done, or where I inspire some of my John Wayne wanna' be co-workers to start packing in order to feel safe around me and thus being indirectly responsible for any ND or injury one of them might cause. And I don't think I need to carry at my church, or at public government functions, and I certainly don't want you carrying at my kid's birthday party either.
Then don't invite me. That is the ONLY way to be sure I won't carry at your kid's birthday party.

Last edited by txshurricane; 09-07-2012 at 08:05 AM.
txshurricane is offline  
Old 09-07-2012, 02:05 PM   #34
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Montana
Posts: 78
I would say you are generally less safe at public government functions than at your kid's birthday party... just saying.

But that being said if you don't feel comfortable carrying all the time then why are you comfortable carrying any of the time? You're just as likely to inspire someone else to carry then you by your words become responsible for that persons actions and/or inaction.

Idk the only time I feel uncomfortable carrying is when I don't have a holster.
death2twinkys is offline  
Old 09-07-2012, 02:23 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yonder
Posts: 1,329
evilted I believe you summed it up pretty well.There are places that have the right to not let firearms on their property.If it happens to be where I work I have to decide if I'm gonna work or go hungry.It is that simple. One of the more dangerous jobs out there,over the road truck drivers.DOT says they can not have a gun in their truck for protection, and Lord knows they need it these days and times.On top of that they don't even need a reason to search and they have K-9's that can smell a bullet a mile away.Which way do those poor soles turn? Call a cop,10 minutes call a carry 1/10 a second,which do you trust? Gotta figure out what suits you,and only you can do that!
Sgt Ed is offline  
Old 09-07-2012, 02:37 PM   #36
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by txshurricane View Post
You're missing the point, and you're eating the liberal plate that's set in front of you. It's not the gun that matters - it's the freedom to wield it, if you so choose.

I think I get your point: You're arguing in favor of unrestrained exercise of an individual right.

I'm saying that the Constitution places a premium on promotion of the general welfare of all the people, not freedom of the individual. Individual freedom is a worthy goal, but one provided for at the margins of the general public welfare. So if exercise of your (used figuratively here) unrestrained right to stalk the main street in your locality with your rifle and six-guns strapped to your hips causes injury or death, or even pervasive fear of injury or death, your individual right will curtailed in the name of the greater public good.

There are plenty of historical examples where individual rights were suspended or ignored during times of crisis, all in the name of preserving the state, so what I'm saying can hardly be regarded as a radical idea.

But there is something I don't get: Why you can't just admit that it's not all just about you and your rights.
evilted is offline  
Old 09-07-2012, 02:53 PM   #37
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 54
I don't know anything the legality of packing while driving a truck with a CDL, but if firearms are outright prohibited that sounds incredibly dumb and dangerous for the drivers. Hopefully that law or administrative reg will be tossed soon -- I'm shocked that it's even on the books!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgt Ed View Post
One of the more dangerous jobs out there,over the road truck drivers.DOT says they can not have a gun in their truck for protection, and Lord knows they need it these days and times.On top of that they don't even need a reason to search and they have K-9's that can smell a bullet a mile away.Which way do those poor soles turn? Call a cop,10 minutes call a carry 1/10 a second,which do you trust? Gotta figure out what suits you,and only you can do that!
evilted is offline  
Old 09-07-2012, 03:31 PM   #38
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by death2twinkys View Post
I would say you are generally less safe at public government functions than at your kid's birthday party... just saying.
Yep, I would agree that a public government function is probably lots less safe.

FWIW, I agree with txhurricane's response about the birthday party -- if someone told me I was unwelcome packing someplace where I thought I should be able to, I would just not go there anymore. The only stores I patronize that have "No Loaded Firearms Inside" signs are gun stores.


Quote:
Originally Posted by death2twinkys View Post
But that being said if you don't feel comfortable carrying all the time then why are you comfortable carrying any of the time? You're just as likely to inspire someone else to carry then you by your words become responsible for that persons actions and/or inaction.

Idk the only time I feel uncomfortable carrying is when I don't have a holster.



Well, there are lots of reasons why I don't carry 24x7: I can't carry at work, that's just out as per company policy. Can't carry at the US Post Office or the library or DMV or tax office either, so errands to those locations entail a cost benefit analysis because I have to unstrap and lock my gun in the trunk of my car. I don't particularly like leaving firearms in the car when I can't see the car, so I'm as likely to leave it locked in the safe at home. Realistically, I don't regard my short commute to work or the office itself to be a high risk environment. My personal preference would be to carry in public buildings like the post office and library because unlike a courthouse or or legislative building, there's no on-site security to provide protection to those who have willfully complied with a no-firearm rule and are now at the mercy of someone seeking to violate it for the purpose of shooting at a bunch of unarmed people.

Sometimes I don't want to dress around a gun, like when it's hot and I'm wearing a t-shirt. On that topic, I'm sure that if I were to be involved in a violent encounter when not packing, I'd be pissed as heck at myself (assuming I live) for not carrying that time. But we're all doing risk/reward calculations all the time -- statistically, I'm more likely to die in a car crash than I am to be shot by a violent felon. But does that risk mean I'm not going to hop in my car to drive over to visit some friends to shoot the shit for a while? If I died or was maimed in an accident on the way there, you could make an argument that the risk was not worth the reward, but most of us don't give a second thought to that sort of thing and do it all the time.

And if I knew I were really tired, or was going out to drink a few beers, I won't carry because I don't like the idea of being armed when my judgement is poor or otherwise impaired. And I do like to drink beer.

And I'm all for responsible people carrying, and would like to see a lot less hassle and more uniform legal treatment of people lawfully carrying firearms in all jurisdictions. But responsibility is key and means knowing how to handle yourself and your firearm. You need to practice, you probably want to practice tactical drills too, so you're not a hazard to yourself and those around you. I hate the idea of the government sanctioning who can carry and who can't with a test, but the reality is the government already does decide the extent to which we can carry. What I am not in favor of is everyone getting a gun because everyone else has one. All you need to do is look at all the iPhones and iPads and BMW 3-series cars to realize that a lot of people own them for no other reason than that lots of other people own them and they want to be part of the in crowd and be cool. So yeah, I don't want to inspire borderline mental defectives or the kind of clown who is going to toss a loaded firearm onto the bureau at night when he gets home and junior can pull it down and inadvertently shoot himself, or maybe at a neighbor through an adjacent wall.

Heck, I've probably convinced lots of people to ride motorcycles, both through outright evangelism as well as by example. It is of concern that they might hurt themselves as a result, but that's their choice. What isn't their choice is if they hurt some hapless bystander as a result of being dumb, then I would feel bad for encouraging someone who didn't show good judgement to get into, and by virtue of association, taint something I care about with a negative connotation.

Everyone having a gun just because everyone else has one is the nightmare scenario I imagine and one leading to lots of accidental deaths and injuries. Sadly, violence won't always be moron on moron. However, if everyone who could carry did and they were responsible and we ended up with that polite society that pro-gun Americans talk about happened, I'd be as happy as anyone else because it would be a model of individual responsibility and mutual respect.

Last edited by evilted; 09-07-2012 at 03:36 PM.
evilted is offline  
Old 09-08-2012, 04:10 AM   #39
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SIGtalk.com
Posts: 1,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilted View Post
I think I get your point: You're arguing in favor of unrestrained exercise of an individual right.

I'm saying that the Constitution places a premium on promotion of the general welfare of all the people, not freedom of the individual. Individual freedom is a worthy goal, but one provided for at the margins of the general public welfare. So if exercise of your (used figuratively here) unrestrained right to stalk the main street in your locality with your rifle and six-guns strapped to your hips causes injury or death, or even pervasive fear of injury or death, your individual right will curtailed in the name of the greater public good.

There are plenty of historical examples where individual rights were suspended or ignored during times of crisis, all in the name of preserving the state, so what I'm saying can hardly be regarded as a radical idea.
I still disagree. Every God-given right - as defined in the Constitution - starts at an individual level. We have the right to free speech as individuals, not just as a collective. We have the right to carry on without unreasonable search nor seizure, as individuals.

We have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness regardless of who's around us...not because of who is.

I don't believe that any of our rights are trumped by the good of the collective. That defeats the whole purpose of having them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by evilted View Post
But there is something I don't get: Why you can't just admit that it's not all just about you and your rights.
I don't understand. You want me to admit to some kind of complex, or something? Little Man Syndrome?

If that's the case you're barking up the wrong tree. At this stage in my life I'm long past self-confidence issues. If there's any ulterior motive in my position on this discussion, it's my desire to be wholly committed to every decision I make. One of those decisions happens to be: when and where is it appropriate for ME to carry a handgun? And the answer is: EVERYWHERE. The only thing that keeps me from carrying is the notion that I might be revealed (i.e. metal detectors, searches of person, etc)...beyond that, my commitment to the safety of myself and my family transcends even the law. If I go to prison for carrying a handgun in a restricted zone, it will be because I saved someone from mortal harm, and it will be worth the prison time.

I don't advocate that position for everyone. It's just mine.

Last edited by txshurricane; 09-08-2012 at 04:13 AM.
txshurricane is offline  
Old 09-08-2012, 06:08 AM   #40
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by txshurricane View Post
I still disagree. Every God-given right - as defined in the Constitution - starts at an individual level. We have the right to free speech as individuals, not just as a collective. We have the right to carry on without unreasonable search nor seizure, as individuals.

We have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness regardless of who's around us...not because of who is.

I don't believe that any of our rights are trumped by the good of the collective. That defeats the whole purpose of having them.
On this point we just disagree. The Bill of Rights was, sadly, something of an afterthought which is why it's not part of the original text. And that probably goes a long way to explaining why the Second Amendment is so poorly written insofar as reference to a militia has been the biggest impediment to unambiguous legal affirmation of the individual right to firearms.

By the by, the next time you want to hate on liberals, you should know that the only reason the Bill of Rights was included at all is because some classically liberal New Englanders demanded it. Liberalism has always been about the rights of the individual though the term has been appropriated for other uses now, primarily as a label for describing proponents of the welfare state or those deemed insufficiently religious.



Quote:
Originally Posted by txshurricane View Post
I don't understand. You want me to admit to some kind of complex, or something? Little Man Syndrome?

If that's the case you're barking up the wrong tree. At this stage in my life I'm long past self-confidence issues. If there's any ulterior motive in my position on this discussion, it's my desire to be wholly committed to every decision I make. One of those decisions happens to be: when and where is it appropriate for ME to carry a handgun? And the answer is: EVERYWHERE. The only thing that keeps me from carrying is the notion that I might be revealed (i.e. metal detectors, searches of person, etc)...beyond that, my commitment to the safety of myself and my family transcends even the law. If I go to prison for carrying a handgun in a restricted zone, it will be because I saved someone from mortal harm, and it will be worth the prison time.

I don't advocate that position for everyone. It's just mine.
Nope, I don't think you "have issues" or anything. But I was trying to understand why you feel that carrying without restriction is so important. I think you've answered that question above and there's a strong moral component. My problem isn't necessarily with you carrying (even though I don't know you and have to infer that you're a safe gun handler), it's the thought that exercise of the same right by everyone -- including a lot of people who may have a Constitutional right to carry -- would get messy because I don't trust people in general to be safe with their firearms if they don't regard the right as important and worthy of respect.

Call me a pessimist, but my experiences being almost run over almost daily by distracted drivers (you know the ones -- you pass them and they're holding their smart phone up while driving) suggests to me that a growing number of people are increasingly wrapped up in their own little worlds and not particularly respectful of the lives and well-being of others!

Last edited by evilted; 09-08-2012 at 06:24 AM.
evilted is offline  
Reply

  SIG Talk > Gun Forum > Concealed Carry


Search tags for this page
argument for firearms in the workplace policy in oregon
,
chl holders leave the gun in the workplace garage
,
gun in work place
,
hawaii right to carry gun work place of employment
,

smart phone 938 sig sauer concealed carry holster

,
taliking about weapons in the workplace
,
workplace has no guns policy
Click on a term to search for related topics.

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar SIG Talk Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hey there...new to Sig, not new to guns! cmartin72 New Users 7 04-17-2012 02:21 AM
Talk about guns dondavis3 Guns 1 12-10-2011 09:50 AM
Mouse Guns Jim-Bob Guns 13 03-09-2011 08:15 AM


Top Gun Sites Top Sites List

Powered by vBulletin 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
Copyright © 2010 - 2014 SIG Talk. All rights reserved.
SIG Talk is a SIG Sauer Firearms enthusiast's forum, but it is in no way affiliated with, nor does it represent SIG Sauer, Inc. of Exeter, NH.