NRA-Backed Employee/Parking Lot Legislation Passes Texas House!‏

Freedom is not free. When good men do nothing evil men prevail. This is good news for law-abiding citizens. Keep vigilante the gun control/ban movement will keep trying to undo all the gains we have made.   Now for the article.  Glenn

Yesterday, the Texas House passed Senate Bill 321, NRA-backed employee protection/parking lot legislation sponsored by state Senator Glenn Hegar (R-Katy) and state Representative Tim Kleinschmidt (R-Lexington), by a 117-29 vote.  SB 321, substituted in House Bill 681 on the House floor since it had already passed the Senate, would prevent employers from enacting and enforcing policies to prohibit employees from storing firearms in their locked, private motor vehicles while parked at work.  To find out how your state Representative voted on this important measure, please click hereIf your state Representative voted for SB 321, please be sure to contact him or her and express your thanks for supporting SB 321.  Contact information for state House members can be found here.

This action marked the first time in four legislative sessions that this issue made it to the House floor for a vote.  Special thanks go to our hard-working bill sponsors, House Speaker Joe Straus and House Calendars Committee Chairman Todd Hunter for ensuring that the bill was set for consideration by the full House well in advance of impending legislative deadlines that begin next week.

Also this week, state Senator Jeff Wentworth (R-San Antonio), successfully amended language allowing Concealed Handgun Licensees to protect themselves on the campuses of public colleges and universities on Senate Bill 5, a bill related to higher education.  With the help of pro-Second Amendment colleagues in the Senate, he won several procedural votes and beat back several amendments designed to gut his original amendment.  In the end, the anti-gun sponsor of SB 5, state Senator Judith Zaffirini (D-Laredo), was so offended by the addition of the Wentworth amendment that she pulled her bill from further consideration.  Click here to see how your state Senator voted on the Wentworth amendment.

Please be sure to thank those Senators who stood with law-abiding Concealed Handgun Licensees’ right to protect themselves on the campuses of taxpayer-funded institutions of higher education.  Contact information for state Senators can be found here.

Note: Sen. Wentworth’s campus carry bill, SB 354, remains on the Senate Intent Calendar as he works to garner the 21 votes necessary to suspend the regular order of business in the Senate and bring his bill up for consideration.

This alert is posted at: www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=6730

Advertisements

About Republic of Texas (Conservative/Libertarian state)

Apostolic/Christian, Conservative/Libertarian, Husband & Father, Hunter, Mountain biker, hiking, camping, outdoors love em. Business man etc.
This entry was posted in Politic's and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to NRA-Backed Employee/Parking Lot Legislation Passes Texas House!‏

  1. chapster says:

    Ok. I’ve got a problem with this.
    “prevent employers from enacting and enforcing policies to prohibit employees from storing firearms in their locked, private motor vehicles while parked at work.”

    Seems to me that this is gun rights coming up against property rights.

    Property rights SHOULD trump in this case, even as it appears not to be. Otherwise, why should government limit themselves from overriding property rights in just this case?

    We have an owner of property, who is deciding what should happen on the owners property. In this case, choosing to not allow weapons. And the government is saying, “Property Owner, you have no choice, you MUST let weapons on your property.”

    Is this the same government that is stomping on property owners rights when the rights of a restaurant or bar to allow smoking is taken away?

  2. Perception, sir. Define property for me?
    Property is any physical or intangible entity that is owned by a person or jointly by a group of people. Depending on the nature of the property, an owner of property has the right to consume, sell, rent, mortgage, transfer, exchange or destroy their property, and/or to exclude others from doing these things.[1][2][3] Important widely recognized types of property include real property (land), personal property (physical possessions belonging to a person), private property (property owned by legal persons or business entities), public property (state owned or publicly owned and available possessions) and intellectual property (exclusive rights over artistic creations, inventions, etc.), although the latter is not always as widely recognized or enforced.[4] A title, or a right of ownership, establishes the relation between the property and other persons, assuring the owner the right to dispose of the property as they see fit. Some philosophers assert that property rights arise from social convention. Others find origins for them in morality or natural law.

    Is not a vehicle property? This law protects the rights of property owner (the car).
    All the law dose is protect an employee from being fired from his job, because he keeps, transports a firearm in his portable private property. What if you are a CHL, or private citizen, work in an area of Dallas or you past through a rough area to get to your job or home. But your employer has a policy that if they find a gun, in your car you will be terminated. Who’s rights are being violated? Once again your vehicle is private property. The law say you must keep the car secure, locked and the firearm out of sight. Big companies are pro gun control, anti second amendment. Most small business has no such policy’s.

    • chapster says:

      Indeed, food for thought. 🙂

      I absolutely see where you are going. The car is indeed personal property. That is absolutely true. Looking at this, I still see that we have an area that belongs to someone. Someone is wanting to enter this property owners area, and wants to enter it with items that the property owner does not wish to have on the premises. The government is forcing the property owner to allow this.

      I am going to borrow from the smoking issue again. Lets suppose that society had a zeal for smoking, and it was expected that you COULD smoke wherever you wanted – except a cantankerous business owner did not want to let people smoke in his business. So some of the employees sued, and won the right legally to smoke in the business. This is the same type of scenario that has happened with the gun(s) on the workplace premises.

      I realize there are restrictions in place. Has to be secure in the vehicle, and without reading the actual wording of the law, there are probably other caveats.

      But, just like a restaurant that has smoking in it, and I choose not to give my business to that restaurant – I am not forced to work for that employer that restricts the right to have a weapon locked in my car. Perhaps I could park on the public street, instead of the employee parking lot. Perhaps, perhaps….

      I simply think about it being my property, and I say, “This thing, whatever it is, is not allowed on my property”, and the government overriding me and forcing me to allow X, Y or Z. It doesn’t matter what this “thing” is. It is the concept of property rights. There are always repercussions/ramifications good and bad from decisions.

      This is my analysis and also my determination. I am sure that many, many people will disagree with me.

  3. Any one, individual,company,business or corporation that restricts freedoms of the individual, (law abiding) who drives to work in their private property to me is no different than the tyrannical government or state. Take our place of employment their is no place to park outside our facility except on a narrow county road, then the employee would have to walk across 6-7 acres to get to the time clock and get ready to go to work. Hypothetically I am leaving from the office on Friday to go to the deer lease. I live in Cleburne, but because of my tyrannical employee who will terminate me because I have my deer rifle in my vehicle secured and lock. Means I would have to drive back to Cleburne south and I need to go north to get to my lease.

    Hypothetically I am a competition shooter, I live in Granbury, but I have a shoot in say south Ft Worth after work, I would then be forced to drive back to Granbury to retrieve my fire arm. At witch point cost me time, fuel, money and may cause me to miss the competition all together. I know some of the own the property other are leasing the property. And your argument is valid upto the point of the private vehicle that is private property. Also you are correct we could just find employment some place else. In this current economy a guy is just glad to have a job. But should he be forced to not defend himself? Most of the reason these companies that have those polices in place at their because their insurance company told them they had to have that or they would not insure them. Now we have another and bigger tyrant forcing its will on the smaller guy. We are force to have insurance to protect ourselves from lawsuits. A judicial system gone a muck. This is a big circus. This law would not have even happen had it not been for government, rules, bureaucrats, bureaucracy. I see your point. But no business, corporation,state, city, county and or entity has the right to restrict my second amendment rights. This is a tough one. ????????

  4. Brian says:

    Why should I be allowed to have a firearm in my vehicle on the property of my employer?

    How about what exists between my home and my employer? How about if someone tries to car jack me or rob me at a stop light? Does the employer have to right to take away my right to defend myself if necessary when not on their property? It is not as if there are employers out there that do allow employees to have guns on the property, even if they themselves are gun enthusiasts, the insurance companies would not allow it. So, what are my choices?

    So how about if an employer tells you that due to new insurance company regulations you can not have a tire iron in your car because it could be used as a dangerous weapon? So now you must travel to work without an important tool you may need in an emergency. What do you do now between point A and B should something happen?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s