I might need your help

imported post

Deleted by moderator known troll.

imported post

MousePrifeII wrote:

i think you made the correct decision to not call the cops right away. they are incompetent and would've hassled you about your firearm and probably arrested you on suspicion you were the one breaking in. happens all the time

Click to expand...

Hi Jonny.

imported post

Deleted by moderator known troll.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

I would say that you are not really prohibited from protecting yourself to and from work. You can always park off the property. Right?

Click to expand...

The plant is over a mile long and they own 300 acres, 80 of which is under roof, and nine employee parking lots. Its a 15 minute walk from my parking lot to the office to clock in. I couldnt even imagine how far away I would have to park to be off the land they own. Also there are no real other places to park because its not in a town its kinda all by itself but I get what your pointing at and an extra five minutes walk would be worth it if I could.

Click to expand...

imported post

YllwFvr wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

I would say that you are not really prohibited from protecting yourself to and from work. You can always park off the property. Right?

Click to expand...

The plant is over a mile long and they own 300 acres, 80 of which is under roof, and nine employee parking lots. Its a 15 minute walk from my parking lot to the office to clock in. I couldnt even imagine how far away I would have to park to be off the land they own. Also there are no real other places to park because its not in a town its kinda all by itself but I get what your pointing at and an extra five minutes walk would be worth it if I could.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Damn. If I was doing that every day I'd invest in a golf cart.

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

Damn. If I was doing that every day I'd invest in a golf cart.

Click to expand...

I drive one through the plant when going anywhere, like to the resteraunt inside the plant.

EZ-Go power!

imported post

smash29 wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

You knowingly violated company policy.

Click to expand...

Sorry, you were clearly in violation. The owner of the property did not want you there armed. You broke the rules and a law suit will probably get you nowhere.

Click to expand...

Seems some here are condemning the OP for knowingly violating company policy but I have to wonder if there was actually a rule or policyforbidding weapons on company property or if this is an "after the fact" decisionmade only as a result of the customer complaint. I realize that thismay besemantics,splitting hairs, whateverand the job may be lost anyway but all I see "fired for having a weapon on company property", not "fired for violating company policy by bring a weapon on property". Maybe the OP can clarify....

Click to expand...

We still don't know, is there a policy as a condition of your employment that says you have to adhere to a rule of no firearms on company property???????????????????:question::question::question:

imported post

It still doesn't matter.

imported post

Aran wrote:

It still doesn't matter.

Click to expand...

:question:

imported post

It doesn't matter if there's a rule against it. They don't need him to have broken a rule to tell him to piss off.

imported post

True, but they need to be creative about an accusation for a discharge, I'm a Union Employee, and have been fired 2 times in the last 5 years, Once for something that was my fault, but provoked by a former coworker, and once for something that had absolutely nothing to do with me, When you're wearing the BullsEye, you can't hide, but justice can be served and a wrong corrected even in an at will employee situation..

imported post

"I don't like you." is a good enough reason in an at-will state.

imported post

I'mrather disturbed by a lot of the responses in this thread.

Before I go any further, I want to make clear that I support property rights, at-will employment status, etc., etc. However, it seems to me that a lot of otherwise clear-thinking people on this boardhave for some reason temporarilyfallen into the liberalmold of abandoning self-reliance. One of the biggest curses of humanity is the attitude, "let someone else do it." Philosophically, it doesn't matter one iota that the "others" in this case would be the police. Everybody who routinely carries a gun ought to have the training, the discipline, and the willingness to act in any way necessary to uphold the laws of the land and toprotect any person or property in which he has an interest. Remember, the authority of all laws, and the authority of all leaders, elected or otherwise, comes directly from the inherent authority of the populace as the ultimate governing body of the nation. That is why we have concepts such as jury nullification and citizen's arrest.

The OP was on the scene. The police weren't. I would have done essentially the same thing, although I might have taken a different tactical approach. Unfortunately, it looks like his actions may have negative personal consequences.

imported post

I have to agree with company policy that would state no weapons, to an extent. I've worked as a business manager since 1979 and even though the companies, all but a couple, have the no weapon policy on the premises, I've always carried my handgun in my vehicle. Your vehicle is the same as your home when it comes to privacy. I just don't advertise I'm keeping a gun in my car and have never had a problem. And one more step to ensure your privacy in this respect is to just carry a lock box or locking gun box in your car and you are protected from beingterminated for violating company policy if the gun is locked in a box while on their property. I was stopped at a border patrol check point in California last year and had my handgun in a lock box in my trunk. When they said they were going to search my automobile for contraband I refused to allow them to do so and the result was they put a dog on my car, end of story. They never were able to get probable cause to search my car. Your car is not open to search without probable cause, period! I have never allowed anyone to search my person, home, or automobile without justifiable cause, its just not constitutional under any circumstances, with exception to a government compound or military base. I get really worked up about this and wish that everyone would stop letting law enforcement and others violate their constitutional rights!!

gamestalker

imported post

gamestalker wrote:

Your vehicle is the same as your home when it comes to privacy.

Click to expand...

That depends entirely on the state you're in.

imported post

Find a good Doctor Fast, and develope a serious Back complication ASAP and Take sick leave, that Sick leave pay oughta hold you over for a while while a flurry of Resumes do the job prospecting for you!!

imported post

Flyer22 wrote:

I'mrather disturbed by a lot of the responses in this thread.

Before I go any further, I want to make clear that I support property rights, at-will employment status, etc., etc. However, it seems to me that a lot of otherwise clear-thinking people on this boardhave for some reason temporarilyfallen into the liberalmold of abandoning self-reliance. One of the biggest curses of humanity is the attitude, "let someone else do it." Philosophically, it doesn't matter one iota that the "others" in this case would be the police. Everybody who routinely carries a gun ought to have the training, the discipline, and the willingness to act in any way necessary to uphold the laws of the land and toprotect any person or property in which he has an interest. Remember, the authority of all laws, and the authority of all leaders, elected or otherwise, comes directly from the inherent authority of the populace as the ultimate governing body of the nation. That is why we have concepts such as jury nullification and citizen's arrest.

The OP was on the scene. The police weren't. I would have done essentially the same thing, although I might have taken a different tactical approach. Unfortunately, it looks like his actions may have negative personal consequences.

Click to expand...

Flyer22, I wholeheartedly agree with you on this point. More and more lately as I read posts on this and other supposed 2A supporting sites, I get the feeling that those who say that they support the right to carry and defend themselves do neither. There are way too many armchair quarterbacks and IANAL legal advice types that are quick to demonize those that are not afraid to step up and defend themselves and those in their charge. Where has all of this pansy ass lawsuit fearing, let LEO handle everything attitudes coming from. Even the Supreme court has stated that we are not guaranteed protection by LE. What if LEO was busy and something bad were to be happening inside the building? At least the poster chose to do something instead of turn and look the other way. Hopefully none of you or your families are ever in a situation where they are injured or killed while someone stands outside and waits for LEO to show or not. Other than the fact that the poster chose to go in with his handgun still holstered, I see nothing that he did that was wrong.

And for all of you armchair lawyers out there, even most at will states do allow for wrongful termination lawsuits if the person was terminated for a reason that is not spelled out in an employee handbook. Just because you do not work in a non at will state does not menat that you do not have legal protection under the law.

imported post

Charging in somewhere because a door is open that shouldn't be is NOT SELF-DEFENSE and has nothing to do with carry in any form.

It's foolishness at best, suicidal at worst.


And he said that it was an hour before anyone should have been there, so his first thought was likely not "My employees could be hurt inside!"

imported post

bufordtpisser wrote:

And for all of you armchair lawyers out there, even most at will states do allow for wrongful termination lawsuits if the person was terminated for a reason that is not spelled out in an employee handbook. Just because you do not work in a non at will state does not menat that you do not have legal protection under the law.

Click to expand...

Does anyone else find it ironic that the "armchair lawyers" in this thread are being lectured/corrected/dismissed by an... Armchair lawyer?

imported post

Aran wrote:

Charging in somewhere because a door is open that shouldn't be is NOT SELF-DEFENSE and has nothing to do with carry in any form.

It's foolishness at best, suicidal at worst.


And he said that it was an hour before anyone should have been there, so his first thought was likely not "My employees could be hurt inside!"

Click to expand...

Agreed.

I thought about that line too... He is a manager and may be required to open up shop. He arrived early to find an open door. How do you determine employees are inside and hurt and assume bad things are happening inside?

Once again.... My conclusion was there was no need to rush in under the guise of "saving lives."

Sorry... I am very up front with my thoughts and from the information I have obtained thus far... I am calling it the "Tackleberry affair" !!

Learn from your mistakes and the mistakes of others.