stainless1911
Banned
imported post
unless you live in Michigan, then you need a CPL to carry there too.
unless you live in Michigan, then you need a CPL to carry there too.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Wal-mart employees allowed to carry loaded weapons off clock
- Thread starter northofnowhere
- Start date
Hunterdave
Regular Member
imported post
buster81 wrote:
Sorry for the confusion.
Also If you read further up, my other post makes it abundantly clear that I am speaking about off time and off employers property.
Eyes and my conversation, in my mind, was about what restrictions an employer could put on an employee in their personal life.As I said in that conversation,I don't believe that an employer can compel you to give up certain constitutional rights
contractually , on our on time and property, as condition of employment.
Lets say they had in their contract, that as a condition of employment, you could no longer worship God or you could never own a gun or use one for any reason.
And lets also say you signed that contract but still attended church every Sunday and deer hunted every chance you got.The employer sues for breach, in my opinion no
court in the land would favor the employer.
In my opinion nothing transcends the rights protected by the 1st and 2nd amend.
buster81 wrote:
Yes,you would be in breach of contract, but I was talking about after I left your property,and on my own time. I inferred from some of the post that W.M. said that their employees were unable to carry a loaded firearm off the clock and off W.M property.As I read further I saw that some omitted the fact that they were talking about W.M. employees carrying off the clock on W.M. property.
Sorry for the confusion.
Also If you read further up, my other post makes it abundantly clear that I am speaking about off time and off employers property.
Eyes and my conversation, in my mind, was about what restrictions an employer could put on an employee in their personal life.As I said in that conversation,I don't believe that an employer can compel you to give up certain constitutional rights
contractually , on our on time and property, as condition of employment.
Lets say they had in their contract, that as a condition of employment, you could no longer worship God or you could never own a gun or use one for any reason.
And lets also say you signed that contract but still attended church every Sunday and deer hunted every chance you got.The employer sues for breach, in my opinion no
court in the land would favor the employer.
In my opinion nothing transcends the rights protected by the 1st and 2nd amend.
buster81
Regular Member
imported post
Hunterdave wrote:
Indeed it did. My apologies.
You have said that you feel a contract restricting constitutional rights to be "immoral and illegal." Under what law do you feel it would be illegal?
Hunterdave wrote:
Indeed it did. My apologies.
You have said that you feel a contract restricting constitutional rights to be "immoral and illegal." Under what law do you feel it would be illegal?
imported post
Hunterdave wrote:
IMO, every court in the land would regard that contract as breached if you did as described. No payment or service would be forthcoming from the other party and any penalties would be levied and enforced. How could they not be?
I offer and you agree toa contract stipulating that if you do not attend church for the next year, I will pay you $100,000. You go to church, I become aware of it and refuse payment. You sue. I show the judge the copy of the contract, your signature on the contract, proof of your attendance,you tell the truth and confirm that you signed it of your own free will without duress and I believe no judge in the landwould make me pay you that $100,000.
Further, I believe that if that contract required you to buy me a new truck if you defaulted in youragreement that every judge in the land would require you to buy me a new truck.
Substitute whatever you want for the performance requirement. "Not carry a gun", "not write a book", "not vote in an election", etc.
Hunterdave wrote:
IMO, every court in the land would regard that contract as breached if you did as described. No payment or service would be forthcoming from the other party and any penalties would be levied and enforced. How could they not be?
I offer and you agree toa contract stipulating that if you do not attend church for the next year, I will pay you $100,000. You go to church, I become aware of it and refuse payment. You sue. I show the judge the copy of the contract, your signature on the contract, proof of your attendance,you tell the truth and confirm that you signed it of your own free will without duress and I believe no judge in the landwould make me pay you that $100,000.
Further, I believe that if that contract required you to buy me a new truck if you defaulted in youragreement that every judge in the land would require you to buy me a new truck.
Substitute whatever you want for the performance requirement. "Not carry a gun", "not write a book", "not vote in an election", etc.
Hunterdave
Regular Member
imported post
Buster,
No apologies necessary, just a friendly hypothetical discussion.
I will try to answer as to, in my opinion, legality,shortly.
Ecocks,
In your scenario, I would agree. You were contracted to a specific
purpose . To not attend church and being paid for that action.To
fulfill a contract you must buy a truck. Yes, agreed.
But in a contract to be a stock boy or maintenance man or whatever,
a company makes as a condition of that contract, that you give up
your 1st and 2nd amend. rights, is an over reach of employers rights.
If it were in the scope of their business, I would see it differently i.e.
you were going to work for an atheistic org. and they required you not
attend church. Within the scope. If you were going to work for the
Brady Bunch, to not own firearms. Within the scope.To not write a
book about W.M. while employed by W.M. Within the scope. To not
do illegal drugs. Within the scope because they are illegal and insurance
purposes.
Buster,
No apologies necessary, just a friendly hypothetical discussion.
I will try to answer as to, in my opinion, legality,shortly.
Ecocks,
In your scenario, I would agree. You were contracted to a specific
purpose . To not attend church and being paid for that action.To
fulfill a contract you must buy a truck. Yes, agreed.
But in a contract to be a stock boy or maintenance man or whatever,
a company makes as a condition of that contract, that you give up
your 1st and 2nd amend. rights, is an over reach of employers rights.
If it were in the scope of their business, I would see it differently i.e.
you were going to work for an atheistic org. and they required you not
attend church. Within the scope. If you were going to work for the
Brady Bunch, to not own firearms. Within the scope.To not write a
book about W.M. while employed by W.M. Within the scope. To not
do illegal drugs. Within the scope because they are illegal and insurance
purposes.
okboomer
Regular Member
imported post
I, too read it as WM was trying to dictate off-the-clock, off-the-property behavior. I also still do not understand how it is legalthat they canregulate your behavior on their property while off-the-clock when you are exercising a Right that is actively supported and upheld by the State by means of legislation (in the case of Open Carry) and State Licensing (in the case of Concealed Carry).
Does this WM also screen for illegal carry?
Of course, I am in Oklahoma and remember very clearly the "Parking Lot War" over whether the employee had the Right to Privacy extended to their vehicle while it was on employer property. According to our State Legislature, privacy begins as soon as the employee is off the clock. IIRC, that right was also extended to the employee who patronized their employer as a customer, off the clock. After that, a lot of businesses posted No Carry on their property, and a lot of businesses DID NOT
.
I'll have to check with some friends who are WM employees down here and see if the ban is company wide, or a local restriction in 'your' area.
I, too read it as WM was trying to dictate off-the-clock, off-the-property behavior. I also still do not understand how it is legalthat they canregulate your behavior on their property while off-the-clock when you are exercising a Right that is actively supported and upheld by the State by means of legislation (in the case of Open Carry) and State Licensing (in the case of Concealed Carry).
Does this WM also screen for illegal carry?
Of course, I am in Oklahoma and remember very clearly the "Parking Lot War" over whether the employee had the Right to Privacy extended to their vehicle while it was on employer property. According to our State Legislature, privacy begins as soon as the employee is off the clock. IIRC, that right was also extended to the employee who patronized their employer as a customer, off the clock. After that, a lot of businesses posted No Carry on their property, and a lot of businesses DID NOT
.I'll have to check with some friends who are WM employees down here and see if the ban is company wide, or a local restriction in 'your' area.
northofnowhere
Campaign Veteran
imported post
It is acompany wide policy. There are various states who have laws that require that state's WM'sto be exempted.
It is acompany wide policy. There are various states who have laws that require that state's WM'sto be exempted.
eye95
Well-known member
imported post
okboomer wrote:
I don't like at all the idea that I cannot enjoy a beer while watching the game. However, that was part of the contract I agreed to when I took the job. If anyone does not like the conditions of employment, they are free not to take the job. That's Liberty. Just like the Liberty the ball club exercises when it says that it does not want employees to drink when they stick around.
okboomer wrote:
I work part-time for a local Baseball team. Once I am off-the-clock, I may stay in the stadium and watch the game. Two rules: I have to take off the shirt that reads, "staff," and I may not drink alcohol.
I don't like at all the idea that I cannot enjoy a beer while watching the game. However, that was part of the contract I agreed to when I took the job. If anyone does not like the conditions of employment, they are free not to take the job. That's Liberty. Just like the Liberty the ball club exercises when it says that it does not want employees to drink when they stick around.
Porter N
Regular Member
imported post
About 2 months ago The APA at my store told me I needed to leave with my gun. I did, and talked to her about it later. I looked up AP-01 and all.
She pulled me aside a week later and said it was OK, but stay out of associate-only areas . She talked to a few people, and it turns out Our store manager doesn't want any guns in the store. Our APC said there wasn't anything they could do to people who carry guns in the store, customers or off-clock associates.
I showed her the new AP-01 today and she read the first sentance of it and said, "So now it says you cant have a gun, loaded, or not, in the store at any times." I hadn't read it yet - just printed it off to read it at home. I looked at it and read what she read, and yeah. That's what it says. darn...
I got home and read the whole thing. the last line of the POLICY section says it only applies to associates who are coming or leaving work for official company business.
I'll have to point that out to her tomorrow and see what she says.
About 2 months ago The APA at my store told me I needed to leave with my gun. I did, and talked to her about it later. I looked up AP-01 and all.
She pulled me aside a week later and said it was OK, but stay out of associate-only areas . She talked to a few people, and it turns out Our store manager doesn't want any guns in the store. Our APC said there wasn't anything they could do to people who carry guns in the store, customers or off-clock associates.
I showed her the new AP-01 today and she read the first sentance of it and said, "So now it says you cant have a gun, loaded, or not, in the store at any times." I hadn't read it yet - just printed it off to read it at home. I looked at it and read what she read, and yeah. That's what it says. darn...
I got home and read the whole thing. the last line of the POLICY section says it only applies to associates who are coming or leaving work for official company business.
I'll have to point that out to her tomorrow and see what she says.