Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 3/14/2005 3:33:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 3/14/2005 3:44:09 PM EST by Dace]
Let me first say that my father is not anti, he beleives in the second amendment but does not beleive firearms reduce crime or help in any situation, they are all around bad things. The whole "guns kill people" philosophy.

It started at dinner when he brought up a legislator dropping a bill that would have allowed anyone with a permit to carry a firearm in a school among other places here in Az. He said the the idea was stupid, I said it wasnt and it started from there. We exchanged back and forth about two issues mainly 1.) carrying a firearms deters criminals and lowers the potential for crime and 2.) an employer should not have the right to deny an individual their right to bear firearms in the workplace. He being a Vice President of a 1,000 employee company here in the Valley he took offense to me saying an employer who bans all firearms at work is endangering the lives of his employees and does not care for their well being. Basically I said employers ban guns for money, their insurance carriers make them or else they would raise rates.

Tonight he comes home from work and says "I talked with my mens bible study group and I could not beleive how many of them agreed with you. So today i called out insurance broker and asked what the rates would be if employees carried firearms." Surpisingly the rates do not change. Talking with his peers and close friends really made him think about his point of view. And now he is cintemplating changint he rules of the company to allow a licensed CCW carrier to carry a firearm as long as it is hidden.
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 3:35:15 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dace:
Let me first say that my father is not anti, he beleives in the second amendment but does not beleive firearms reduce crime or help in any situation, they are all around bad things. The whole "guns kill people" philosophy.

It started at dinner when he brought up a legislator dropping a bill that would have allowed anyone with a permit to carry a firearm in a school among other places here in Az. He said the the idea was stupid, I said it wasnt and it started from there. We exchanged back and forth about two issues mainly 1.) carrying a firearms deters criminals and lowers the potential for crime and 2.) an employer should not have the right to deny an individual their right to bear firearms in the workplace. He being a Vice President of a 1,000 employee company here in the Valley he took offense to me saying an employer who bans all firearms at work is endangering the lives of his employees and does not care for their well being. Basically I said employers ban guns for money, their insurance carriers make them or else they would raise rates.

Tonight he comes home from work and says "I talked with my mens bible study group and I could not beleive how many of them agreed with you. So today i called out insurance broker and asked what the rates would be if employees carried firearms." Surpisingly the rates do not change. Talking with his peers and close friends really made him think about his point of view. And now he is cintemplating changint he rules of the company to allow a licensed CCW carrier to carry a firearm as long as it is hidden.



w00t! You may have just been responsible for getting an entire company its rights back!
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 3:35:37 PM EST
What's "gun sin?"

Link Posted: 3/14/2005 3:36:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
What's "gun sin?"




Crappy english.
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 3:39:22 PM EST
Good Job!!
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 3:43:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
What's "gun sin?"






Not owning enough guns or not owning an AR15, I forget which?
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 4:00:02 PM EST
I think that if a person is injured or killed in a place where firearms are prohibited by private policy, and the victim has a CCW, and it is more likely than not that the injury or death could have been lawfully prevented had the victim been armed, the owner or operator of the premises should be answerable in damages, including punitive damages. If the prohibition is the result of a public policy or law, and the location is not a jail, police car, or the White House, the government responsible for the law should be similarly liable.

I see no difference between prohibiting CCW and prohibiting nonskid shoes.
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 4:04:44 PM EST
My father and I have such heated arguments surrounding firearms just like that.
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 5:09:43 PM EST

Originally Posted By BobCole:

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
What's "gun sin?"






Not owning enough guns or not owning an AR15, I forget which?


This is Arfkom so it's both.
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 5:48:33 PM EST
nicely done dude. I don't work there but I thank you for the people and the families that might be able to protect themselves and not have to chose between a job and their lives.
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 5:52:31 PM EST
No gun prohibition where I work.
Its not practical for ME to carry but my bus driver can.
Link Posted: 3/14/2005 7:58:05 PM EST
I think you did well as there is a big gap between older people that used to carry a rifle or two in there gun rack,and the new laws that say they have to carry them now out of sight!

I am an old man and use a CCW so I can keep a loaded gun in my vehicle,God knows I would never want to kill another man,but if I ever felt that another person were going to take my life !

Then bingo the dice were rolled and he turned up a snake-eye!!

Us grey panthers are baby boomers licenced to kill!!!

Bob
Top Top