Posted: 10/28/2013 6:20:54 PM EDT
|
It has been nearly four months that this legislation has been the law of the land.
Do any of you know of anyone here in Tennessee who has been dismissed, demoted, disciplined, or otherwise punished by an employer in Tennessee for having a firearm in their vehicle as allowed by this statute. If you do, please let me know. Thank you. |
|
Quoted: It has been nearly four months that this legislation has been the law of the land. Do any of you know of anyone here in Tennessee who has been dismissed, demoted, disciplined, or otherwise punished by an employer in Tennessee for having a firearm in their vehicle as allowed by this statute. If you do, please let me know. Thank you. How would they know unless you told them or someone else you work with, or your employer searches every vehicle that comes onto their property. Alabama passed similar legislation this year that went into effect August 1 and I have wondered the same thing. |
|
Quoted:
It is easier to fight termination for no search vs termination for a gun. Not really, IMO. Virtually any employee handbook will state "all employee vehicles are subject to search at any time while on company property" & refusal is = "violating company policy" = getting fired. 
I'm no lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once.................. 
|
|
Quoted:
.... It is easier to fight termination for no search vs termination for a gun. Gotigers, thank you for your comments. I am not sure that I support you on this statement. I believe, even though the bill itself does not offer the employee any specific work place protection for having a firearm in the car, the current Section 39-17-1313 bill would give you more of a discussion point of view than would a "no search" reason. Like Bob, I am not an attorney but unlike Bob I have not stayed at a Holiday Inn Express anywhere near recently. For all of us here on this site - we need to keep an ear open for ALL stories of people being disciplined for having a gun in their car at work. |
|
Quoted:
How would they know unless you told them or someone else you work with, or your employer searches every vehicle that comes onto their property. If you were the employee, you would know if the employer searched your car - found a firearm - and fired you then and there. If it is someone else then there we must rely on local stories floating around, local news programs and local news media stories. In these cases we need to post them here for others to see. |
|
Maybe someone can answer this question since it is sort of on the same topic, why can I not leave my carry gun in my car when at school? I have read that a non-student adult permit holder may leave their handgun secured in their vehicle while on campus. However, it does not apply to students. I think it is crazy that I am a veteran in my late 30's who is going to college and am forced to go unarmed to campus. I am not even asking to carry inside, just to campus, that would satisfy me and should pacify the pacifists...in my mind at least. Would the safe commute legislation protect me in any capacity in this regard?
ETA I only mention the veteran thing because the government trusts me to carry a weapon around the world but they don't trust me at home with one. Frustrating. |
|
Quoted:
Maybe someone can answer this question since it is sort of on the same topic, why can I not leave my carry gun in my car when at school? I have read that a non-student adult permit holder may leave their handgun secured in their vehicle while on campus. However, it does not apply to students. I think it is crazy that I am a veteran in my late 30's who is going to college and am forced to go unarmed to campus. I am not even asking to carry inside, just to campus, that would satisfy me and should pacify the pacifists...in my mind at least. Would the safe commute legislation protect me in any capacity in this regard? ETA I only mention the veteran thing because the government trusts me to carry a weapon around the world but they don't trust me at home with one. Frustrating. No the Safe Commute will not cover you. Yes it is stupid. I actually work at a college and I hate the fact that I have to go into my office/room everyday and wait for some disgruntled idiot not deterred by "no guns allowed" signs to come in and shoot up the place. I have a carry permit and see NO valid reason I should not be able to carry concealed in my office. That is the law however. It should be changed. |
|
Quoted:
No the Safe Commute will not cover you. Yes it is stupid. I actually work at a college and I hate the fact that I have to go into my office/room everyday and wait for some disgruntled idiot not deterred by "no guns allowed" signs to come in and shoot up the place. I have a carry permit and see NO valid reason I should not be able to carry concealed in my office. That is the law however. It should be changed. Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe someone can answer this question since it is sort of on the same topic, why can I not leave my carry gun in my car when at school? I have read that a non-student adult permit holder may leave their handgun secured in their vehicle while on campus. However, it does not apply to students. I think it is crazy that I am a veteran in my late 30's who is going to college and am forced to go unarmed to campus. I am not even asking to carry inside, just to campus, that would satisfy me and should pacify the pacifists...in my mind at least. Would the safe commute legislation protect me in any capacity in this regard? ETA I only mention the veteran thing because the government trusts me to carry a weapon around the world but they don't trust me at home with one. Frustrating. No the Safe Commute will not cover you. Yes it is stupid. I actually work at a college and I hate the fact that I have to go into my office/room everyday and wait for some disgruntled idiot not deterred by "no guns allowed" signs to come in and shoot up the place. I have a carry permit and see NO valid reason I should not be able to carry concealed in my office. That is the law however. It should be changed. The only reason for it is, "oh no! guns! somebody is going to get shot!". The opponents to 'safe commute to workplace' at least can bring up the permit holder's rights vs business owner's rights argument (though their argument is weakened when you restrict the issue to leaving the gun in the locked car). Opponents to anything remotely linked to college campus carry have nothing but the (pure emotion)argument that it will somehow result in more school shootings. |
|
Quoted:
Maybe someone can answer this question since it is sort of on the same topic, why can I not leave my carry gun in my car when at school? I have read that a non-student adult permit holder may leave their handgun secured in their vehicle while on campus. However, it does not apply to students. I think it is crazy that I am a veteran in my late 30's who is going to college and am forced to go unarmed to campus. I am not even asking to carry inside, just to campus, that would satisfy me and should pacify the pacifists...in my mind at least. Would the safe commute legislation protect me in any capacity in this regard? ETA I only mention the veteran thing because the government trusts me to carry a weapon around the world but they don't trust me at home with one. Frustrating. I think I disagree with some of the answers posted following your asking this question. During subcommittee hearings the following is some dialog between Representative Faison, the bill’s sponsor, and Representative Sherry Jones, a member of the Civil Justice Committee and Subcommittee: Representative Jones: Thank you Mister Chairman. So, let me see if I understand exactly what it is supposed to do – it allows a permit holder, on any property, to have a gun in their car, in the trunk, in the glove compartment, so you could go to church, school, ahm…drive down to the guy’s house down the block, any restaurant, any business, anywhere? Representative Faison: The ones you mentioned – Yes ma’am. The only exemption would be a place where federal law would trump it. But other than that in the State of Tennessee you could take your car with a gun in it any place else. And then there was this exchange: Representative Jones: OK…So posting with this won’t make any difference – [holding out hand towards Rep. Faison] yes or no is good – I’m just trying to find out where I am… Representative Faison: For permit holders…No ma’am… Representative Jones: …OK…So…[for] a permit holder it doesn’t matter what’s posted where – you can still take it as long as you are a permit holder… Representative Faison: Yes, ma’am. Representative Jones: anywhere? Representative Faison: …anywhere. The provision of the statute which covers firearms at schools is section 39-17-1309. The first sentence of the employee safe commute legislation (section 39-17-1313) says, “Notwithstanding §39-17-1309,….” which is to say “In spite of §39-17-1309….” a permit holder can have a firearm in the parking lot as long as they do certain things, i.e. keep it out of sight and locked in the car if you are not there. §39-17-1309 only protects you from criminal prosecution. It does not protect you from school discipline procedures which is why we saw all of the major schools restate their “no guns” policy after this legislation was passed. Now mind you I am not an attorney nor do I practice law in any form or feature nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express. This is solely my personal opinion worth exactly what you paid for it. If you need actual legal advice, please contact a licensed attorney. |
| Last I heard, which was this Spring, almost all the schools reinstated their gun policy but 7. Two of those were Pellissippi State Comm College and UT. As of my last discussion on the subject, they are ok with permit holders having firearms locked in their car. |
| I would most definitely have to have something legal in writing before I take my handgun past the unarmed guard, fence, and sign that says that all vehicles are subject to search for weapons before I tried "take a gun to work" day. My company has never searched vehicles as far as I know, but it is in policy. What good is a gun if I have to sell it to pay bills because I lost my job because of it? Hopefully the legislature will amend the law to make it where I can't be fired because of having my handgun in my vehicle; but I just don't see it happening. I haven't heard of any cases of firings locally, but I doubt that any news outlets would report it if it did happen. |
|
Quoted:
Maybe someone can answer this question since it is sort of on the same topic, why can I not leave my carry gun in my car when at school? I have read that a non-student adult permit holder may leave their handgun secured in their vehicle while on campus. However, it does not apply to students. I think it is crazy that I am a veteran in my late 30's who is going to college and am forced to go unarmed to campus. I am not even asking to carry inside, just to campus, that would satisfy me and should pacify the pacifists...in my mind at least. Would the safe commute legislation protect me in any capacity in this regard?.... The "non-student adult" exception in 39-17-1309 seems almost certainly to apply to only unloaded firearms because: 1. it is not applicable to "intent to go armed" condition mentioned in previous paragraph, which prohibits possession by anyone on school grounds (a loaded firearm is always "intent to go armed" in TN) 2. Without a permit, a loaded firearm in vehicle is in violation of both TN law and the federal Gun Free School Zones Act. What you call "safe commute" legislation is 39-17-1313 is generally referred to as the "parking lot law", and is called in TCA "Transporting and storing a firearm or firearm ammunition in permit holder's privately owned motor vehicle" If statue provisions are followed, it does indeed protect you from prosecution on any school property. However, there is nothing in the law that protects you from being fired or expelled by the school for doing it. (I expect this to be successfully challenged at some point by one fired or expelled by a state supported institution, however). There is one glaring contradiction between TCA 39-17-1313 and the GFSZA, though, in that the law allows such possession by a permit holder from any state, while the GFSZA only allows such possession by a holder of a permit from the state in which the school resides. So at least under the exact wording of the laws, a permit holder from a different state could not be prosecuted by the state of TN, but could be by feds. - OS |
|
Recently (September 28th.) I wrote to the National Rifle Association to inquire about their plans for upcoming legislation here in Tennessee and offering some comments on legislation I felt they needed to focus upon prior the 2015 Annual Meeting.
Today, November 7th., I received this letter dated October 18, 2013: “Thank you for your recent letter to NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre. Unfortunately, Mr. LaPierre is unable to respond to your concerns personally, but he has asked me to respond on his behalf and to let you know that he is always interested in hearing what our members have to say. We thank you for your letter regarding the legislative issues taking place in Tennessee. We look forward to Nashville hosting our Annual Meeting in 2015. We understand the importance of passing solid pro-gun legislation to protect and preserve the rights of law-abiding Tennesseans. While not perfect, the parking lot legislation passed in 2013 was a step in the right direction for law-abiding citizens. The NRA-ILA has every intention of strengthening this law to allow all residents to exercise their fundamental right of self-defense. The NRA-ILA also intends on addressing the guns in parks issue in the upcoming sessions. Once again thank you for your inquiry and please understand that the NRA-ILA will continue working to advance the right of law-abiding gun owners. Once again, thank you for your comments. If you need any additional information regarding our legislative efforts, please do not hesitate to contact me at the above address or at (800) 392-8683.” The letter was signed: Sincerely, Erik E. NRA-ILA Grassroots Division. When I read that letter I felt my leg getting wet and when I looked down and saw it was, in fact wet, I thought I heard Mr. E. say it was raining. I’m not sure if Mr. E has the world’s shortest last name, or, if E is his middle initial and Mr. E is old and senile like myself and simply forgot to finish his name, or if Mr. E. is too afraid of his fellow members or his position to let it be know his last name but I’ll bet if I called that 800 – number they will know just exactly to whom to direct the call. Personally, I almost consider it an insult the way he signed the letter. I call the legislation passed this spring “The Employee Safe Commute” legislation.” The Tessessean calls it “The Guns-In-Trunks” legislation. To me “guns-in-parking lots” and “guns-in-trunks” have the same negative connotations and those who use those terms are quickly lumped into the same barrel and viewed with suspicion. Erik E. is no different. The employee safe commute legislation was a step in the right direction but only a step. It had five glaring faults; it restricted the vehicle you could drive; it codified federal law into state law; it allowed grandfathered opt out ordinances; it didn’t protect incidental exposure; and it gave the employee absolutely no protection or recourse from employer adverse action. The NRA signed off on this bill and gave its blessing to it. Sure they “have every intention of strengthening this law” but let me tell you - put your intentions in one hand and take a crap in the other and see which hand gets full the fastest. In this case actions speak louder than words and so far we have seen NO actions from Mr. E. and his cronies. Yes I wanted information about their intended actions but did you see any of that in the letter? I certainly did not. Let me get down off my soap box and tomorrow I’ll feel better. One thing I can’t figure out though is why it took 18 days from when he wrote the letter to the mailing of it (the envelop was post marked Nov 5, 2013). Is Mr. E so far down the chain of command it takes that long for it to get to the top for the man himself to approve? Just thinking…. |
|
Not really, IMO. Virtually any employee handbook will state "all employee vehicles are subject to search at any time while on company property" & refusal is = "violating company policy" = getting fired.
Outside of the military, I haven't personally had any job where my employer claimed a right to search my vehicle. But "company property" is perhaps the reason why. Most jobs I've had, the company themselves were tenants in someone else's building and therefore had no company property outside of their own store. At my last job, I think the company owned the lot - not sure - but since we weren't allowed to park in that lot anyway, it didn't matter. Therefore they had no ability to demand "search" rights cos the vehicles in question weren't on their "property" anyway. |
|
Quoted:
Outside of the military, I haven't personally had any job where my employer claimed a right to search my vehicle. But "company property" is perhaps the reason why. Most jobs I've had, the company themselves were tenants in someone else's building and therefore had no company property outside of their own store. At my last job, I think the company owned the lot - not sure - but since we weren't allowed to park in that lot anyway, it didn't matter. Therefore they had no ability to demand "search" rights cos the vehicles in question weren't on their "property" anyway. Quoted:
Not really, IMO. Virtually any employee handbook will state "all employee vehicles are subject to search at any time while on company property" & refusal is = "violating company policy" = getting fired.
Outside of the military, I haven't personally had any job where my employer claimed a right to search my vehicle. But "company property" is perhaps the reason why. Most jobs I've had, the company themselves were tenants in someone else's building and therefore had no company property outside of their own store. At my last job, I think the company owned the lot - not sure - but since we weren't allowed to park in that lot anyway, it didn't matter. Therefore they had no ability to demand "search" rights cos the vehicles in question weren't on their "property" anyway. Most companies with a private fenced lot like factories and such will have a sign stating that, or they will have it in the handbook. I can always say "no", but then I get fired for insubordination. I am safe though. We have only had one shooting, and one other attempted shooting at my plant. And a guy only killed his ex wife and three others next door at a place with a fence and a sign.
|