House passes 'guns at work' bill

The Florida House Wednesday passed the so-called guns-at-work bill by a 72-42 vote and sent it to the Senate. Approval came after three years of debate and discussion, over the strong opposition of much of the state's business community. The bill (HB 503), which allows concealed weapons permit holders to keep their guns locked in their cars at work and visitors who do not have such permits, was amended to exclude nuclear plants, and now goes to the Senate. Three Democrats voted for the bill and five Republicans voted against it, including two from Pinellas County: Reps. Jim Frishe and Ed Hooper.

"Law abiding people have a right to have a firearm in their vehicle to protect themselves and their families," said National Rifle Association lobbyist Marion Hammer. Senate passage is considered likely, but Gov. Charlie Crist has not said whether he will sign the bill, citing the tussle between gun rights and property rights. "I think there are some real competing issues with that piece of legislation," Crist said recently.

Does the NRA's Hammer think Crist will sign the bill if the Senate passes it? "I never make predictions," Hammer said. Crist would be wise to clear out his email in-box. Lawmakers report getting thousands of email messages in recent days from NRA members.

Comments

[Vocal Majority]

If I work for you and you tell me not to voice my opinion because it might be bad for business, I respect that... But to tell me that I can not have a tool used for protection of myself and family secured in my vehicle. GO TO HELL!! You are ignorant or evil.. I will not be denied the right to ensure the safety of the people I care about.

[Daniel R.]

So .. this is what I am hearing, correct me if I am wrong (LOL!) ..

I can spend my money at your "place of business on your property with my gun?" However, I can not earn a living at your "place of business on your property with my gun?"

Your emotional fear is causing you to surrender the very thing that the framers (founding Fathers) wanted you to have. YOUR OWN PROTECTION.

Why is it the 2nd Ammendment and not the last? I am guessing that the Framers thought it to be the 2nd most important. Since it comes right after "Freedom of Speech" .. which wont exist when you take away the RIGHT that gives all the others backbone.

I am a small business owner and I think that my employees have their rights, and I will not violate those rights.

my company is proudly Pro-Gun! .. DinoGreenFuels.com .. come on in, guns welcome. Fear not allowed!

If a law abiding gun owner makes a mistake, and hurts somebody, and the accident ocurred on a 3rd party's property - does the victim have standing to recover losses from that 3rd party?

[Jim]

Remember ..... when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

Vocal Majority - you have all the right in the world to defend yourself.

However, I have all the right in the world to decide whether or not to hire and fire you.

If a law abiding gun owner makes a mistake, and hurts somebody, and the accident ocurred on a 3rd party's property - does the victim have standing to recover losses from that 3rd party?

rep. traveisa really sucks at his job.

In the Forty + years I had been in busines in Florida, I encouraged all my employees to carry and display guns. No Problems. I think most of the problems come from the newcomers from the North East Liberal States.

Will Publix get sued if an employee uses a gun on their property and accidentally shoots someone else?

[Jeff in TX]

There is NO logical connection between an employee having a gun locked in his/her car in your parking lot, and any form of increased danger to your other employees or business. If anything, a wealth of research indicates that just the opposite is the case. Given this fact, your desire as an employer, to bully your employees by dictating their personal habits is reprehensible in the extreme. Would you fire an employee for not wearing underwear? How would you know? Are you going to search them all? If you knew, and you didn't like it, so what? Your rights as an employer can NEVER supercede your employee's individual rights as citizens. If you could find a rational argument for how having a gun locked in an employee's car increases the physical or legal danger to your business, let's hear that. But your arrogance is exactly what you keep accusing the pro-gunners of, and it just makes you look stupid and bullying. As long as you open your business to the public (unlike your home, for example)you will have to respect the civil rights (including the right to defend themselves)of others who work or do business there. You can no more refuse me service, or a job, because I have a gun in my car than because my skin is black.

[Paul]

To all you employers, you will sure wish someone you can trust is near by with a gun, to protect your a-ss, when a crazy comes in to kill you.

[Steve Holvik]

I am an employer and i am a citizen. I would much rather lose rights as an employer rather then my constitutional rights as a citizen. Like the one person said..I wish all my employees had carry permits, that way i know they have passed extensive federal background checks and demonstrate responsibility on a daily bases. Let us not forget that most of the crazed shooting sprees that take place these days occur in "Gun Free Zones"...gee, i wonder why? Spending all this time and money on something that was already resolved when our founding fathers drafted our bill of rights is a disgusting misuse of my taxes. Thats what people should be P.O.'d about!

[Daniel R.]

We can sue companies for not providing security? right? I want 2 people to come to my wifes car, walk her into the store, stay with her in the store, and then walk her back to the car.

That would solve my issues, but one question remains, would those to people be armed?

seems silly doesnt it?

I agree with tort reforms, protect the business from lawsuits - and mandate the the display of their anti-gun position.

But even better !! .. remove ALL legal protections if a company has an anti-gun policy! ..

NOW WHERE DO YOU STAND?!?

[David]

When honest law abiding citizens are no longer allowed to carry guns,Mr Businessman will be sweating bullets.

[Mike]

OK. If you prevent me from having a gun in my car on your property, and I am physically attacked by a real BIG bully while standing beside my car on your property, then you are liable for my injuries because you prevented me from being able to defend myself. You didn't provide the same protection that I would have had had you not prevented me. And BOY am I going to collect from your insurance. I may even be able to put you out of business.

[Gregory Morris]

For all the folks asking about "will so-and-so get sued if someone is accidentally shot"... this bill has NOTHING what-so-ever to do with that. Nothing is going to change litigation-wise regardless of whether or not this bill is passed.

This law simply makes it so some employers cannot effectively ban guns in their parking lots. Of course, nobody has found a way to effectively guarantee that guns are kept out of parking lots.

In response to “If a law abiding gun owner makes a mistake, and hurts somebody, and the accident occurred on a 3rd party's property - does the victim have standing to recover losses from that 3rd party?”

If a police officer makes a mistake, and hurts somebody, and the accident occurred on a 3rd party's property - does the victim have standing to recover losses from that 3rd party?

Thank you for at least answering my question Gregory Morris.

However, your answer "nothing is going to change litigation-wise regardless of whether or not this bill is passed" does concern me.

If a business must recognize an employee's right to carry a concealed weapon, and that employeee uses that weapon, and in doing so, hurts or kills someone - that business, not the employee - could be considered neglient and liable, and thus subject to a lawsuit.

It would be great for the business to be immune from such litigation.

Which then begs the quesiton of the victim - if the gun owner is immune, and the business is immune, and the criminal is dead - who pays for the victim's medical bills?

[Greg]

Its about time to have some rights back!! If you don't want me to bring a gun in your office thats fine. When a crazy gun men comes in that could care less about laws and shoots you. you are going to wish there was a law abinding citizen there with a carry permit. do you think a "do not carry" is going to stop crooks? NO just law abinding citizens. I'm glad it passed

[GREG]

"""OK. If you prevent me from having a gun in my car on your property, and I am physically attacked by a real BIG bully while standing beside my car on your property, then you are liable for my injuries because you prevented me from being able to defend myself. You didn't provide the same protection that I would have had had you not prevented me. And BOY am I going to collect from your insurance. I may even be able to put you out of business."" GOOD POINT MIKE!!!!

[Gregory Morris]

"Thank you for at least answering my question Gregory Morris."
I would love to know who it is I am responding to.

"If a business must recognize an employee's right to carry a concealed weapon..."
That's not what this law is about. It is about a firearm locked within someone's car in a parking lot.

I agree businesses have the right to ban firearms on their private property, however, any property where the public has the right of access is not the same as truly private property. It is my assertion that when the public has the right of access, you cannot ban guns. In any other area you may. If you want your employees to park in a gated and locked parking lot, you should be able to say "no gun". But if they have to park in a spot that is accessible to anyone, they should be allowed to keep their firearms.

3:07

The munipality employing the police officer would be liable. However, in most cases the municipality would have the means to finance the payment of loss.

However, if an employee is liable in an accidental shooting, and does not have the ability to compenstae the victim for losses, who then will compensate the victim?

[gregs238]

""Remember ..... when seconds count, the police are only minutes away."

you better hope one of your people are armed. because the crooks could care less about your rules or laws

[Dave]

For all you employers that want to fire employees for exercising the right to bear arms, how about when you get sued by an employee's survivors when they are killed on their way home from your "gun free" place of business because he or she was unable to defend themselves against a gun totting criminal all because of your anti rights workplace rule? Better yet, how about the gun toting criminal that comes into your "gun free" place of employment and kills your unarmed employee because they were kept defenseless by your no guns rule? Maybe a couple of "gun free" businesses getting sued out of business would change your obtuse views.

[Steve Holvik]

Looks like the lawyers are on the board now....I have seen several comments about "who will compensate the victim" if no one is liable. Well the good news is the VICTIM IS ALIVE! The scenario could have been "everyone is dead". Idiots. I still stand by my previous comment.

[bailey]

i have a carry permit and refuse to shop were me and my 2nd amendment right are not welcome,
as for a gun on your store property IM the safest shopper you have i have been finger printed, background checked, chances are great i wont be the one shoplifting or robbing you while on your property. and IM also 100% sure the bad guy does not care for any of your rules or wishes.
Were not talking about guns at work were talking about guns locked up in law biding citizens cars that you have trusted enough to hire and be work around all day long.if you dont/cant trust them why did you hire them to start with!

[Dave]

How about all you anti-right business owners posting up the names of your businesses? That way we can vote with our dollars and put you out of business for your anti-rights "gun free" policies. Bet you won't tell us, will you? Your property rights are more important to the right of someone to defend their life? You are on the wrong side of that argument both legally and morally.

[HJ]

My wife works for a large corp. her building is in a very bad part of town, they have had multiple problems with employees being robbed and/or beaten while performing their duties, I have trained my wife and armed her, I would rather have my wife than her insurance. Not allowing her to have a firearm in her vehicle is just stupid. Good people do not do bad things just because they have a firearm....bad people will do bad things whenever they have the oportunity, I do not hire bad people to work for me.

[bailey]

A saying just came to mind.

JUDGED BY 12 OR CARRIED BY 6

Steve Holvik

If it was your kid with a bullet in his neck, unable to walk ever again and you had a $200k medical bill to pay...

I bet you'd be wanting a lot more than just the thanks he was still alive. And that's assuming that he even made it.

I am glad to see there are enough people who see the reality and obviousness of the situation.

1. Lawabiding cititzens are exactly that, law abiding. Passing this law does not change that fact! The people who are sociopaths and are going to shoot up your place could care less if they can or cannot carry a weapon in your business!! All that you accomplish by baning weapons on your property serves is to make law abiding citizens exponentionally less secure.

2. By defining that an employee is unable to have a weapon locked securely in their PERSONAL vehicle on your property, you are then making those same lawabiding citizens not only exponentially less secure on your premisis, but also, they now have no way to protect themselves while traveling to and from your business!!!

All of you that want to fire employees who have a weapon in the car, are you going to hire full time armed personal body guards to escort all of your employees to and from your place of work? ... yeah didnt think so.

Use your head for something other than anti-gun paranoia.

Dave

Whether they denied the employee the right to defned themselves, or they allowed their right and the employee negligently hurt someone else, it sounds like you are perfectly OK with the business getting sued either way.

What good is your right to carry your gun to work, if your boss lays you off beacause he's got to money left to pay you?

[Steve Holvik]

As a responsible person with a carry permit I also have medical insurance. I would still rather have my child saved from a violent attack and be in debt then have many bystanders watch in horror as my child is gunned down without mercy. again...idiots.

[Jonah]

I'm an average person here in FL, I come into every one of your stores, Im ALWAYS carrying. In order to get a permit to carry I have to be background checked by the FBI, this makes me a good person.. good enough for the FBI anyhow. Now.. I'm in your store... and so is some punk who's about to rob you and kill your wife (or husband).. what are you going to do? die? sit down and wait for it? Not if I'm there, because if I'm there I'm a good citizen with the right to carry a firearm and I will do my best to save you, your wife (or husband) and anyone else in the vicinity of a Punk wielding a weapon. Do some research of how many gun crimes are committed by CWP holders.. its nearly non existent.. DO NOT IMAGINE PEOPLE LEGALLY CARRYING A FIREARM IS BAD! You should consider us more like cops than bad guys we tend to fall 1000X more towards being a cop than being a punk criminal. The only people who would obey a law to not have a gun in their own car is a law abiding citizen... Anyone intending to do harm with the gun obviously don't care about the laws.

[Dave]

I'm just wondering, where in the Constitution is this "property right" that the anti-rights business owners are pumping out? While I am convinced without citation that property rights are essential to life and liberty, I am not convinced that property rights trump either life and liberty or any of the enumerated rights in the Bill of Rights - such as the right to keep and bear arms. I just don't see an enumerated right (the individual right to keep and bear arms) conflicting with an unenumerated right (property) and the fact that some businesses seem to place the value of their property over the value of life is just mindboggeling as to both its lack of logic and stupidity.

[Peter Patterson]

I am truly saddened by the level of intelligence displayed by many of those posting here. The right to keep and bear arms and to be able to defend oneself was only affirmed by the 2nd Amendment. Don't all you liberal business people know what the phrase shall not be abridged mean?

There is a fearful false assumption being made by many on this board.

It is the idea that because someone is a law abiding concealed weapons permit holder, that they also are expert marksment and never make a mistake.

Yes, permit holders are far and away experienced shooters and fully understand gun safety. However, accidents do happen.

[Tony Tartaglia CW2 USAR]

I originaly resided in one of those Northeast liberal states, New Hampshire to be exact where our state motto goes like this..LIVE FREE OR DIE... The reason we lived FREE in New Hampshire was almost everyone has a gun. Now I live free in Florida because I own 4 guns, and everyone in my family knows how, and more importantly, when to use them.
I firmly agree with the Second Ammendment and the NRA'S fight to keep the liberal one world wishers off of our backs.
We live in the United States of America which was founded on religious freedom backed up by a gun. Take either one away and we might be living in China,or England or Australia, or...,or...,or...

[Jonah]

your worried about accidents, how about the accidental criminal intentionally kills you and or your employees?

October 7, 1997: Hani Farah, owner of a Mt. Morris, MI, liquor
store, was accused of felonious assault on two liquor control board
investigators. According to reports, after the investigators had
seized an illegal gambling machine from Farah's store, Farah ran
after them, firing two shots. Farah, a concealed weapons permit
holder, had his permit revoked after this incident. (Reported in the
Flint, MI, Journal 12/4/97)

September 16, 1997: Former Broward County, FL judge candidate and
CCW license holder Daniel Blackman pulled his gun on an emergency
room doctor at St. Mary's Medical Center after the doctor refused to
write him a prescription. The doctor fled from the examining room
and summoned a police officer who confronted Blackman. Blackman then
pointed his gun at the officer, who managed to wrestle the gun from
him. In 1996 Blackman was accused of threatening to put three
bullets in the head of an officer after receiving a parking ticket at
an airport. Charges were dropped on assurances Blackman would receive
psychological treatment. Under Florida law, he was able to retain
his CCW license. (Reported in the Sun-Sentinel 9/17/97)

September 6, 1997: Five men got into an argument outside of Big
Willy's Saloon in Baldwin, PA. According to reports, words were
exchanged, and guns were pulled. All five individuals had valid
Pennsylvania Concealed Weapons Permits. Shots were fired, and five
people were injured, two critically. Five weapons were recovered.
Although only five bullets had been fired from three of the guns,
each shot managed to injure someone.

[Fred Brownbill]

Every citizen has the right to carry with a CCW. They should all take that up and obtain one. I personally would never shop, or allow any one in my family to shop, in a business that refused that right of protection to its workers and or customers. Having the gun locked in a car is useless, although better than nothing. The gun should be at hand, ready for that emergency. The Police will never get there on time to help, only to sort out the dead and injured. God bless America and lets hope that all these so called business owners on here, with no names or business names, do not get attacked or shot at. The way they write, I have to think that most of them will have failed businesses, if in fact they own one at all, because most are too stupid to run one.

[Zechariah Blanchard]

After reading every post here I feel the need to put in my "two cents" on this issue.

For one, NO-ONE has the right to search my vehicle without a warrant. I don't care if my vehicle lands in your front room. It is my vehicle and it is still MY property.

Two, employers have the right to fire anyone that carries a gun on their property in Florida, but that same employer should never know that their employee is carrying a gun. If your employer finds out then you have not properly concealed your weapon.

Every employee has the right to not work where an employer will not permit them the right to carry a weapon for self defense.

Three, it is true that if you are worried about your employees then you have your marbles mixed up. Florida CCW holders are the least likely group to commit a crime in this state. Look up the statistics.

Four, what if you - The Employer goes berserk - and start killing people? You just disregard everyone else? Their lives are worth nothing to you? As long as you feel safe no-one else matters?

Five, can you honestly say that you feel completely safe going to a gun-free zone? I don't. I am a college student at UCF and every time I drive to school I have to drive through some of the roughest neighborhoods in Central Florida. I have a CCW permit and have had one for 5 years. I am a long time gun owner, and believe in safety to the utmost extreme. But, if something happens to me when I am at school, one my way to school, or working after school then I am out of luck. I will just have to resort to throwing my 140lbs around to defend myself and my girlfriend or others. Probably not the most reliable way to do things, and I might get killed - giving that the criminal will probably have no respect for gun-free zones or gun laws - but that is a risk I take to be a law biding citizen of this great State.

Six, As for the post about shooting anyone on your property with a weapon, even if that weapon is properly concealed. YOU WILL GO TO JAIL FOR MURDER. Having a weapon on your person is not in itself an act of violence. You WILL have to prove that your life was threatened or that at the very least you believed that your life was in IMMINENT danger.

Last but not least. This post has given me the urge to write the NRA to have a list made up of businesses that are anti-gun and fire employees for legal carry. Yes, Florida is a state that allows employers to fire employees for just about anything, but that does not mean that I have to spend my money there.

Sincerely,
Zechariah Blanchard
Proud Gun Owner, NRA member, CCW Permit Holder, College Student, Voter, and Law Biding Citizen.

rofl, accident, now thats funny. Yes accidents happen. If you live your live scared of accidents you wouldnt get out of bed in the morning. More people die every day from expressely commited violence with intent, that a random accident.

3:50 scoffs at accidents. When an accident permanently paralyzes you, will you be laughing? Or will you be suing the living s*it out of someone?

[Steve Holvik]

had to go back eleven years for those news articles. good detective work (sarcastic). There are 3 types of people 1.sheep (you) 2. sheep dogs (me) and wolves (the people who are looking for you sheep).

[Jonah]

Ok someone who posts with no Name cited 3 cases in all of the country with CWP holders, the last one is questionable (not knowing all the facts), if I have 4 guys saying they are gonna kill me a gun might come out.. I'm at that point questioning my life. I run a business here in FL and encourage all of my employees to obtain a CWP and carry on the job for their own and my customers protection. I refuse to be a victim, the cops cant save me.. only I can.

[Dave]

So, what's your point? Permit holders back in 1997 used guns? What in the world does that have to do with my, and each citizen of the United States' Constitutional right to keep and bear arms? This argument has been used ad-nauseum by anti-gun and anti-rights bigots such as yourself but it doesn't hold up when it comes to the natural rights that our Founding Fathers affirmed by placing them firmly in our Constitution. Guns save lives and guns stop crime more so than any number of permit holder incidents you can come up with. In fact, having to have a permit is probably not what the Founders had in mind and is probably also un-Constitutional but for the liberal imposition of the "reasonableness" test (which the Founders also would probably frown upon as a government intrusion on our natural rights.

[Jonah]

3:53 my gun comes out of its holster on 3 occasions, its being put on my belt in the AM, its being taken off my belt in the PM or some one is in need of help that requires a weapon.. if an accident happens its going to be in the course of saving some ones life.. or when I'm home alone in my bedroom in the AM or PM.. be realistic

[Carl in Chicago]

I understand property rights and all, but I guess I am not sure why the opposition to storing a locked gun in a locked vehicle.

So....slavery is illegal, just like prohibiting guns is illegal. But just because you own property does not mean that you can practice slavery on your private property. So what makes you think you can prohibit a person's right to their gun on your property...after all, it's in their personal vehicle?

Grow up folks...enough of the nanny-business.

[bailey]

LOSE THE 2ND IS JUST THE START TO LOSING THE REST.
LOSE THE 1ST YOU WONT BE ABLE TO POST COMMENTS ANYMORE.