A very Bad Law

[lizbud]

Taking the side of business instead of the individual is not a usual thing
with me, but this proposed law is a bad idea no matter what or who
proposed it. It clearly is a matter of gun rights vs property rights, as it
wants to deny property owners from banning guns on their property.

I'm very glad I am not the only one who agrees, this is a bad idea.

http://www.indianaprosperity.org/iss...parent=INDIANA

[blue]

You gotta love the fearmongering in the OpEd.

[wombat2u2004]

Write bigger Blue, I'm hiding behind the desk

[blue]

You gotta love the fearmongering in the OpEd.

And if property rights trump individual rights, property owners should be able to allow smoking in their establishments.

[wombat2u2004]

You gotta love the fearmongering in the OpEd.

And if property rights trump individual rights, property owners should be able to allow smoking in their establishments.

That's right !!!! And booze, and women of ill repute.
The possibilities are endless.

[lizbud]

Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Lawmakers OK guns at work; Portage worker opens fire


Talk about bad timing.

I usually don't agree with much that the Indiana Chamber of Commerce has to say, but on the issue of guns in the workplace I have to agree with the chamber folks -- guns don't belong at work.

Ironically, the day after the General Assembly passed a law allowing Hoosier to take their guns to work as long as they keep them locked in their car or truck, an "angry worker at the Department of Workforce Development in Portage walked out to his car, grabbed a 12-gauge shotgun, and fired into his office," The Post-Tribune reported.

Here's more from the P-T:

"All of the arguments against this are now coming true," State Rep. Charlie Brown, D-Gary, said when he was told about the shooting Friday. "I'm sorry to hear that. I really am."

Supporters say the bill protects the Second Amendment rights of Hoosiers, making sure they are able to protect themselves while they are at the workplace.

"It goes back to the fundamental constitutional right to bear arms," (State Sen. Ed) Charbonneau, R-Valparaiso, said.

Gov. Mitch Daniels didn't commit to signing the bill when he met with reporters Friday. He said he wants to read it first. Republican Daniels is flirting with the idea of a presidential bid in 2012. It'll be interesting to see how he handles a bill championed by the NRA.

But Brown called out the powerful lobbying group before the House's vote on the bill. He joined local lawmakers who included Smith and Randolph in speaking out against it, saying the NRA's influence cuts across party lines.

"I think once and for all we need to tell the NRA, 'Hell, no, you don't have a stranglehold on this chamber,'" Brown said. "I'm not afraid of the NRA."

Northern Lake County lawmakers told their colleagues the legislation wasn't popular in their hometowns and crosses a dangerous line. They argued the owners of private properties should decide whether guns are present.

"I think we're violating a very personal right," (State Rep.) Vernon Smith, D-Gary, said.

In that much, Smith and Charbonneau might agree. Charbonneau said the bill might end up in a courtroom to sort out the conflict between the rights of property owners and gun owners.

But Charbonneau said he chose to vote with the constitution.

"It's not an easy issue to decide where to come down," Charbonneau said.
Posted by Terry Burns at 4:05 AM

[Puckstop31]

Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Lawmakers OK guns at work; Portage worker opens fire


Talk about bad timing.

I usually don't agree with much that the Indiana Chamber of Commerce has to say, but on the issue of guns in the workplace I have to agree with the chamber folks -- guns don't belong at work.

... <snip>

A sad story indeed. Explain to me how a "no guns at work" law would have prevented this. See, there are so many other questions to ask and issues to be addressed.

Would this law grant an employer the right to search employees cars? Are we really willing to give up personal privacy rights for a job?

I say again... All the gun laws in the world won't stop this stuff from happening. Because only the law abiding will follow the law. All the emotional "feel good" law in the world won't change it.

[lizbud]

[SIZE="4"]

And if property rights trump individual rights, property owners should be able to allow smoking in their establishments.

Are you sitting down? I agree with you.

[blue]

I agree with you.

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

[lizbud]

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

Yeah, even a broken clock is right twice a day. LOL

[Catty1]

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

Calling Mr. Ripley...*dialing*