Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Just a Man
Joined
·
6,061 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
2019-2020 Regular Session - HB 74
Ride share network services and transportation referral services; disallowing ride share drivers who are weapons carry license holders from carrying or possessing weapons in a vehicle that is used for purposes of the ride share network service; prohibit

http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/display/20192020/HB/74

Sponsored By
(1) Turner, Scot 21st(2) Clark, Heath 147th(3) Powell, Alan 32nd
(4) Ridley, Jason 6th(5) Gullett, Joseph 19th
Committees
HC:SC:
First Reader Summary
A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Part 4 of Article 3 of Chapter 1 of Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to ride share network services and transportation referral services, so as to prohibit ride share network services from disallowing ride share drivers who are weapons carry license holders from carrying or possessing weapons in a vehicle that is used for purposes of the ride share network service; to provide for a definition; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.
Status History
Jan/28/2019 - House Hopper
 

·
Man of Myth and Legend
Joined
·
14,813 Posts
That looks good to me. As I understand it, it prohibits Uber from saying-- even if you have a carry license you cannot carry in your own car while driving for us.

I can go with that.

Nemo
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,323 Posts
Yeah, but The business community , pro-biz conservatives, and free-market libertarians in general ( ones who aren’t gun nuts) will oppose this.

Employers have always been free to tell employees that they cannot carry weapons on the job while working for the employer . And this applies to businesses that have independent contractors rather than W-2 employees.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,552 Posts
Yeah, but The business community , pro-biz conservatives, and free-market libertarians in general ( ones who aren't gun nuts) will oppose this.

Employers have always been free to tell employees that they cannot carry weapons on the job while working for the employer . And this applies to businesses that have independent contractors rather than W-2 employees.
I think businesses should be able to make their own decisions. I also think they should be held liable for said decisions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,205 Posts
Change this around. State that the disallow of weapons carry is all that is needed to prove person is an employee rather than a contractor. Watch Uber and Lyft stop virtue-signaling faster than you would believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimBob

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,323 Posts
I think businesses should be able to make their own decisions. I also think they should be held liable for said decisions.
It wouldn't be much of a factor to big businesses.
They have insurance to cover acts of negligence. Making the wrong business decision on the issue of weapons carry by employees can't be more than simple negligence.

And it would be tough to prove it's even negligent. Plenty of Human Resources and Loss Prevention experts would say it's the safest policy. Indeed, the industry standard for 50+ years. Allowing employees to carry just isn't done in modern times, for businesses that have nothing to do with weapons or law enforcement.

And how would the family of any crime victim prove that "but for" the company having that policy in place, the victim would have (1) been carrying a gun that day, and (2) would have had the opportunity to draw it and use it, and (3) would have won the gunfight instantly without the bad guy getting off a single shot in his or her direction.
If you can't prove all of those things, and you agree that YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED had the victim pulled a gun, then you lose. You have not proven causation. The bad act of disarming your employees isn't the proven 'cause' of that employee's injury.
 

·
Man of Myth and Legend
Joined
·
14,813 Posts
Someone needs to make sure Rep. Turner has the idea of no gun while driving for Uber basically makes they an employee turning in the back of his mind.

I agree that could be the final straw to make Uber drivers employees rather than contractors.

Nemo
 

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,859 Posts
Uber and Lyft can tell people what they can have in their private cars only if they are employees. Let that be added to the bill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimBob

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,552 Posts
It wouldn't be much of a factor to big businesses.
They have insurance to cover acts of negligence. Making the wrong business decision on the issue of weapons carry by employees can't be more than simple negligence.

And it would be tough to prove it's even negligent. Plenty of Human Resources and Loss Prevention experts would say it's the safest policy. Indeed, the industry standard for 50+ years. Allowing employees to carry just isn't done in modern times, for businesses that have nothing to do with weapons or law enforcement.

And how would the family of any crime victim prove that "but for" the company having that policy in place, the victim would have (1) been carrying a gun that day, and (2) would have had the opportunity to draw it and use it, and (3) would have won the gunfight instantly without the bad guy getting off a single shot in his or her direction.
If you can't prove all of those things, and you agree that YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED had the victim pulled a gun, then you lose. You have not proven causation. The bad act of disarming your employees isn't the proven 'cause' of that employee's injury.
The cost of defense still hurts. Take a look at pg&e. Even though it's already been shown they didnt cause the wildfires they are still filing bankruptcy due to the lawsuits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,952 Posts

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,859 Posts
Why did the AJC predict the bill was not going anywhere?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,607 Posts
Yeah, but The business community , pro-biz conservatives, and free-market libertarians in general ( ones who aren't gun nuts) will oppose this.

Employers have always been free to tell employees that they cannot carry weapons on the job while working for the employer . And this applies to businesses that have independent contractors rather than W-2 employees.
I was under the impression that rideshare drivers were largely 1099 contractors using their own private vehicles on public roads and not employees piloting company controlled assets on company premises.

Somewhere we run upon the difference between an employer banning firearms in an employee's house while the employee is telecommuting and an employer setting and enforcing rules on their leased or owned property.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top