I should have figured it would be tommorrow. The day of back to back conference calls. Since I hadn't thought through what I wanted to say, maybe its good I can't attend.
Some of my intital thoughts about topics to cover are:
My Company's Weapons Policy From HR
Weapon-Free Workplace
To ensure we maintain a workplace safe and free of violence for all employees, the Company prohibits the possession or use of weapons on Company property. A license to carry the weapon does not supersede Company policy. Any employee in violation of this policy will be subject to immediate disciplinary action, up to and including termination.
"Dangerous Weapons" include, but are not limited to, firearms, explosives, knives and other items that might be considered dangerous or that could cause harm.
The Sign On Our Door That Keeps Us Safe
The security guard told me that the sign keeps us safe. Honest. I asked if the all-powerful sign will help me after work on my way home.
An Example of An Employee Who Needs To Carry
A woman in my office has a psycho ex boyfriend who has been stalking her. One time, he ran her car off the road. She shouldn't be disarmed and left unprotected just because my company wants to impose its anti-gun beliefs on us.
I'd love for her to testify but she can't. She's not unprotected, if you know what I mean.
Not to sound paranoid but whistleblowers do occasionally get attacked on the the way to work. Here is an article about a whistleblower being assualted. He worked at Los Alamos and the attack happened last year just before he was to testify in front of congress. Los Alamos had a weapons ban when I did work there in the late 1980's.
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001590.html
Gates
As I mentioned in the posts above, the language is too broad. An employer can install a gate just at the curb cut and then claim their employees aren't covered by the law.
Why does a gate mean that we have to commute to work unprotected? The hurdle to disarm your employees should be a little higher than a $200 gate.
Why Just Employees?
As MP asks, why just employees? If the law is good for employees, shouldn't it apply to customers, residents, visitors, etc. See my sign above, the company prohibition applies to everyone.
Disciplinary Action
Excuse me but that is also broad. In my company, a disciplinary action includes ..... being late for an important meeting .... cursing .... sexual harrassment .... not making sales plan ..... not performing to standards .. and sometimes challenging authority. I've been placed on a plan at a prior employer because I refused to do a task which was illegal.
What about due process? An HR department is going to determine in a fair manner if you can protect yourself while commuting to work. That doesn't sound fair. My HR department is 100% anti-gun.
Penal and Jail
Does this language mean the parking lot in front of the jail or inside the jail? Probably should this law doesn't over-ride the jail line prohibitions.
State and Federal law
Basically, this section means if you work at a public gathering .... you are not protected by this law. That includes a restruant, bar, school, church, etc.
My Recommendation
I think I stole the following language from OK. I think it works better:
(a) No property owner, tenant, employer, business entity, county, municipal corporation, state created authority, agency, department, or public corporation shall be permitted to establish any policy or rule that has the effect of prohibiting any person, except those enumerated as ineligible for a license under Code Section 16-11-129, from transporting and storing firearms and weapons in a locked vehicle on any property set aside for any vehicle.
As long as the gun is secured in a locked car, its ok.
This language would solve some of the public gathering violation issues as hinted at by MP and would be clear.
These are just some thoughts.