-
If you are having trouble changng your password please click here for help.
So my job just went 2a friendly to its customers but not its employees
- Thread starter jabodgreat
- Start date
We will need a video to confirm said event of flagrant policy violator
Privately owned business can make what ever rules they want. They write you the check you follow the rules. I believe in no ask no tell rule.
This may have to do more with insurer dictates
than internal policy, especially workers compensation.
GA is an employment at will state, you can be fired
for any reason, and their risk is they may have their unemployment insurance account tapped. I can't carry into
the courthouse. Therefore, I treat the Deputies very
nicely. If I disagree, it is ok. I just can't break that rule.
than internal policy, especially workers compensation.
GA is an employment at will state, you can be fired
for any reason, and their risk is they may have their unemployment insurance account tapped. I can't carry into
the courthouse. Therefore, I treat the Deputies very
nicely. If I disagree, it is ok. I just can't break that rule.
it's that 'chance' thing that's
disturbing, see? and then that 'interpretation' thing get's in the way of........the truth.
Probably has everything to do with insurance and nothing about legality or feelings
Not uncommon for employers to ban personnel from carrying firearms in the execution of their duties. And yes it's based upon "perceived" liability.
If a business choses to arm their personnel then liability insurance is necessitated and yes it's expensive. Hence "unarmed" "security" at some facilities or the hiring of off-duty LEO.
The two avenues of approach of the anti-gun crowd are "public health" and law.
Bloomturd spends money on both."public health" and money funneled into law schools to influence the vision of both fields.
The current issue is organizations/businesses that "prohibit legal firearms" that incur no responsibility of that decision. If they arm staff then they are liable but when they with the force of law disarm the citizen and that citizen sues and wins a turning point will occur.
But property rights, a business can fire an employee for violating "policy" unless specifically prohibited by law and that business can ask a customer to leave, if in failure to comply, they can be arrested for "trespass".
If a business choses to arm their personnel then liability insurance is necessitated and yes it's expensive. Hence "unarmed" "security" at some facilities or the hiring of off-duty LEO.
The two avenues of approach of the anti-gun crowd are "public health" and law.
Bloomturd spends money on both."public health" and money funneled into law schools to influence the vision of both fields.
The current issue is organizations/businesses that "prohibit legal firearms" that incur no responsibility of that decision. If they arm staff then they are liable but when they with the force of law disarm the citizen and that citizen sues and wins a turning point will occur.
But property rights, a business can fire an employee for violating "policy" unless specifically prohibited by law and that business can ask a customer to leave, if in failure to comply, they can be arrested for "trespass".
Carry concealed. It's no more anyone's business as how much money you have in your wallet, if you so choose to carry a wallet. See what I did there?
