APOD Firearms

Scenario: shooter in the workp[lace.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • ZX9RCAM

    Over the Rainbow bridge...
    TGT Supporter
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    May 14, 2008
    59,737
    96
    The Woodlands, Tx.
    From another Forum.....

    As honest employee's, our workplaces forbid carry on the premisis.
    So, given a situation which happened in Orlando last Friday, I am proposing a scenario. The company obviously banned weapons on premisis. The shooter , who was a former disgruntled employee, opened fire and shot 6 people, and 1 died. If I was one of the employees, could I sue the employer on the basis of being a CWP holder, I may have been able to stop the perp? On the basis of restricting the ability to defend myself? Or something?
    Anybody have knowledge of that being done somewhere else?
    That would be an interesting case.......
    Any Lawyers out there for comment?
    Target Sports
     

    codygjohnson

    Eats breakfast everyday
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 11, 2009
    1,676
    31
    Flower Mound
    That would be a big win in our favor, but I'm sure it would be pretty hard to get a jury in a civil case to side pro-gun in most courts for a case like this. I'd like to hear what an attorney has to say on it though.
     

    SIG_Fiend

    TGT Addict
    TGT Supporter
    Admin
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Feb 21, 2008
    7,218
    66
    Austin, TX
    Just remember, even when you think you are completely disarmed, things like a bic pen to the jugular or eye socket are usually still available to use against an attacker. ;) What we really need is to stop conditioning people to be in the "helpless sheep" mentality. If everyone just charged an active shooter, sure a few people would still get injured and/or possibly die, but the bastard would be disabled or killed a lot sooner and would never be able to achieve the body count they are looking for.
     

    Willy

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 28, 2009
    1,067
    31
    Ellis County
    If an employer is going to deny his employee's 2A rights, he should be held responsible for their security.

    A military court might favor our 2A rights, even if it is just for soldiers. Our soldiers should never be forced to be sitting ducks again after last week.
     

    txinvestigator

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    14,204
    96
    Ft Worth, TX
    I've wondered about this myself. I think that if an employer is going to deny an employee's 2A rights, he should take the steps to insure his employee's security while he is unarmed.
    That is faulty on several points. You have no "2A" right to carry at work. The amendments refer to the government, not businesses.

    2nd, there is no precedent for a suit against an employer who bans handguns then has a person come in shooting. The employer must prevent FORESEEABLE acts.

    3rd, you would be hard pressed to even prove you could have or would have shot the gunman.

    If I were a soldier, I would be sueing for the right to concealed carry on base. Who more than a soldier clearly has the right to bear arms? Even if the 2A is interpreted that only the "militia" can bear arms, a soldier still should be able to carry.

    You would lose. Soldier can and do carry, but bases are like towns and there MUST be regulations in place.

    Many military members, soldiers, airmen, seamen, marines, get minimal handgun training.
     

    Jeff B

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    337
    1
    Flower Mound, TX
    That is faulty on several points. You have no "2A" right to carry at work. The amendments refer to the government, not businesses.

    2nd, there is no precedent for a suit against an employer who bans handguns then has a person come in shooting. The employer must prevent FORESEEABLE acts.

    3rd, you would be hard pressed to even prove you could have or would have shot the gunman.

    You would lose. Soldier can and do carry, but bases are like towns and there MUST be regulations in place.

    Many military members, soldiers, airmen, seamen, marines, get minimal handgun training.

    As I see it;

    Workplace carry depends upon the policy of the employer.

    I do suspect that there could be grounds for litigation against an employer that deprived its employees of the ability to defend themselves and failed to provide adequate security.

    Could have or would have are conjecture, and should not enter into a potential lawsuit.

    The rights of the military are not necessarily equal to those of the general public (you lose certain rights when you join). Among those losses are the ability to "sue" the military/government (feres doctrine), which usually applies to injury or loss, but in that circumstance could likely be extended to the loss of life or function.

    Most military personnel are assigned rifle/carbine style weapons. Relatively few are assigned sidearms.

    I would be in favor of recognizing the state carry laws on installations within a particular state. So, in this case, in Texas, there might well have been a legal CHL holder to shoot this rabid dog down in the manner he deserved.

    Jeff B.
     

    TrailDust

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 29, 2009
    2,945
    21
    Kalifornication
    I worked at a reprographics store when I was in college and there was a driver who got fired for being such an incompetent, difficult, a-hole. This guy was the kind of person that put everyone on edge, and talk went around the store about whether he'd go postal. We were 100% serious about it...no joke. Being California with no right to carry and, at that time, no ability to even carry pepper spray, I spent hours going over in my mind what escape routes I would take, where I could hide, what items I could use as a last-ditch weapon. Thankfully it never happened, but it pays to not think you're being ridiculous by taking some time to plan for such an emergency.
     

    txinvestigator

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    14,204
    96
    Ft Worth, TX
    As I see it;

    Workplace carry depends upon the policy of the employer.

    I do suspect that there could be grounds for litigation against an employer that deprived its employees of the ability to defend themselves and failed to provide adequate security.

    IMO, that is where the argument falls apart. An employer cannot deprive you of your abilities. Only of one tool.
     

    SWJewellTN

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 11, 2009
    413
    1
    LaVergne,TN
    My opinion is that you would not be able to sue in most states since employers are generally protected by Workman's Compensation Laws. Here in Tennessee, and back in my home state of Misery - I mean Missouri - it really didn't matter what happened. Compensation for injuries or death were via a formula. The only argument was just how injured are you? You fought for a percentage for injuries, but if the worker was dead it was already settled. Negligence was not in their calculations by law.
     
    Top Bottom