SB2700: Parking Lot bill ?!?

[GKar]

http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/107/Bill/SB2700.pdf

Campfield filed this one Monday...so far no House sponsor. Before I comment, I'd like to hear from others to see if my perception is just off.

[Guest nicemac]

Totally useless. It specifies that only "public" parking lots are covered and gives employers and opt-out if they implement "reasonable security measures to ensure the safety of employees while in the public access parking lot."

This covers some retail businesses, but does nothing for a company like mine that has a parking lot just for employees. We have no public access–you have to show your security badge to get in the lot. Of course, every company that has any security at all has "reasonable safety measures" in their parking lot. I want reasonable safety measures when driving back and forth to work. This bill doesn't help that.

Let's call this the FedEX-friendly parking lot bill.

Edited January 24, 2012 by nicemac
fixed typo

[Oh Shoot]

Doesn't apply "Where transport and possession of a firearm on the premises of the employer is prohibited by state or federal law or regulation.."

Seems to me simply posting the lot compliant with 1359 would suffice for that.

- OS

[Guest PapaB]

Also doesn't allow gun to be locked in a safe such as the gunvault and doesn't include a borrowed or rented car.

It should not be legal for any company to have control over the contents of a private parties vehicle.

[Sky King]

I just skimmed over it but I can tell you from what I saw, I can't support this one either. Too many loopholes for employers. If an employer can opt out, they need to be held liable not only while the employee is on their property but also during the commute. After all, the MAIN issue for laws such as this is to be sure you can provide for your protection during your commute.

Again, more feel good legislation.

[DaveTN]

Yes, this bill seems to be aimed at allowing you to be armed while in the parking lot, and doesn’t address the drive to and from work for those that park in a lot that doesn’t have public access.

Entrance to most secure parking lots requires that you understand you are subject to search. If you allow guns past that point you would then have to understand that employees are subject to search.

I see that it offers some protection from civil suits against the business.

[Worriedman]

This is not what we should be supporting.

[Fallguy]

This is not what we should be supporting.

Yep...

These are the ones that need our support... http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/tennessee-politics-legislation/68256-sb-3002-2992-faulk.html

[GKar]

Yeah, my first thought after reading this one was "If this is the best you can do, then please stop trying". So now, we get an almost identical bill, SB 2941, that Evans has signed on as co-sponsor: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/107/Bill/SB2941.pdf I totally agree that the two offerings by Faulk are far more deisrable, as they actually address the core issues. My fear by Evans junping onto the 2941 bandwagon is that this somehow signifies a back-door deal with the big money opponents...we've certainly seen his camp play that game before in very recent history...

[R_Bert]

Yep...

These are the ones that need our support... http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/tennessee-politics-legislation/68256-sb-3002-2992-faulk.html

I sent a letter to my Representative, John Ragan