Update on SB51 (guns in vehicles at businesses)

[swagge1]

Looks like this bill is going to the full House next.

http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/19343384.html

 

[spanky]

 

[SKYWLKR]

Property Owners cant Disallow a gun in your car in Louisiana so what is the point of the bill?

 

[Pops]

Property Owners cant Disallow a gun in your car in Louisiana so what is the point of the bill?

Yes , they can , and they do . Every day . EXXON/MOBIL in Baton Rouge for one .

 

[R.McNaylor]

Yes , they can , and they do . Every day . EXXON/MOBIL in Baton Rouge for one .

He is correct. I work there and I check my gun at the gate.

 

[dantheman]

A couple of weeks ago , an EXXON guy told me that an employee got caught with a loaded round in his vehicle . No gun , just a cartridge . He was escorted off of the property and it took a couple of days worth of ******** to get him back on the job .

 

[Jon]

A couple of weeks ago , an EXXON guy told me that an employee got caught with a loaded round in his vehicle . No gun , just a cartridge . He was escorted off of the property and it took a couple of days worth of ******** to get him back on the job .

Someone told a similar story in the comments section in the advocate article.

 

[spanky]

Property Owners cant Disallow a gun in your car in Louisiana so what is the point of the bill?

Obviously they can, otherwise that provision wouldn't be in my employee handbook.

 

[Pale Horse]

An employer most certainly can. I was fired last year from the best paying job I ever had because I was ACCUSED of having a gun in my car on company property (no effort was made to determine the truthfullness of the accusation).

 

[Craig]

Legally they can't, but they can make any policy they want.
Break policy and get fired.

 

[spanky]

Yep, that's why I'm pushing for SB51 hard.

 

[swamper]

I'm really, really not understanding why not being allowed to have a gun in your car on company/private property is enforceable anyway. What happened to "your car is an extension of your home?"

 

[spanky]

I'm really, really not understanding why not being allowed to have a gun in your car on company/private property is enforceable anyway. What happened to "your car is an extension of your home?"

I think SB51 provides more clarification and more set standards as far as your vehicle is concerned.

eta http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/streamdocument.asp?did=465489

 

[dzelenka]

SB 51 has been assigned to the House Civil Law & Procedure Committee. For you Tim Burns supporters, note that he voted to assign it to committee rather than for passage. He is the chairman of that committee so it is time to call him on whether he is pro gun or not.

Dan

ETA: Burns also voted to prevent the bill from being discharged from the committee and voted on by the full house.

 

[Pops]

I'm really, really not understanding why not being allowed to have a gun in your car on company/private property is enforceable anyway. What happened to "your car is an extension of your home?"

I think you just said it . " Private property " . Not public , and not your own .
The same way you can't carry concealed on MY private property unless I say so .

 

[dzelenka]

SB 51 is back on the calendar for next Tuesday. The following are the representatives that voted to send the bill to committee to die:

Abramson Gallot Marchand
Aubert Greene Mills
Badon, B. Guillory, E. Monica
Baldone Guinn Norton
Barras Hardy Peterson
Barrow Harrison Ponti
Billiot Hines Pope
Burns, T. Hoffmann Richardson
Burrell Honey Richmond
Carter Howard Robideaux
Chaney Hutter Schroder
Cortez Jackson G. Smith, J.
Cromer Jackson M. Smith, P.
Danahay Jones, R. St. Germain
Dixon Katz Talbot
Downs Kleckley Waddell
Foil LaFonta Williams
Franklin Leger

Some of these guys did vote to return it to the floor, but I think it would be a good time to write them and let them know that this bill is important to you.

Dan

 

[spanky]

abramson@legis.state.la.us; arep011@legis.state.la.us; larep099@legis.state.la.us; auberte@legis.state.la.us; larep066@legis.state.la.us; larep046@legis.state.la.us; badonb@legis.state.la.us; larep040@legis.state.la.us; monican@legis.state.la.us; larep053@legis.state.la.us; guinnj@legis.state.la.us; nortonb@legis.state.la.us; barrast@legis.state.la.us; hardyr@legis.state.la.us; larep029@legis.state.la.us; larep093@legis.state.la.us; harrisoj@legis.state.la.us; pontie@legis.state.la.us; billiotr@legis.state.la.us; hinesw@legis.state.la.us; poper@legis.state.la.us; larep089@legis.state.la.us; hoffmanf@legis.state.la.us; richardc@legis.state.la.us; larep002@legis.state.la.us; ahoney@legis.state.la.us; larep101@legis.state.la.us; carters@legis.state.la.us; howardf@legis.state.la.us; larep045@legis.state.la.us; chaneyb@legis.state.la.us; larep104@legis.state.la.us; schrodej@legis.state.la.us; cortezp@legis.state.la.us; cromerg@legis.state.la.us; danahaym@legis.state.la.us; dixonh@legis.state.la.us; larep012@legis.state.la.us; foilf@legis.state.la.us; franklina@legis.state.la.us; jacksong@legis.state.la.us; larep061@legis.state.la.us; jonesr@legis.state.la.us; joness@legis.state.la.us; larep016@legis.state.la.us; larep036@legis.state.la.us; larep096@legis.state.la.us; legerw@legis.state.la.us; schrodej@legis.state.la.us; larep008@legis.state.la.us; smithp@legis.state.la.us; larep060@legis.state.la.us; talbotk@legis.state.la.us; larep005@legis.state.la.us; larep004@legis.state.la.us

 

[spanky]

Email sent.