Have Gun, Will Travel…to Work
Question 1: Assume that either the Second Amendment or state law gives you a legal right to keep a gun in your car. Do you also have a moral right to do this? Do you have a moral, not only a legal, right to own a gun? Do you have either a moral or a legal right to park a car with a loaded gun in a public parking lot regardless of what the lot’s owner wants? No, I do not have a moral right keep a gun in my car regardless to the Second Amendment or state law gives me the right to keep a gun in my car. Although having a gun in your car is your legal right, the company policy may state it is prohibited.
The difference between moral and legal is that your legal right supersedes moral rights. In today society the law over rides the moral aspect of most situations. If you are parked in a public parking lot and it is posted clearly no weapon allowed on the property then you must abide by their rules. Question 2: In your view, do employees have either a moral or a legal right to park cars with guns in them in the company parking lot? If so, what about the property rights and safety concerns of employers?
If employees don’t have this right, would it be good policy for companies to allow them to stow guns in their cars anyway? Do companies have good grounds for being concerned about weapons in their parking lots? Employees do not have the right to disobey company policies regardless of their moral beliefs. When you are employed by a company, no matter how large or small they are, they have some form of written policies on what they expect of the their employees. Most companies have some type of mission statement about maintaining a safe work place environment.
No it would not be a good idea for companies to allow guns to be stored in employees cars if there is a policy of no weapons in place. Companies have very good reason for been concerned with weapon in their parking lots because there are over five hundred work place homicides per year; in addition, 1. 5 million employees are assaulted at work, many of them by coworkers or former employees. Question 3: Do you agree with the NRA that if companies ban guns from their parking lots, this restriction would take “a wrecking ball to the Second Amendment” or nullify the right of people to have weapons for self-defense?
Explain why or why not. In your view, have gun advocates been guilty of politicizing this issue? Do you think state legislatures are right to get involved, or should the matter be left to companies and employees to settle? No, I do not agree with the NRA that if companies ban guns from their parking lots, this restriction would take “a wrecking ball to the Second Amendment” or nullify the right of people to have weapons for self defense. The Second Amendment gives the owner of the property the right to refuse weapons on their private property.
I feel everyone believes in the Second Amendment but some people feel more strongly about this issue than others and it is a political issue. The state legislature should not get involved when it pertains to the issue of private property such as company property policies. These types of matters should be left up to the company and their policy makers. Question 4: Because the workplace is the company’s private property, the company could choose, if it wished, to allow employees to bring guns not only into the parking lot but into the workplace itself.
Are there ever circumstances in which doing so might be reasonable? Or would the presence of guns automatically violate the rights of other employees to be guaranteed a safe working environment? Some companies allow employees to bring guns not only into the parking lot but into the workplace itself such as police officers, security officers, banks, pawnshops and anywhere the company policy states that guns are allow with the permission of the company. This would not be a violation of the rights of other employees because it is the policy of the company.
With such a policy there would have to be some sort of qualification, licensing, and liability. Question 5: What would a libertarian say about this issue? What considerations would a utilitarian have to take into account? What conclusion might he or she draw? A libertarian believes identify justice with an ideal of liberty. Liberty is the prime value, and justice consists in permitting each person to live as he or she pleases, free from interference of others. So, on the matter of gun control in the work place, a libertarian would say, “If he or she wants to carry a gun then no one should interfere”.
Utilitarianism is the moral doctrine that we should always act to produce the greatest possible balance of good over bad for everyone affected by our actions. In this matter a utilitarian would believe that the greatest happiness of all constitutes the standard that determines whether an action is right or wrong. Question 6: If you were on a company’s board of directors, what policy would you recommend regarding handguns, rifles, or other weapons in employees’ cars? In making your recommendation, what factors would you take into account?
Would it make a difference how large the company was, the nature of its workforce, or where it was located? If you support banning firearms from the parking lot, what steps, if any, do you think the company should take to enforce that policy? I would recommend the policy of weapons free workplace which would include handguns, rifles, and other weapons in employees’ cars on company property. I would factor in the type of business, the nature of the workforce and where it’s located and then make a sound discussion.
If necessary, I would have armed security officers for the safety of the employees and therefore the no weapons policy would still apply. Question 7: Explain whether (and why) you agree or disagree with the following argument: “If employees have the right to keep guns in the parking lot, then they also have a right to bring them into workplace. After all, we’re only talking about licensed, responsible owners, and same rationale applies: An employee might need a weapon for self-protection. What if a lunatic starts shooting up the company? ” I disagree with part of this statement and agree with the other part.
I agree with the statement because this is how people think, if they are allowed to bring their guns in the parking lot why not push the boundary and take it inside the building. Yah, you’re talking about licensed, responsible owners, and same rationale applies: An employee might need a weapon for self-protection. What if a lunatic starts shooting up the company? ” What if the people allowed to carry that gun on property becomes the lunatic? When policies are put into place there’s usually a reason or a prevention method. Allowing people to have a weapon that close if they get mad or fired would be irresponsible on the company’s part.