Am I missing something, or aren't we talking here specifically about governmental entities denying citizens their right to carry? This post seems to imply that private property owners could be held responsible as well. Maybe Iowa law is different, I don't know.E.Marquez wrote:In theory i agree, and in cases where malice is proven Id agree.. But your idea as stated means every person must now be an educated, experienced lawyer with experience in the specific area of this law, so they can actually KNOW the law as it applies to the various permutations of it.Soccerdad1995 wrote:Someone who follows illegal orders should be held fully responsible for their actions, just like the person issuing the illegal orders.
If the company owner says "hey don't forget after Thursday, we are not allowing guns in the building" I don't expect every employee to go home, research relevant case law, the actual law covering this situation, contact a lawyer to get an opinion on if such action is legal or not and then confront their employer before next Thursday.. do you?
Now if the employee has been shown a judges ruling specific to the conditions and circumstances they are in or local law enforcement has stopped by and advised "You cant do that, this law XYZ, says they can have that gun here regardless of what the boss said" or if some other person of apparent authority who is reasonable accepted to commonly have an "educated" opinion advised that employee the gun prohibition was illegal, then sure Id say the burden shifts to the employee to confirm or deny what they are doing (enforcing) is righteous.
In any event, as has been noted, there are any number of things that businesses are expected to comply with under penalty of law. While I'm not sure about holding private businesses accountable for this one, I absolutely would like to see each and very government employee involved in any decision to illegally restrict carry on government property face some kind of action, with the most severe penalties reserved for those who established the illegal policy.
I am extremely disappointed the Legislature failed to address this in the most recent session.