TexasCHLforum.com

Stormwatcher wrote:

paulhailes wrote:Based on the attitude of your HR department I think it would be hard not to worry, but then again how would they know? Do they search cars often? If not then keep it concealed and keep your mouth shut.

Exactly Paul! It's hard not to worry about it! If I got fired.... I feel I would eventually win..... Maybe. But at what cost? My kids are entering college now and I need my job more than ever now!' I don't mean to sound ungrateful for all the hard work that went into getting this bill passed, but the reality is..... If big companies are taking this attitude..... I suspect little guys like myself would not fair well in the litigation, due to all the political dollars lining politician's pockets.

If this true..... What good did the bill do, if Large Companies choose to ignore it.

And No! I have been at my company almost 25 years and to my knowledge... they have never searched vehicles at our facility. Other facilities, but never mine.

The fact that my large global company chooses to ignore the law tells me they know something I don't. Most working class people can't afford to loose their job. If we can still loose our jobs .... What did SB321 do for us?

Alot for those who just choose to abide within it and not rock the boat.

Not to be rude, but I cannot think a one possible upside to talking to your boss about having a weapon in your car or having your CHL (especially at a big corporation) The law is what it is, and seems fairly clear.

I work at a company where I know the owner is 100% pro gun, is a staunch NRA supporter, talks about how he needs to get his CHL, talks about what a great program TX has for CHL'ers, and I have not, and will not ever tell him I carry. I just don't see the upside.

Stormwatcher wrote:

paulhailes wrote:Based on the attitude of your HR department I think it would be hard not to worry, but then again how would they know? Do they search cars often? If not then keep it concealed and keep your mouth shut.

Exactly Paul! It's hard not to worry about it! If I got fired.... I feel I would eventually win..... Maybe. But at what cost? My kids are entering college now and I need my job more than ever now!' I don't mean to sound ungrateful for all the hard work that went into getting this bill passed, but the reality is..... If big companies are taking this attitude..... I suspect little guys like myself would not fair well in the litigation, due to all the political dollars lining politician's pockets.

If this true..... What good did the bill do, if Large Companies choose to ignore it.

And No! I have been at my company almost 25 years and to my knowledge... they have never searched vehicles at our facility. Other facilities, but never mine.

The fact that my large global company chooses to ignore the law tells me they know something I don't. Most working class people can't afford to loose their job. If we can still loose our jobs .... What did SB321 do for us?

Actually they did not ignore it. They added the clause about "if our policy is in conflict with local laws..... The law would take precedence". We discussed adding essentially the same language to our companies' policy (I am the person who was responsible for re-writing our facility firearms policy, we are also a large global petrochemical company). The thinking behind this clause was for the company to still be able to send the message of "we don't want guns here" but allow them wherever the law forces the company too. The clause would also allow us the chance to not change our policy everytime that the law is changed in future sessions. We ultimately spelled out where no one including CHL holders could carry and then added the standard "unlicensed possession is prohibited even in parking lots".

Our company recognizes that we can not bar employees who are CHL holders from possessing weapons outside of the secure area. I'm pretty sure that if you asked our HR manager the same question as you did yours, you would still get the response of "our policy remains no weapons on the property" but they are fully aware that they can do nothing about it if you do bring one on in accordance with the law.

Most companies want to portray the message that they do not want guns on their property. Be glad that your company chose this approach as opposed to many companies that are requiring employees to fill out firearms declaration forms.

FWIW, it was quite a difficult situation to be a CHL holder who believes in constitutional carry, but I must represent the wishes of my company when writing policy.

steveincowtown wrote:

Stormwatcher wrote:

paulhailes wrote:Based on the attitude of your HR department I think it would be hard not to worry, but then again how would they know? Do they search cars often? If not then keep it concealed and keep your mouth shut.

Exactly Paul! It's hard not to worry about it! If I got fired.... I feel I would eventually win..... Maybe. But at what cost? My kids are entering college now and I need my job more than ever now!' I don't mean to sound ungrateful for all the hard work that went into getting this bill passed, but the reality is..... If big companies are taking this attitude..... I suspect little guys like myself would not fair well in the litigation, due to all the political dollars lining politician's pockets.

If this true..... What good did the bill do, if Large Companies choose to ignore it.

And No! I have been at my company almost 25 years and to my knowledge... they have never searched vehicles at our facility. Other facilities, but never mine.

The fact that my large global company chooses to ignore the law tells me they know something I don't. Most working class people can't afford to loose their job. If we can still loose our jobs .... What did SB321 do for us?

Alot for those who just choose to abide within it and not rock the boat.

Not to be rude, but I cannot think a one possible upside to talking to your boss about having a weapon in your car or having your CHL (especially at a big corporation) The law is what it is, and seems fairly clear.

I work at a company where I know the owner is 100% pro gun, is a staunch NRA supporter, talks about how he needs to get his CHL, talks about what a great program TX has for CHL'ers, and I have not, and will not ever tell him I carry. I just don't see the upside.

I respectfully disagree.....responsible gun owners should not hide the fact that people who are not viewed as gun nuts also own and carry firearms. It's time to take the issue out of the closet. We will never win over the folks who are not opposed to guns per se but are largly uneducated on how an armed populous is actually safer than disarmament. The other side is doing a good job of selling gun control with emotional arguements while the side that has facts on their side is remaining silent.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:SB321 "Employer Parking Lot Bill" provides a lot of protection to workers. If anyone doesn't want to rely on SB321, then don't.

Chas.

(F) property owned or leased by a chemical manufacturer or oil and gas refiner with an air authorization under Chapter 382, Health and Safety Code, and on which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of hazardous, combustible, or explosive materials, except in regard to an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and who stores a firearm or ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked, privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area the employer provides for employees that is outside of a secured and restricted area:
(i) that contains the physical plant;
(ii) that is not open to the public; and
(iii) the ingress into which is constantly monitored by security personnel.

I am not a lawyer, what does this mean in plain english? I know I am not the only one who does not understand? What the heck is an air authorization under chapter 382, Health and Safety Code and how does it apply to stowing a gun in your locked car in your employer's parking lot?

EDIT 9-2-2011 When I made this statement I was uninformed. Please read the following...

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=46515&start=30#p589360" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stormwatcher wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:SB321 "Employer Parking Lot Bill" provides a lot of protection to workers. If anyone doesn't want to rely on SB321, then don't.

Chas.

(F) property owned or leased by a chemical manufacturer or oil and gas refiner with an air authorization under Chapter 382, Health and Safety Code, and on which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of hazardous, combustible, or explosive materials, except in regard to an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and who stores a firearm or ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked, privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area the employer provides for employees that is outside of a secured and restricted area:
(i) that contains the physical plant;
(ii) that is not open to the public; and
(iii) the ingress into which is constantly monitored by security personnel.

And? What's your quesiton?

steveincowtown wrote: I work at a company where I know the owner is 100% pro gun, is a staunch NRA supporter, talks about how he needs to get his CHL, talks about what a great program TX has for CHL'ers, and I have not, and will not ever tell him I carry. I just don't see the upside.

In my case telling is not the issue. When I get to work and get off my motorcycle it's going to be very noticable when I pull a 45 out of my jacket or pants and put it in the lock box on the bike..

Keith B wrote:
And? What's your quesiton?

I am not a lawyer, what does this mean in plain english? I know I am not the only one who does not understand? What the heck is an air authorization under chapter 382, Health and Safety Code and how does it apply to stowing a gun in your locked car in your employer's parking lot?

PArrow wrote:[quote="steveincowtownI work at a company where I know the owner is 100% pro gun, is a staunch NRA supporter, talks about how he needs to get his CHL, talks about what a great program TX has for CHL'ers, and I have not, and will not ever tell him I carry. I just don't see the upside.

In my case telling is not the issue. When I get to work and get off my motorcycle it's going to be very noticable when I pull a 45 out of my jacket or pants and put it in the lock box on the bike..[/quote]

Excellent point. When I ride I have what looks like a day planner in my bags (bags are lockable). If I have to remove my gun for 30.06 or 51% I hold the day planner in my strong hand and pull my gun into like a taco. This may or may not work, depending on how busy your parking lot is.

Stormwatcher wrote:

Keith B wrote:
And? What's your quesiton?

I am not a lawyer, what does this mean in plain english? I know I am not the only one who does not understand? What the heck is an air authorization under chapter 382, Health and Safety Code and how does it apply to stowing a gun in your locked car in your employer's parking lot?

This was a compromise that had to be made with the Petro-chemical plants in order to get the bill passed.

See my response to your other duplicate quesiton here http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=48108" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And, since it is a duplicate, let's discuss here and I am locking the other thread.

Keith B wrote:
This was a compromise that had to be made with the Petro-chemical plants in order to get the bill passed.

So what you are saying is.......that our Texas Law makers pass laws based on what the Texas Petrochemical Industry want? Figures.......my rights go out the window so the lawmakers can get oil money to stay in office. This is what's wrong with our country. The people are no longer in control. It is all just an illusion. Big money is in control.

For those who may be interest.....here is link to.....

HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
TITLE 5. SANITATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
SUBTITLE C. AIR QUALITY
CHAPTER 382. CLEAN AIR ACT

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... HS.382.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This has absolutely nothing to do with stowing a gun and stowing a gun has no effect on Chapter 382 Clean Air Act.

Is it just me or is this insane?

EDIT 9-2-2011 When I made this statement I was uninformed. Please read the following...

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=46515&start=30#p589360" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stormwatcher wrote:

Keith B wrote:
This was a compromise that had to be made with the Petro-chemical plants in order to get the bill passed.

So what you are saying is.......that our Texas Law makers pass laws based on what the Texas Petrochemical Industry want? Figures.......my rights go out the window so the lawmakers can get oil money to stay in office. This is what's wrong with our country. The people are no longer in control. It is all just an illusion. Big money is in control.

Nope, in this case it was either compromise or get nothing. And, the final version was a lot better than what they were pushing for, which was a total exemption from having to allow firearms for anyone. If not for the folks like Charles and Alice Tripp with the TSRA lobbying for us, they would have gotten that.

It's politics, and the Petro-chemical industry is huge in this state and they carry a lot of weight with the legislators; like it or not.

Well obviously I don't like it but let me say I don't intend to insult anyone that furthers our gun rights. It is just very discouraging to be in my position. I work in a chemical plant and from what I do understand of the bill.......I can't have my gun in my car unless I am willing to be fired. Just looking for answers. You know it's a crying shame that we have to pass State laws to get the rights that our Bill of Rights already gives us.......then find out that the State law excludes you!

EDIT 9-2-2011 When I made this statement I was uninformed. Please read the following...

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=46515&start=30#p589360" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stormwatcher wrote:Well obviously I don't like it but let me say I don't intend to insult anyone that furthers our gun rights. It is just very discouraging to be in my position. I work in a chemical plant and from what I do understand of the bill.......I can't have my gun in my car unless I am willing to be fired. Just looking for answers. You know it's a crying shame that we have to pass State laws to get the rights that our Bill of Rights already gives us.......then find out that the State law excludes you!

No, you are not excluded if you are and employee, have a CHL and park in an unsecured parking lot that does not meet the restrictions listed in the statute.

canvasbck wrote: Actually they did not ignore it. They added the clause about "if our policy is in conflict with local laws..... The law would take precedence". We discussed adding essentially the same language to our companies' policy (I am the person who was responsible for re-writing our facility firearms policy, we are also a large global petrochemical company). The thinking behind this clause was for the company to still be able to send the message of "we don't want guns here" but allow them wherever the law forces the company too. The clause would also allow us the chance to not change our policy everytime that the law is changed in future sessions. We ultimately spelled out where no one including CHL holders could carry and then added the standard "unlicensed possession is prohibited even in parking lots".

I think your company is still in violation by excluding those carrying under the MPA by saying that unlicensed possession is still prohibited in the parking lots. The new law also says it includes anyone also able to lawfully possess a firearm.

C-dub wrote:

canvasbck wrote: Actually they did not ignore it. They added the clause about "if our policy is in conflict with local laws..... The law would take precedence". We discussed adding essentially the same language to our companies' policy (I am the person who was responsible for re-writing our facility firearms policy, we are also a large global petrochemical company). The thinking behind this clause was for the company to still be able to send the message of "we don't want guns here" but allow them wherever the law forces the company too. The clause would also allow us the chance to not change our policy everytime that the law is changed in future sessions. We ultimately spelled out where no one including CHL holders could carry and then added the standard "unlicensed possession is prohibited even in parking lots".

I think your company is still in violation by excluding those carrying under the MPA by saying that unlicensed possession is still prohibited in the parking lots. The new law also says it includes anyone also able to lawfully possess a firearm.

Not for the petrochemical plants; you have to be a CHL. Here is the text from statute here http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/ ... 00321F.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

....except in regard to an employee who holds a license to carry a
concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,