Policy is "No Firearms"

[24Carat]

DIGEST OF SB411 (Updated April 5, 2011 2:31 pm - DI 84)​

Disclosure of firearm or ammunition information. Provides that a civil action may be brought against a public or private employer that has: (1) required an applicant for employment or an employee to disclose information under certain circumstances about whether the applicant or employee owns, possesses, uses, or transports a firearm or ammunition; or (2) conditioned employment, or any rights, benefits, privileges, or opportunities offered by the employment, upon an agreement that the applicant for employment or the employee forgo the otherwise lawful ownership, possession, storage, transportation, or use of a firearm or ammunition. Provides that a governmental entity may not restrict the possession of a firearm at a person's residence during a declared emergency.

Thus my contention that a discreet recording device should be at hand at all times where interaction with employers or potential employers may happen.

 

[Bill of Rights]

That's just silly.
OK what happens when the wife and I go to pick up the kids and we are BOTH carrying??
Same thing I guess.... I would be a law breaker if she is driving...........

Correct, though that one's easy to get around: Her LTCH does not limit to one the number of handguns she may carry. Give it to her, or if you're driving, she hands hers to you and all is legal, so long as the driver does not exit the car on school property.

Yes, it is silly. Most "gun control" laws are.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[blamecharles]

So my company just handed out an employee handbook stating no firearms on company or customer premises. Mines stays on me while not at work in the glove box(soon to be lock box) during work. I have an LTCH and don't want to see the company sued by others. Should i warn them that the handbook violates IC34-28-7-2? I wouldn't want to seem like i am the one that would sue just trying to keep them from getting sued. I think i know the answer and have also been told by FIL that it is probably best to just shut my mouth. I am part of the administrative side of the house and we just had 2 meetings about staying legal on our driving, paperwork, time keeping, etc. so shouldn't this part of it be legal as well?

 

[MickeyBlueEyes]

Correct, though that one's easy to get around: Her LTCH does not limit to one the number of handguns she may carry. Give it to her, or if you're driving, she hands hers to you and all is legal, so long as the driver does not exit the car on school property.

Yes, it is silly. Most "gun control" laws are.

Blessings,
Bill

You can still drive through and pick up your children with a LTCH as long as you're only picking them up and dropping them off. It's in the Bill.

 

[ATM]

You can still drive through and pick up your children with a LTCH as long as you're only picking them up and dropping them off. It's in the Bill.

Right, but it only applies to the operator of the vehicle, not passengers.

Poor wording for an exception to a ridiculous law.

 

[Dirtebiker]

I think it was already legal before that new bill.
Now you can carry in state buildings with a LTCH so I dont see why you couldn't carry on state highway department property.

Company policy has never been the law, it can be against company policy to wear pink pants and yet it's not illegal to do so.

I thought you said those pants were your old girlfriends, and that you threw them away! yeah right!!!

 

[Dirtebiker]

Like everyone else at work I keep it in the car. We are all pretty mum about it so no one is tempted to try and get to it.

Thanks

Obviously not, or you wouldn't know about each others!!!

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

So my company just handed out an employee handbook stating no firearms on company or customer premises. Mines stays on me while not at work in the glove box(soon to be lock box) during work. I have an LTCH and don't want to see the company sued by others. Should i warn them that the handbook violates IC34-28-7-2? I wouldn't want to seem like i am the one that would sue just trying to keep them from getting sued. I think i know the answer and have also been told by FIL that it is probably best to just shut my mouth. I am part of the administrative side of the house and we just had 2 meetings about staying legal on our driving, paperwork, time keeping, etc. so shouldn't this part of it be legal as well?

No, their handbook doesn't violate the IC.

Your employer can still have the rule.

If an employee breaks that rule and is discovered, that employee just can't be fired specifically for breaking that rule. Instead, that employee will be fired for something else, or no reason at all; which is still perfectly legal.

-J-

 

[blamecharles]

No, their handbook doesn't violate the IC.

Your employer can still have the rule.

If an employee breaks that rule and is discovered, that employee just can't be fired specifically for breaking that rule. Instead, that employee will be fired for something else, or no reason at all; which is still perfectly legal.

-J-

In other words shut my mouth and let them deal with it.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

In other words shut my mouth and let them deal with it.

Yep!