Losing the Battle over Guns in Parking Lots; Bad Strategy - Bad Laws - Bad News
Jeff Knox
March 20, 2006
As we feared, the battle to protect gun rights in parking lots is rapidly degenerating into a lose/lose scenario. As I have been repeating for over a year, the solution to this problem lies with liability legislation, not restrictions on property rights. My pleas have fallen on deaf ears though and the result is a battle between groups that should be mutually supportive.
Chambers of Commerce, business organizations, and Libertarian bloggers are alerting their troops. Every day more groups are joining the battle against over-reaching government interfering with the rights of lawful business and property owners to control what is and is not allowed on their private property.
The primary enemy of the groups in this fight is the National Rifle Association along with state gun rights organizations pushing for laws forbidding the banning of guns in locked cars in private parking lots.
Regardless of which side has the better case in this fight, the ?collateral damage? is not worth the end result. Even if gun owners are victorious in the end ? which is really very unlikely ? this fight is creating a rift between traditional allies that is going to be very difficult to mend.
To have traditionally conservative and libertarian groups doing head-to-head battle with gun rights groups over whose rights should trump whose is madness. The only ones who can stop the madness are gun owners. We must stop challenging their right to challenge our right and instead argue from the philosophy that along with rights goes responsibility.
It has been well established that competent adults are ultimately responsible for their own personal safety. If a property owner has the right to require us to give up our chosen means of ensuring our personal safety, they must take that responsibility upon themselves. In other words, those who take away our guns should be required by law to assume responsibility for our safety.
If an employer chooses to forbid the possession of legal firearms on their property, even in locked vehicles in the parking lot, that employer should be held legally liable for the personal safety of employees thus disarmed. And this responsibility should not apply only while the employee is at work, but in transit to and from work as well.
Conversely, property owners who do not prohibit firearms in locked vehicles in their parking lots should be specifically indemnified of any liability for an incident involving a firearm so stored.
As a practical matter, gun bans would evaporate over night ? without government infringement on the rights of business and property owners.
Unfortunately, the longer gun groups insist on fighting a direct battle over guns in parking lots, the more damage is done and the less likely it becomes that any strategy will be effective in eventually solving the problem.
As NRA and state groups push for these parking lot laws in several states, business groups in those states are mustering their forces and pitting their political power against that of the gun lobby.
Not only is this tactic generating bad blood between natural allies, it is generating bad law and bad legal precedent. It is also consuming political capitol that could be better spent in other ways. Politicians who are taking heat from their business constituents over this issue are going to be very reluctant to put themselves at risk again by sponsoring other legislation that might be perceived to be anti-business.
The gun rights community needs to make an immediate shift in strategy or this battle is going to cost much more than we and our grandkids can afford to pay.
Any time, anywhere, for any reason, if a law-abiding citizen of the United States is forced to relinquish their personal defense firearm or forbidden to be in possession of their chosen method of personal protection, the party responsible for disarming them must be required by law to assume legal responsibility for that person?s safety.
Fighting the parking lot fight with strict liability is logical. It is reasonable. And it is winnable. It?s time that gun rights activists work smarter not harder.
Permission to reprint or post this article in its entirety is hereby granted provided this credit is included. To Receive the Firearms Coalition?s bi-monthly newsletter, The Hard Corps Report, send a contribution to The Firearms Coalition, PO Box 3313, Manassas, VA 20108 or visit FirearmsCoalition.org and ShotgunNews.com ?Copyright 2006 Neal Knox Associates
Chambers of Commerce, business organizations, and Libertarian bloggers are alerting their troops. Every day more groups are joining the battle against over-reaching government interfering with the rights of lawful business and property owners to control what is and is not allowed on their private property.
The primary enemy of the groups in this fight is the National Rifle Association along with state gun rights organizations pushing for laws forbidding the banning of guns in locked cars in private parking lots.
Regardless of which side has the better case in this fight, the ?collateral damage? is not worth the end result. Even if gun owners are victorious in the end ? which is really very unlikely ? this fight is creating a rift between traditional allies that is going to be very difficult to mend.
To have traditionally conservative and libertarian groups doing head-to-head battle with gun rights groups over whose rights should trump whose is madness. The only ones who can stop the madness are gun owners. We must stop challenging their right to challenge our right and instead argue from the philosophy that along with rights goes responsibility.
It has been well established that competent adults are ultimately responsible for their own personal safety. If a property owner has the right to require us to give up our chosen means of ensuring our personal safety, they must take that responsibility upon themselves. In other words, those who take away our guns should be required by law to assume responsibility for our safety.
If an employer chooses to forbid the possession of legal firearms on their property, even in locked vehicles in the parking lot, that employer should be held legally liable for the personal safety of employees thus disarmed. And this responsibility should not apply only while the employee is at work, but in transit to and from work as well.
Conversely, property owners who do not prohibit firearms in locked vehicles in their parking lots should be specifically indemnified of any liability for an incident involving a firearm so stored.
As a practical matter, gun bans would evaporate over night ? without government infringement on the rights of business and property owners.
Unfortunately, the longer gun groups insist on fighting a direct battle over guns in parking lots, the more damage is done and the less likely it becomes that any strategy will be effective in eventually solving the problem.
As NRA and state groups push for these parking lot laws in several states, business groups in those states are mustering their forces and pitting their political power against that of the gun lobby.
Not only is this tactic generating bad blood between natural allies, it is generating bad law and bad legal precedent. It is also consuming political capitol that could be better spent in other ways. Politicians who are taking heat from their business constituents over this issue are going to be very reluctant to put themselves at risk again by sponsoring other legislation that might be perceived to be anti-business.
The gun rights community needs to make an immediate shift in strategy or this battle is going to cost much more than we and our grandkids can afford to pay.
Any time, anywhere, for any reason, if a law-abiding citizen of the United States is forced to relinquish their personal defense firearm or forbidden to be in possession of their chosen method of personal protection, the party responsible for disarming them must be required by law to assume legal responsibility for that person?s safety.
Fighting the parking lot fight with strict liability is logical. It is reasonable. And it is winnable. It?s time that gun rights activists work smarter not harder.
Permission to reprint or post this article in its entirety is hereby granted provided this credit is included. To Receive the Firearms Coalition?s bi-monthly newsletter, The Hard Corps Report, send a contribution to The Firearms Coalition, PO Box 3313, Manassas, VA 20108 or visit FirearmsCoalition.org and ShotgunNews.com ?Copyright 2006 Neal Knox Associates
Print
Email
