![[Nameplate]](http://www.gcdailyworld.com/images/nameplate.png)
|
|
~ High: 83°F ~ Low: 58°F Wednesday, May 23, 2012 |
|
Happiness is a Warm Gun...Posted Tuesday, July 20, 2010, at 3:18 PM
Perhaps the Beatles were right when they said "Happiness is a warm gun." Now in Indiana, this could not be any truer. According to several news sources and my reading of the bill, employees (with the exception of ten places) can now transport guns to and from their places of employment.
The first thing I thought of when I heard on the local TV news stations and online news sources was yikes! I did this for two reasons. One the timing, and two for the stupidity of the bill. One thing has to be straightened out before I continue. I know the Democrats have the majority in the Indiana General Assembly, and yes, I am a Democrat. I will probably always vote for the Democrat, but this bill (now law) ranks in the top five as the dumbest the Assembly could ever pass. The biggest reason for this feeling is the timing of the bill. I think everyone can agree that we are facing some bad economic times. While it is on the rebound, some people are still hurting from the Bush (now Obama's) -- Daniels economy. Why pass a bill concerning guns into law when we need our state and local leaders to assist us in this turbulent time? That does not make a lot of sense to me. We need people in the state house who understand our needs, not pass a distracting bill because it buys them time in the political arena. Where are the small business investment bills? Where are the bills that will invest in our infrastructure? Oh that is right, they do not exist because that is something tough for our political goons -- er, I mean leaders. The second reason I do not like this bill is due to the ignorance of it. Did I wake up one day when no one could have guns? Is there a big scare to ensure gun rights in this state? The last time I checked, any sane person can own a gun and transport it. Why is this bill important for this state? Is it going to create jobs? Is it going to help small business owners? Does it make the workplace safer? The answer to all of those questions is a resounding no. All that needs to happen, and its not like it will not happen due to layoffs and other economic woes, is for a worker to become disgruntled, get the gun, and shoot up the workplace. Think that is out of the realm of possibility? Ask some workers at Bemis about guns in the workplace, or better yet, ask an employee from the Indiana Department of Workforce Development. I am all for gun rights and ownership and shooting them and all that. Shooting a gun is exciting, no question about it, but why is this gun law necessary? As much as I pay attention to current events, I never saw any threat to gun owners or gun rights. Other than distracting from the actual business of the day, I see no point for this bill. I just wish someone with half a brain can remember the needs of the district and the state. Until that happens, happiness may very well be a warm gun. Till Next Time Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
Hot topics The Grand Finale(8 ~ 11:53 AM, Aug 11)
For The Dads
The Once and Future Subject
Personal Story
Mom's Day
|
Email link
Read comments (20)
Blog archive
![[Feed icon]](http://www.gcdailyworld.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
They just want NRA approval and campaign donations. Same reason the NRA was exempt from the financial reform bill. The organization has a crazy amount of power only rivaled by the AARP.
Anti-gun advocates usually try to erode the rights of law-abiding gun owners, little by little. I too am unsure of the reason or timing for this bill, but I suspect it is due to companies trying to prohibit gun owners from bringing firearms onto their property, even though it is legal by State & Federal law.
I also agree that we have much more important problems that need the focus and attention of our lawmakers. No matter where you place the blame for our current ecomomic crisis, we had better get our heads out of the sand and demand (vote) better leadership or I fear we have just begun to see the bad times!
And since you declared your party, Drew, I shall say that I have always voted conservative nationally and for the best qualified candidate, locally. The problem I see in current times is there are fewer and fewer good candidates to vote for on either side of the aisle!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE2Vdcv9Q...
I'm going to agree with on the Blood trail on his last point. The parties have let everybody down. The Republicans basically work for corporate America along with some moderate Democrats and the liberal Democrats are afraid to actually do anything even with a majority and that's why the people are so mad. We somehow have to change the way elections are run so candidates are less likely to work just to appease people who can make large campaign donations. The recent Supreme Court decision to allow corporations to have first amendment rights upset me because it caused a large setback in the world of campaign finance reform and regulation.
anyway though, there are definitely other more important things to worry about than bringing guns to work, like how much Indiana is indebted to the federal government.
If somebody is going to go into the workplace & shoot it up....it doesn't matter how many laws are in effect to prevent OR allow guns on the property! Like a law OR a sign is going to stop them.
That person is a criminal and wouldn't follow any laws anyhow.
Just an afterthought, I do belong to the NRA.
My only problem with this law is it simply didn't go far enough. They should let 'em bring in semi-automatic weapons, tommy guns and such. Heck, let 'em bring in small cannons, too, what the hey.
The Indiana General Assembly passed the bill March 4 -- one day before police said a state Department of Workforce Development auditor went to his car and returned with a shotgun that he fired inside an agency office, sending other employees fleeing.
-Quoted from therepublic.com
Sounds like the law is going over pretty well...Thanks to all you geniouses who voted it in.
Why pass the law? To PROTECT OUR RIGHTS AS INDIVIDUALS. Simple.
Everyday, especially under this new administration, our rights as individuals are under threat. (and NO I cannot stand most of the administration now, I won't hide it; but that is a whole other rant) Everyday some ignorant bill gets written or passed...
Will this bill create jobs? No, probably not...will it help small business owners-yes, it could help them to protect what they have built...will it make the workplace safer-I have to say yes again...again..its called protection! I intend to protect myself and my family where ever I go! There is NO place safe in this world today..nowhere!!!
This bill should not be treated as if it will cause more shootings or killings...The bill and the Guns are NOT going to be the ones hurting people...why do people forget that the laws and the tools do not do the evil deeds, it is PEOPLE that do....
Come November I hope to see a change with the State and in 2012 a HUGE change (oh wait, that's what we are getting) in the person we elect to run this country.
Isn't that what they are there for---to be our voice? To serve US?? I agree they need to worry about MUCH bigger things right now, but this law was a GREAT step in protecting our indiviual rights as citizens of the USA. I'm glad they are not letting our rights slip away, no matter how ignorant or un-needed you think they are.
Oh and since you shared, I will too, I AM a proud member of the NRA...gasp!! And yes, vote Conservatively..bigger gasp!
Mis:
Can you give me a couple of examples of what rights have been taken from you (or are "under threat")by the present administration and then point out to me where those same rights originated?
Thanks
The way I read things about the bill I don't see much of a way of this helping small business owners. Could you explain how this is so? Seems to me it was already legal for someone to have a weapon in thier car and the new bill is to stop BUSINESSES from banning the guns in their parking lots. That to me is infringing on the rights of the business owners. I have the right to ban smoking(just an example) in my home and even in my yard. Those business owners have the right to ban guns in their parking lots.
My dad tells stories of friends leaving their trucks in the parking lot at the high school unlocked with guns in the back windows, but that was a different time. Now it is ACTUALLY against the rules to leave your car or truck UNLOCKED in the parking lot at Shakamak. If Bemis or Sony or Arcellor Mittal or whoever wants to ban weapons in their parking lots that sounds perfectly fine to me. It would suck, as many times after I get off work in the summer I don't have time to go home to get my gun to go out shooting with my friends from work, but then again it is not my property and I'm sure many people have good reasons for not liking my ban of smoking on my property.
And since everyone is sharing I am NOT a member of the NRA, but am an avid hunter and love sport shooting as well.
No, you are right in many respects Tom, but when a company makes it against the rules to have a gun on the property it slightly deters people from easily being able to walk to their cars and grab the gun they brought and using it. Many people could still sneak a gun in but the number of shootings would go down. Speed limits(another one of my examples) DEFINATELY DO NOT stop me from driving faster, but if there were no speed limits I would drive much faster, much more often. And others would do the same to the extreme.
Another example:
An employee doesn't get his way and goes into a rage for some reason and goes out to his car a grabs his gun and kills everyone he can with this law.
Without the law, the employee who seemed quite normal until he snapped didn't feel like breaking the rules that day before he left home so he didn't pack his gun. When he goes into his rage and wants to kill his fellow employees he makes a note to bring his gun the next day, and has 24 hours to cool down and think about his consequences. Assuming he works somewhere that the owners have deemed it against the rules to have guns on the grounds.
What good would a "Gun Law" have been to Able? I believe in the right to bear arms. Would Cain not have killed his brother if we had a "Gun Law" in his day? A killer is going to kill. Laws do not stop them. Good laws only get rid of them so they can never do it again.
They do a pretty good job of enforcing it at schools, why should the work place be any different?
And regardless of whether or not you can enforce it, the owner of that parking lot that I park in at work has a right to tell me I cant have a gun there, just like I, as the owner of my driveway, have the right to tell others that they can't hang out there or dump trash there or any other crazy ideas that they may have.
And has anyone ever stopped to think that maybe this bill just passed quickly so that our politicians could get on to more important matters? That could be the reason why bills like this are getting passed while more controversial bills are still being processed.
TomHaverford, you are wrong. Companies do perform random searches of employee vehicles all the time. Here in Konx County, it is done at least once a month WITH police and drug dogs. I say GOOD! If you're stupid enough to bring items onto a company property when it is clearly posted on every gate that these items are illegal, you should be fired when caught posessing those items. I'm not talking about guns specifically, I'm referring to things like beer and dope. And yes, guns are also on the posted list of items illegal to bring onto company property.
"Thanks to all you geniouses who voted it in."
I laughed.
i,o, and u are too close to each other on the keyboard and my hands are too big, I laughed a little myself after I posted, but didn't think anyone else in greene county would notice
I also will laugh.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100803/ap_o...
Drew, I don't understand why you posted a link to the article.
Was it an interesting article or are you implying that it wouldn't have taken place if guns were illegal?
My posting wasn't meant to be interpreted as anything more than that, but I must say, James, your posts are missed. Come back whenever you can.
I can see both sides of this argument, what if one of these victims had been armed himself and was able to take out the gunman - there would have been fewer casualties.
If I read the article correctly the gunman at the beer distributor's warehouse carried two guns into the building inside his lunchbox, seems to me he may have known what was coming and planned this retaliation, not the same as having your firearm locked inside your vechicle.