Quote:
Originally posted by denton
The company is oblivious to reality:
I suppose the policy made some bliss-ninny at the top feel better.
|
yeah well I wrote a reply to their explanation but I haven't sent it yet. I know it is just a waste of time to send it but I might "reply to their reply tomorrow"
This is what I have so far.................
As I said before I know I am only one voice. I also know that I am probably wasting my time writing this email and after this reply will not write back anymore. However I will make sure that I do not do anything to support your company in anyway that I can possibly avoid.
However in response to your rebuttal of my original Email I feel a certain responsibility to in turn reply to your "explanations."
First you say that your policy is about safety not guns.
To this I say how unsafe is a unloaded gun locked inside of a vehicle in a parking lot. I cannot think of one incident where a person that was planning wrong doing would leave their unloaded firearm locked in a vehicle in a parking lot. Also it is not just about safety it is about a law abiding citizens' right to transport a firearms in their vehicle, so that they may enjoy the activities that go along with that right.
Second I do not understand what difference it make what time of year you searched the parking lot #1 it is still an illegal search and against a persons rights to search their private property. Even police have to have probable cause and a warrant to search a persons car. It appears that your company carried out the search without a warrant and without the persons permission. #2 There are many, many more legitimate reasons people have for legally transporting a firearm in their vehicle, shooting competitions and target practice before or after work, many people have a permit to LEGALLY carry for personal protection, issued by the state and many other reasons which are too numerous to list. So why does it matter if the illegal search was during firearms hunting season?
Third Just because you say that the employees were told of the NEW policies does not make them right, just, or in any way fair to a law abiding citizen. The Constitution and the State of Oklahoma (and many other states) say that citizens are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms and are allowed to legally transport them in a vehicle and you think it is your corporate duty to strip these rights away from them just because you say so and put a new policy into affect?
Is it fair that a person that started working for your company many years before you put this "policy" into affect and has many vested years working for you be subjected to choosing between losing his Constitutional Rights or giving up his retirement just because your company says so?
Fourth I am certainly glad to hear that you are not part of the litigation but that does not excuse the fact that you are making law abiding citizens that should have the right to "keep and bear arms" choose between their Constitutional Rights and the rights the state gives them to carry a firearm legally in their vehicle and their employment at your company.
Like I said I certainly hope your company will reconsider their stance on this issue in any future "policies" you put into affect that limit your employees rights under our Constitution.
Once again Thank You for your time.