Place of Business

[Soju 153]

I find the word His to show ownership as defined... I hear what you are saying.. but as discussed I see no reasonable situation that would make it worth it to me to take any kind of chance based simply on the "word play" of 3 words.. lol hell they make security guards be licensed to carry a gun.. at work.. if you as an employee could just carry a gun at work.. there would be no need for that certification.. so as stated.. pretty sure they are using his as an ownership word..

 

I am not saying I disagree.

 

About security guard types, somewhat of a solid point, however those 3 exceptions (while they still apply) are not the only places, assuming you are referring to the jobs listed in the statues. They are specifically mentioned, because they can carry while on the job (official duties), and that is not restricted to just a business or their land. In most cases, if they are on the job, and in NJ, it is legal. This doesn't not apply to the average person.

 

If you are talking about something not listed, like instead meaning they must obtain an actual NJ carry permit JUST to be able to stand around the store with a firearm, then disregard the above. Then it is a quite solid point assuming true.

 

Again, I am not saying I disagree (or agree), I was asking because I was unsure. If I was sure (either way), I wouldn't have asked!

[vladtepes 1,060]

I am not saying I disagree.

 

About security guard types, somewhat of a solid point, however those 3 exceptions (while they still apply) are not the only places, assuming you are referring to the jobs listed in the statues. They are specifically mentioned, because they can carry while on the job (official duties), and that is not restricted to just a business or their land. In most cases, if they are on the job, and in NJ, it is legal. This doesn't not apply to the average person.

 

If you are talking about something not listed, like instead meaning they must obtain an actual NJ carry permit JUST to be able to stand around the store with a firearm, then disregard the above. Then it is a quite solid point assuming true.

 

Again, I am not saying I disagree (or agree), I was asking because I was unsure. If I was sure (either way), I wouldn't have asked!

 

 

I am just saying.. if carrying a gun at work was not a prohibited place then there would be no need for an armed security guard to have a license to carry a firearm.. as "work" would already be exempt.. be it carrying a gun for security work or not.. a license to carry a gun is a license to carry it.. a license being needed to trump a prohibited place..and like I was saying.. I know we were just talking.. no hard feelings felt at all.. just talk and chit chat.. but I would just hate to see some regular gun loving guy carry his gun concealed at the local best buy he works at.. and end up shooting someone he views as a legit threat.. while stating he was "at his place of business" and getting railroaded in every way possible.. that is why I was so adamantly arguing the point.. not so much AT you..

[Underdog 1,593]

Your business would be treated similar as your home. For example, you returned home from the range but planned to go back later in the day. You drove home for lunch. Would you be able to keep your gun in your car parked in front of your house? Perhaps, but I think it's "more legal" to take it in your house or place of business.

 

I have been told that you would not want to leave it in your car on "public property" if it is left in a car such as parked on the street at the curb. It is better to have it parked on private property or a driveway. And, you have to make sure that you don't take it where it is not allowed. For example, one day while traveling to the range, they were doing construction in front of a local school on the roadway. There was a detour through the school parking lot and it would be unlawful to drive on the school property. In fact, the carrying officers that were there might have been breaking the law if they didn't get permission.

 

But, I would still check with an attorney on any gun-related matters. It's best to move to somewhere that is actually part of the United States and still under the US Constitution.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

My employees would certainly give me a strange look if I started carrying at the shop............. What do you thing it would do for morale and productivity?

 

 

I think it would increase Productivity and the use of the word SIR might be a little more frequent..

[NFRs2000NYC 7]

If the lease or rental agreement is in your name, you're considered to be "in possession" of the property, and may carry there as long as there's nothing in your lease that forbids it.

 

Correct. If you lease the property, it's "yours" for the duration of said lease.

[NFRs2000NYC 7]

Interesting that employers (business owners) can legally defend themselves in the workplace, while employees cannot. What's the logic in that?

 

So since I own a business, it sounds like I can bring my gun to work with me if I'm planning a trip to the range afterward, which would save me a trip home. Realizing that we are just expressing opinions, and not providing legal advice, would you guess that I'm OK leaving it in the car while I'm in the office, or would I need to bring it inside with me?

 

Awesome isn't it? If you take a look at the walgreens incident, common sense tells you that it is worth getting fired in exchange for your life.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Stupid OSHA laws. Thanks to them, the guy at Walgreens was fired for saving the lives of himself and his coworkers.

 

OSHA forced Walgreen's to have a policy that employees can't carry nation wide at work?? Didn't know that, where might this be written?

[KpdPipes 388]

OSHA forced Walgreen's to have a policy that employees can't carry nation wide at work?? Didn't know that, where might this be written?

I don't know where he is getting OSHA from.. It IS a Corporate policy of Walgreens, and just about every retailer out there however, due to Liability, and their Belief that the loss due to theft/Robbery is MUCH less than the Liability of Litigation should a Customer get hurt because an Employee resisted the Robber with or without a weapon. In other words..as usual, the Issue begins at the feet of the Corporate Attorneys. Most of the Employee Policies I've seen are STRICTLY "Hands Off" any bad guys, and clearly state that ANY resistance to a Theft or a Robbery would constitute a firing offense.

[joecs1 11]

Interesting thread..... You lease the property,office, or whatever, You are good to go. However, I would (I actually do)keep a personal safe(a good one, bolted to the floor) at work, and store your carry gun on premiss. Lock it, with a trigger lock. Strap it to your side as soon as you get there! We all know transporting is the largest grey area. All you need is for an officer to read between the lines, arrest you, and then its going to cost YOU, no matter how right you are. I carry every day at my store, and dont feel like dealing with the transportation laws. I almost never go straight home. Stop at the here and there for business, etc. Which is why I wish I could CCW. Always have something of value with me. Granted I take all precautions, and I carry two knives, OC spray, pry bar in the car(because I am always doing some sort of construction at my store). And I drive a full size pick up, so I can see what is coming at me from both directions, and if I have to, I will ram myself out of a situation. Personally, I think storing your weapon at work is your best option. Even if that means buying a second carry weapon. And I would definetely check with a lawyer, just to make sure there is case law, stateing that you are good to go, being from out of state! You definetely dont want to be a test dummy in this situation! JMO, Joe

[vladtepes 1,060]

Interesting thread..... You lease the property,office, or whatever, You are good to go. However, I would (I actually do)keep a personal safe(a good one, bolted to the floor) at work, and store your carry gun on premiss. Lock it, with a trigger lock. Strap it to your side as soon as you get there! We all know transporting is the largest grey area. All you need is for an officer to read between the lines, arrest you, and then its going to cost YOU, no matter how right you are. I carry every day at my store, and dont feel like dealing with the transportation laws. I almost never go straight home. Stop at the here and there for business, etc. Which is why I wish I could CCW. Always have something of value with me. Granted I take all precautions, and I carry two knives, OC spray, pry bar in the car(because I am always doing some sort of construction at my store). And I drive a full size pick up, so I can see what is coming at me from both directions, and if I have to, I will ram myself out of a situation. Personally, I think storing your weapon at work is your best option. Even if that means buying a second carry weapon. And I would definetely check with a lawyer, just to make sure there is case law, stateing that you are good to go, being from out of state! You definetely dont want to be a test dummy in this situation! JMO, Joe

 

 

if you fear laws that do not exist you have already completely given up your freedom..

 

the reason there are exemptions in the transport law are so you can transport where the law allows..

 

if you are going "directly to or from" places that are deemed exemptions.. then you are fine.. that is why they are there.... besides.. how often does a traffic stop end up with you getting your car searched? that is not exactly a common situation... and lets just say it does.. and you are transporting your NJ legal gun to your office.. your place of business.. and the officer finds your cased.. unloaded gun...

 

"is this a firearm in this box"

"yes it is"

"why do you have it"

"I am transporting it to my place of business in a way consistent with NJ laws regarding the transportation of firearms"

 

and not a word more.. if they want to lock you up and charge you.. so be it.. hire a lawyer because lawsuit is in the air..

you can't live your life in fear of persecution for laws that do not exist.. when you drive are you afraid that you are going to get a ticket even if you are not speeding? when you go to the grocery store do you have fear that you are going to be arrested for shoplifting even though you are not?

 

just my 2 cents..

[NFRs2000NYC 7]

I don't know where he is getting OSHA from.. It IS a Corporate policy of Walgreens, and just about every retailer out there however, due to Liability, and their Belief that the loss due to theft/Robbery is MUCH less than the Liability of Litigation should a Customer get hurt because an Employee resisted the Robber with or without a weapon. In other words..as usual, the Issue begins at the feet of the Corporate Attorneys. Most of the Employee Policies I've seen are STRICTLY "Hands Off" any bad guys, and clearly state that ANY resistance to a Theft or a Robbery would constitute a firing offense.

 

 

 

http://biggovernment.com/jlott/2011/05/25/hero-gets-fired-for-using-a-gun-to-stop-robbery/

 

I got my info from news stories. I have honestly not been able to find the actual OSHA regulation. It seems the law was being "decided" but never passed. What was though, is some messy regulations which many don't understand, so in order to watch their backs, companies assume the worst case scenario in order to comply with OSHA regulations, to avoid OSHA fines.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

 

I got my info from news stories. I have honestly not been able to find the actual OSHA regulation. It seems the law was being "decided" but never passed. What was though, is some messy regulations which many don't understand, so in order to watch their backs, companies assume the worst case scenario in order to comply with OSHA regulations, to avoid OSHA fines.

 

Just so you know a lot of us know who you are, we know that your wife and mother are lawyers and you are not however many people will see what you write and see your sig line and think what your saying is or has some legal backing. We get that you are trying to promote something related to your family and there profession, but I must say, I think overall you have turned more people away from even taking a look the site let alone referring anyone to it.

 

Now you say after stating that is because of OSHA, that you just read it was OSHA in a news article and even trying to find it at the OSHA website you can't?

[KpdPipes 388]

http://biggovernment.com/jlott/2011/05/25/hero-gets-fired-for-using-a-gun-to-stop-robbery/

 

I got my info from news stories. I have honestly not been able to find the actual OSHA regulation. It seems the law was being "decided" but never passed. What was though, is some messy regulations which many don't understand, so in order to watch their backs, companies assume the worst case scenario in order to comply with OSHA regulations, to avoid OSHA fines.

 

 

Intersting..So i guess the people from actual Retail establishments i spoke to, Including some general and regional managers must've been lying to me when they stated that it was strictly a Liability decision coming out of the National offices and the reccomendations of the Attorneys. While I disagree, i DO understand that their hands are tied. Considering that OSHA, and PEOSHA covers pretty much EVERY profit, Non-Profit, and Public Agency in this nation, an OSHA restriction on firearms in the workplace would have to mean NOBODY Could have Armed Security..ever. here's a hint..when you're wrong, Admit it, otherwise you just look like a fool.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

:popcorn:

[KpdPipes 388]

:popcorn:

[hd2000fxdl 422]

 

[NFRs2000NYC 7]

Just so you know a lot of us know who you are, we know that your wife and mother are lawyers and you are not however many people will see what you write and see your sig line and think what your saying is or has some legal backing. We get that you are trying to promote something related to your family and there profession, but I must say, I think overall you have turned more people away from even taking a look the site let alone referring anyone to it.

 

Now you say after stating that is because of OSHA, that you just read it was OSHA in a news article and even trying to find it at the OSHA website you can't?

 

That is your right. However, I did read the OSHA laws on working conditions, and they are very broad. Walgreens did not want bad light shed on the company (although they failed miserably) so they blamed it on "corporate policy." However, Walgreens does not actually have a "no firearms" policy, they have a "non-escalation policy." There is a Walgreens a few blocks from my house, and the last time the wife was getting her prescription filled, I was BSing with the manager about this. Their policy to their employers are generally a non escalation policy (like all major retail outlets) and comply with local laws and regulations. The rumor started that they actually did ALL this to make sure OSHA keeps off their backs. Is it possible? Sure. Is it 100%? No it isn't.

 

As for the website in my sig, hey, I'm not holding a gun to your head, and I am sorry you have no interest in it. It is a free service brought to members, and they have nothing to lose. We have helped many people with a number of issues, including custody, divorce, real estate, etc...questions that an attorney would normally charge you for "consultation." If you take my PERSONAL views on this, and mix them with business, that's one thing. It seems you may be someone who does not like brash statements, but that's ok. Regardless, my brother-in-law answers the legal questions (he actually IS one of the attorneys) so if you every need anything, by all means.

 

All the best.

[NFRs2000NYC 7]

Intersting..So i guess the people from actual Retail establishments i spoke to, Including some general and regional managers must've been lying to me when they stated that it was strictly a Liability decision coming out of the National offices and the reccomendations of the Attorneys. While I disagree, i DO understand that their hands are tied. Considering that OSHA, and PEOSHA covers pretty much EVERY profit, Non-Profit, and Public Agency in this nation, an OSHA restriction on firearms in the workplace would have to mean NOBODY Could have Armed Security..ever. here's a hint..when you're wrong, Admit it, otherwise you just look like a fool.

 

I never argued, so if you would like me to admit it, ok. Just so you know, guns are ALL ILLEGAL IN NJ FOR EVERYONE...however, there are exceptions, such as police, FID holders, etc etc etc. Just because it is illegal for all businesses to have guns in the workplace, does not mean there are no exceptions. In this case, as I said above, I wasn't sure, and it was just a post. If you just want to make a spectacle of it, so be it. I was wrong.

[NFRs2000NYC 7]

Oh, and since we are actually looking for information here are some things I found interesting...

 

http://www.akemplaw.com/wiki/2007/10/31/guns-at-work/

 

http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/workerscompensationlaw/blogs/workerscompensationlawblog/archive/2010/02/17/larson_2700_s-blogworthy-cases-of-the-week-8_2f00_22_2f00_2008.aspx

 

There is some meat in this case. While there are no OSHA rules banning guns outright, the law can be interpreted that way by OSHA...they kind of left the door open for themselves. Just thought you guys might be interested in this.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

That is your right. However, I did read the OSHA laws on working conditions, and they are very broad. Walgreens did not want bad light shed on the company (although they failed miserably) so they blamed it on "corporate policy." However, Walgreens does not actually have a "no firearms" policy, they have a "non-escalation policy." There is a Walgreens a few blocks from my house, and the last time the wife was getting her prescription filled, I was BSing with the manager about this. Their policy to their employers are generally a non escalation policy (like all major retail outlets) and comply with local laws and regulations. The rumor started that they actually did ALL this to make sure OSHA keeps off their backs. Is it possible? Sure. Is it 100%? No it isn't.

 

As for the website in my sig, hey, I'm not holding a gun to your head, and I am sorry you have no interest in it. It is a free service brought to members, and they have nothing to lose. We have helped many people with a number of issues, including custody, divorce, real estate, etc...questions that an attorney would normally charge you for "consultation." If you take my PERSONAL views on this, and mix them with business, that's one thing. It seems you may be someone who does not like brash statements, but that's ok. Regardless, my brother-in-law answers the legal questions (he actually IS one of the attorneys) so if you every need anything, by all means.

 

All the best.

 

Ok, could we let the OSHA thing go now, OSHA did not make them do what you said they made them do and it was just something you read in a news article and leave it at that.

 

Now as far as the Sig Line and the URL for the Law website. You are not understanding what I am trying to say to you. The URL in your sig is not making me or anyone do anything, and yes your personal views on this are just that, your personal views, however when you try to communicate information your interpreting and a lot of times incorrectly or not taking everything in it's totality and just using part of it that suit your view point is not that good, especially when you associate this incomplete or misinformation with your sig line.

 

I am not saying it's bad for you personally, but I would think it's not doing any good for promoting the use of the service your promoting. Remember everyone who has a good experience may tell a person, maybe, for everyone who has a bad experience will tell 8 people. Oh and if you say your not promoting it, having it in your sig line like you do, you are a representative for the web site.

[KpdPipes 388]

That is your right. However, I did read the OSHA laws on working conditions, and they are very broad. Walgreens did not want bad light shed on the company (although they failed miserably) so they blamed it on "corporate policy." However, Walgreens does not actually have a "no firearms" policy, they have a "non-escalation policy." There is a Walgreens a few blocks from my house, and the last time the wife was getting her prescription filled, I was BSing with the manager about this. Their policy to their employers are generally a non escalation policy (like all major retail outlets) and comply with local laws and regulations. The rumor started that they actually did ALL this to make sure OSHA keeps off their backs. Is it possible? Sure. Is it 100%? No it isn't.

 

As for the website in my sig, hey, I'm not holding a gun to your head, and I am sorry you have no interest in it. It is a free service brought to members, and they have nothing to lose. We have helped many people with a number of issues, including custody, divorce, real estate, etc...questions that an attorney would normally charge you for "consultation." If you take my PERSONAL views on this, and mix them with business, that's one thing. It seems you may be someone who does not like brash statements, but that's ok. Regardless, my brother-in-law answers the legal questions (he actually IS one of the attorneys) so if you every need anything, by all means.

 

All the best.

Want to bet they DO have a "No Weapons" policy for employees??? It may not Specify firearms, but it would include them. Quick-Chek, CVS, BJ's, Costco, i could go on and on, all have specific "No Weapons" verbiage in their employee rules as well as the "No Escalation" policy.