ATG Mail: Gun Backlash
Like to read other people's mail? Well, have at it. The Against the Grain inbox is open for your perusal. And by the way, this is not a blog.
Bringing Guns To Work
A great many readers took me to task for my column on guns in the workplace, saying I was treading on the 2nd Amendment. And it appears a lot of people go hunting after work. However, I stand by what I said.
I am a law abiding citizen who understands that my guns on my person, in my home or auto are of no danger to anyone. As a matter of public record Ted Kennedy has killed more people or animals than any gun that I own!
Our laws should be to protect our citizens, not punish them. What Ted Kennedy and your correct "spineless democrats" should stop their agenda of back door entry to have gun control by any method. The 2nd Amendment has guaranteed my right since its writing and once you change or re-write out constitution we will not be free men anymore. What would the liberal press do if we didn't have the 1st Amendment?
Paul Bartos
Sir, I send you my greetings. I've just read your piece about the NRA sponsored boycott of Conoco over the dismissal of employees "caught" with firearms in their vehicles on company property. I should like to point out that not all firearms carried in vehicles are for personal defense, such as the handgun. More people than you might imagine in Oklahoma, and other areas of the nation, enjoy the sport of hunting, especially after working a stressful or tedious shift... fatigued from working all night, going all the way home to don the proper attire, fetching the accoutrements necessary for hunting, may be too much of a bother, particularly if one is hunting with a co-worker. Having all those items locked up safe and out of sight in the vehicle parking lot, controlled by security is a perfectly sensible arrangement. Chaps can go a-hunting straight from work, get home by lunch-time and sleep soundly after spending quiet time in the woods with a comrade in arms, so to speak. Just a little FYI from the rural region.
Joseph K. Smith (no relation)
I find it troubling that employees should be violated of their rights to protect themselves at work. It is obvious anyone that is planning on killing others at their place of employment is not going to obey any law that bans guns from the workplace. In fact it may make them feel more empowered because they know that the law abiding citizens have no way to protect themselves.
Russel Rodeback
Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins.
Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, whose testimony convicted John Gotti.
Wow. Are we bitter?
Other than the snide cynicism, this is a good discussion to get into about individual rights (both first and second amendment) on private property. Indeed a gray area.
An inaccuracy, however.
There is more than pollsters telling the Democrats 'the smart thing to do is not address gun control'. The voting populace in the southern states traditionally supported conservative Southern Democrats in the house and senate until 1994, when in a backlash to Brady, they converted to conservative Republicans. Just this last election, 4 out of 5 open slots went to the Republicans. The one remaining Democrat said the reason Democrats are losing is they were 'not representing their constituency', so she decided to and won.
Dean's (new DNC head) take on this was that the Democratic Party must do better to 'educate their constituency'.
That's a big disconnect.
Robert A. Sutherland
Gee, Dick, I have no beef with the guy in HR, but the gal in the next office has a restraining order against her ex who, on several occasions, sent her to work badly in need of extra makeup. I'm worried about what he'll do when he's finally told he can't get close enough to his kids to beat them again.
Luckily we have a "no guns at work" policy so we're safe, right?
Right?
Frank Clarke
I guess Mr. Dick Meyer is a left wing liberal who cares a lot for the punks rights and little for the victims. Maybe if we all had the right to defend ourselves against criminals we would have less crime.
Since governments rule by fear, I'm sure that the thought of all those nasty guns in the hands of the citizens scare all of the liberals who, after all, know what is good for the entire population. Why don't some of these hanky-stomping, take-a-punk-to-lunch liberals leave everybody alone?
Lee Salmon
Mr. Meyer, It is quite obvious what your personal position on the right of us commoners to keep and bear arms is, however let me clear up some of the obvious fallacies and misrepresentations you've presented as "fact" in your latest satirical rant.
Three years ago the Weyerhauser Co. paper mill chose to search the vehicles of it's employees during the opening days of deer season. Whether they were looking to fire employees who were gun owners, hunters or only wished to fire a couple of employees for the most convenient reason at the time can only be speculated by you and I.
But what I do know is that if the company had published that political bumper stickers were prohibited on company property in its employee handbook, and had searched its "property" for infractions in the months prior to elections, there would be a liberal uprising against the infringement of first amendment rights. And you, just like the "demonic" NRA would be crying out that a vehicle is an extension of the home and personal property, not company property. And though you intimate that these policies are only protecting the "jerk in human resources" It's quite obvious that some personal property left locked in a vehicle has nothing to do with that "jerk."
As for those pesky drunken men carrying guns, sorry to spoil your emotional appeal for gun control, but it's still illegal. Though sober law abiding citizens are allowed to retain all the rights of sober law abiding citizens, once they are under the influence of alcohol it is still illegal for them to carry a firearm. You seem to have overlooked that fact. I hope it wasn't because you were at all biased in your reporting of the "truth". And while I think that the chief was quite accurate in his statement of "Guns don't mix with booze any better than driving has," I think you'd be singing a different tune if the law they were supporting was one that stated you couldn't drive or possess the keys to your car if you were incidentally in an establishment that had a license to serve alcohol.
As for the Democrats, I'm glad that they have finally spotted a losing horse, and for their sake I hope elitists such as yourself don't bog them down too much, so this country might one day have a reasonable race for the hearts and minds of reasonable people in this country. I hope in the future you will work harder to separate your misconceptions and bias from fact.
Seth Dolan
I fully support Americans carrying guns for protection of themselves and others. I thought your article was very "tacky" and lacked the personal responsibility and the American Way of Firearms and self-defense, listed in the Bill of Rights, of which the 2nd Amendment is referred.
T.W.
An interesting and provocative article. But I feel that your analysis may have overlooked another real reason that Conservatives appear more unified: single-issue voters. In other words: voters that would elect Saddam Hussein to Congress if he was anti-gun control and a Republican.
While the political demographic hasn't shifted much in the last 30 years, the lunatic fringe has been able to stir the moderate voters into action with "single issue" elections. Remember the "Contract with America (unfair taxes)?" And more recently, the incredible number of Evangelicals that came to the polls to vote against "gay marriage?" While they were there they just happened to sway the vote on more moderate issues as well.
Maybe it's because of Right Wing radio shows that stir up otherwise unmotivated Americans, but I know many otherwise liberal-minded folks that vote for conservative Republicans simply because of gun control (or the fear of gun control). The same with so-called "Gay Marriage" votes.
As evidenced by our current President's policies— if you can scare enough people they will vote for their "survival" instead of their pocketbooks. And if you can convince them that their physical or their beliefs' survival depends on one single issue you will win the election.
Just my two cents.
John C. Webb
Apparently, you think it's silly to be allowed to defend yourself with a firearm in a restaurant. I don't know about you, but if I were dining in a restaurant with my family and some nut tried to rob the cashier at gun point or otherwise harm the employees or patrons, I would hope that someone in the facility would have the ability to take that guy out. Most criminals are unable to effectively perpetrate mischief after they've been shot to death.
Michael A. Garcia
Though I did not see "eye-to-eye" with you on your Hurricane Katrina column ("Absolutely, Positively Incoherent"), your latest on the NRA and its maniacal millions is delightful.
These people believe the right to pack a gun anywhere is sure protection against people like themselves, if that makes any sense at all.
Without too much dark humor, I can see two NRA members dueling in a company parking lot because one of them sideswiped the other. That scenario is closer to the truth, unfortunately. Though NRA types always trot out stories about gun owners defending themselves against robbers, rapists or other intruders, most of the violence with handguns is within the household. They never want to talk about that — after all, guns never have anything to do with such "accidents."
Brian
As soon as the states and corporations allow the so called "locked" guns in the parking lots at work, the NRA will start watering that law down to where everyone can put a "locked" gun in their desk.
An armed society is a paranoid society.
M.W.
I can see the issues on both sides, as for the reason to allow or not allow guns in trunks at an employer. As a manager, I can fully understand the threat of a disgruntled worker with a firearm out in the parking lot. I am a current gun owner and love to hunt and trap shoot.
The problem I would have, with not being able to have a gun in my trunk at work, is that I work an hour from my home. I trap shoot after work on a league at an established range in the city where I work (1 hour from home) and I occasionally stop to hunt after work as well. I would be unable to do this, if these kinds of restrictions were in place.
Where do we stop? The disgruntled employee could assault or kill with his or her golf club, baseball bat, etc. or even mow people down with their vehicle. Are we going to ban corporate America from bringing their golf clubs to work or their vehicles, because there is that chance he or she may use them inappropriately to assault or kill someone?
The percentage of people that are unable to distinguish the difference between right or wrong is extremely low. Even with the hundreds of current gun laws and regulations the few bad apples are going to figure a way around.
As for liability against gun manufacturers, do we go after auto makers or alcohol manufacturers for misuse (people injured or killed) of their products?
Ed Hewitt
Does this mean I won't be able to defend myself and my sanity against the guy in the next cube who keeps clearing his throat every five seconds??
Johanna M. Murphy
Even Texas is smart enough to make it a felony to carry a weapon into a bar. A weapon in your vehicle is another matter, in my opinion.
Who do you trust to defend you? Would you like to be defended as the folks in New Orleans were by there governmental assets, including the local, state and federal? Think about it!
The founding fathers, believe it or not, had a little experience dealing with royalty as we are getting here in the USA dealing with the Bush family and their friends in power.
Bob
If you still want to send in an e-mail, you'll have to read a real column to find the address.