Today's paper | eEdition | Subscribe
The Truth-O-Meter
Latest print edition
St. Petersburg Times
Special report
Video report
Multimedia report
  • Owning vs. renting
    The end of the real estate boom has led to a community mix that some owner-occupants say they didn't bargain for. See detailed, clickable maps with data for your neighborhood.
  • More multimedia reports
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Your name Your email
Recipient email
You may enter up to 20 multiple email addresses, separated by commas.
Your message

Guns-to-work opponents pressure Crist

By Alex Leary, Times Staff Writer
In print: Friday, April 11, 2008


Social Bookmarking [+]
Digg Facebook Stumbleupon
Reddit Del.icio.us Newsvine
ADVERTISEMENT

TALLAHASSEE — Alarmed by passage of a bill allowing people to bring guns to work, opponents on Thursday huddled with a powerful constitutional lawyer and put pressure on Gov. Charlie Crist to veto the measure.

Top business groups have enlisted Barry Richard, one of President Bush's advisers in the Florida vote recount in 2000, to research issues that could provide the basis for a court challenge.

"An argument can be made that it doesn't serve any legitimate public purpose that overcomes private property rights," Richard said of the bill. "... They are saying you have to allow something on your property that could pose a significant hazard."

The issue leapt to the forefront on Wednesday after the state Senate approved the bill on a party-line vote, something the House had already done. Crist has indicated he will sign it into law.

The bill (HB 503) prohibits businesses from barring employees or customers from bringing firearms with them and leaving them in locked cars. Employers could not search vehicles, fire workers or remove customers who have guns as long as the weapon is not exhibited for any other reason than lawful self-defense.

As a concession to get the bill passed, only employees with concealed weapons licenses would be protected. There are about 487,000 license holders in Florida.

The issue represents an epic clash between two bedrock constitutional issues — gun rights and property rights.

"The U.S. Constitution begins, 'We the people' not 'We the corporation,' " said Marion Hammer, the Florida lobbyist for the National Rifle Association who fought three years to get the bill passed.

Hammer, who dismisses fears about increased workplace violence, points to the Second Amendment and additional protections in the state Constitution allowing people to bear arms and for the government to regulate that freedom.

But opponents say that does not trump private property rights under the Fifth and 14th amendments as well as the state Constitution. University of Florida constitutional law professor Joe Little agreed.

"The essence of the ownership of property is the right to exclude others from the property," he said. "It's like the old westerns — check your guns at the door."

Last year, a judge struck down a similar law in Oklahoma, saying it conflicted with federal workplace safety guidelines. That decision, which has been appealed, would likely play a role in any legal challenge in Florida.

The pro and con arguments in Florida, however, have been more focused on constitutional matters, portending a captivating legal showdown.

In a sign of how delicate the situation is, powerful trade groups in Tallahassee declined to say whether they were laying the groundwork for a lawsuit.

"We're focused on the governor's veto," said David Daniel, chief lobbyist for the Florida Chamber of Commerce, which was most aggressively fighting the legislation.

Last week, Tampa-based Sweetbay Supermarket vented its concerns to state senators and Crist in an e-mail, calling the bill an "assault" on private-property owners and employers.

"The passage of this bill will force businesses and any other private property owner to allow firearms on their property," the company wrote. "Even more disturbing, if I comply with the provisions of this legislation and it results in a gun-related crime being committed on my property, I may be held legally responsible!"

Theresa Gallion, an attorney at Fisher & Phillips in Tampa, who represents businesses on employment issues, said her phone has been ringing nonstop since the bill passed Wednesday.

"I'll tell you, our clients are apoplectic," she said. "It's as if the Legislature lost its mind and decided the Second Amendment was more important than any other law or interest of its kind. It's really weird."

Gallion said some of her clients are already trying to figure out how they can get around the law, such as by "stretch(ing) the limits" of its few exemptions.

Among the employers exempted by the bill are schools, defense contractors and businesses that make, use, store or transport certain combustible or explosive materials.

Many manufacturers, for example, could seek protection under the latter exemption.

"The employer, under federal and state law, has the ability to place reasonable limits on even the most cherished of our rights," Gallion said. "I can't use the F word at work without getting into trouble. These are reasonable, everyday restrictions to the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment is not special."


>>Fast facts

The gun bill

What does it mean? No business could have a policy barring employees or customers from bringing guns with them to work and keeping them locked in cars.

What's next? Gov. Charlie Crist must sign the bill for it to become law. He has indicated he will, meaning it would go into effect July 1.

What are the penalties for violating the law? The state Attorney General can bring civil action, including fines, against a business.


[Last modified: Apr 16, 2008 09:34 AM]



Comments on this article
by Barry Apr 16, 2008 9:34 AM
This bill/law will be determined to be unconstitutional. Imagine as a private property owner, not being able to dictate non-discriminatory terms of admission to your own property. That's basically the definition of communism.
by BerettaLover Apr 15, 2008 6:29 PM
The company I work for now has a policy prohibiting weapons on the grounds; I had to leave my gun at home due to their absent minded views because they are afraid of someone going postal, but if there were going to do it they would have already.
by BigDwane Apr 14, 2008 1:42 PM
It needs to go further. A teacher who has commitments afterschool cannot protect him/herself at those commitments because of the prohibition of firearms on school grounds. It leaves one defenseless.
by Steve Apr 14, 2008 9:07 AM
Thank you Govenor Crist. I am one of the people you are signing for. Thank God for republicans in general and a few good democrats that are making this possible. If the democratic party had its way, we would all be disarmed and volnerable.
by Mike Apr 13, 2008 11:58 AM
Do the math, right to work state + guns in cars = bosses much nicer or telecommute jobs multiply.
by Richard Apr 11, 2008 2:26 PM
Is Sweetbay going to guarantee the safety of it's employees all the way home, since the are demanding them to be defenseless. I will not shop at a store that does not recognize the Constitution of the United States.
by GT Apr 11, 2008 1:48 PM
I have a CCW permit and my friend, Mr. Glock, is with me most of the time... I have no intention of shooting up your store...and never will...
by Paul Apr 11, 2008 9:16 AM
What a bunch of rednecks
by Robert Apr 11, 2008 9:15 AM
This new law did absolutely nothing. Unless the business has a sign prohibiting firearms posted at the entrance to its parking lot, we already have the right to keep a gun in the car.
by me Apr 11, 2008 9:15 AM
Some professions are dangerous and people should be able to protect themselves. Plus, a state statute will not prevent some lunatic going postal or criminal from attacking. Police work hard but cant be everywhere all of the time.
by Steve Apr 11, 2008 9:15 AM
I carry my gun concealed while shopping at Sweet Bay all the time. I've never seen a sign prohibiting it. If they stop letting me protect myself while on their property I'll start shopping somewhere else.
by Steve Apr 11, 2008 9:15 AM
As a small business owner and a CCW permit holder I allow any of my employees to not only keep a gun in their car but to carry it at work if they wish. I feel much safer when I'm surrounded by "Good Guys" with guns.
by Jason A. Apr 11, 2008 9:15 AM
Do you really think that someone will not shoot up their workplace because they were not allowed to have a gun in their car? Seems like a waste of time that could have been used to draft an actual useful law.
by tom Apr 11, 2008 9:15 AM
how much is it costing the state and our legislature to make this law? could that money have been better spent?
by Rich Apr 11, 2008 9:15 AM
I don't "work " in my car - my car stays in the parking lot & I go to my bldg & work. This is not a "bring your gun to work" bill, it's a "keep your gun in your car" bill. The inside of my car is N
by tash Apr 11, 2008 9:15 AM
yeah, it serves no legitimate public interest, b/c as has been proven, the gov't has no interest in protecting its citizens
Subscribe to the Times
Click here for daily delivery
of the St. Petersburg Times.

Email Newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

 
ADVERTISEMENT