On Jan 15, 2006, at 3:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Assuming by Constitutional protection or by validly issued state
license/permit that you have the right to carry a firearm on your
person, why is that right subordinate to an owner's private property
rights at the owner's workplace but that very same right somehow
supercedes the owner's property rights in the parking lot - how can
that be argued legally?
It seems to me that it all depends on what set of legal fictions we
agree to honor today.
For example, in physical terms, it is ludicrous to insist that the
earth under an embassy is "foreign soil," yet we swallow this fiction
every day. A person within the boundaries of Washington DC is subject
to the jurisdiction of Washington DC, unless he is inside the French
Embassy, in which case he is suddenly outside it.
Extending a similar argument to objects inside vehicles would really
not be that much of a stretch for a properly-motivated legislature.
--
Escape the Rat Race for Peace, Quiet, and Miles of Desert Beauty
Take a Sanity Break at The Bunkhouse at Liberty Haven Ranch
http://libertyhavenranch.com
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
