Why must a company accept liability for the actions of a third party (the
shooter)?  

 

Disallowing employees to keep firearms in their cars is not an act of
disarming - it is a condition of employment, and a contractual agreement.

 

In the contractual state of employment, the employee has the option of not
accepting the job, or quitting.

 

  _____  

From: Joseph E. Olson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 7:14 PM
To: Guy Smith; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Not absolute

 

Fine, so long as the place of business accepts strict liability for all
injuries, caused by an assailant, suffered by a disarmed employee or visitor
while on their sacred property.  Disarming the permit holder is an
intentional interference with their right to PERSONAL protection.  There
must to be an equal trade off.  If the property owner takes away someone's
protection, they must provide an adequate substitute.  A "no violence"
policy or sign is not sufficient.  Neither is an old duffer in a rental
"uniform" sitting in the vestibule.

 

In Minnesota, the original bill called for strict liability.  The "course
and scope of employment" limitation and the parking lot provision was the
trade-off during the behind-the-scenes lobbying.  That's why the lobbyists
for all three of the state business groups -- Minnesota Business Partnership
(big companies), the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce (medium companies), and
the Small Business Association (small companies) -- testified in the House
Public Safety Committee that they accepted the posting and parking lot
provisions.

 

Professor Joseph Olson, J.D., LL.M.                        o-  651-523-2142

Hamline University School of Law (MS-D2037)         f-   651-523-2236
St. Paul, MN  55113-1235                                      c-
612-865-7956
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                               

 

>>> "Guy Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/27/08%208:42%20PM%20%3e%3e> > 04/27/08
8:42 PM >>

 In the absence of intentional or negligent harm of other people, companies
should be able to control their property as they see fit. 

_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to