http://rawstory.com/…

Walt Disney World, backed by the Florida Retail Federation and the Florida Chamber of Commerce, has sparked a row with state lawmakers and the National Rifle Association over Florida’s “Preservation and Protection of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Motor Vehicles Act of 2008,” enacted July 1, which allows employees with concealed weapons permits to store their guns in their cars during work hours.

Disney maintains its zero-tolerance policy towards guns, warning that taking a gun onto company property could be grounds for termination. Disney’s Animal Kingdom security guard Edwin Sotomayor, accordingly, was fired on Monday following a Friday suspension; Sotomayor had announced to local media that he would be storing a gun in his car in accordance with the law but in violation of Disney’s policy. He refused to let his employer search the car.

“It seems if you work for Disney,” the NRA said on its website, “you give up not only your Second Amendment rights, but your First Amendment rights as well.”

This is stupid. The 2nd Amendment is derived from general property rights theory. As Anthony Gregory over at LewRockwell.com said of this:

They want to force Disney World to allow weapons on their private property. This is self-defeating. The right to bear arms, like all rights, must be rooted in self-ownership and private property. Otherwise, I could impose my “right” to bear arms on someone else’s land by forcing myself, armed, into someone’s home. That defeats the whole purpose. If you can’t respect someone’s right to keep guns off their private property, it’s hard to get others to respect your right to keep guns on your own. The current situation is intolerable all around: Even under Scalia’s standard, people can’t keep own, and carry any weapons they choose within the bounds of private property, and yet at the same time people can’t forbid weapons on their own property.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/…

• 13. Infowars.com
• 16. LewRockwell.com
• 20. Antiwar.com
• 23. PrisonPlanet.com
• 36. National Rifle Association
• 68. Ron Paul 2008
• 89. Alex Jones’ Prison Planet.tv

Congrats to Alex Jones, Lew Rockwell and Ron Paul supporters.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/…

Gun rights advocates and the National Rifle Association won a victory today with the Florida House’s passage of a contentious bill that would allow employees to bring their guns to work.

The measure (HB 503) is a watered-down version of what the NRA had hoped for but is seen as a compromise that the Senate is also expected to sign off on.

Under the proposal, employees and visitors who have state-issued concealed weapons licenses would be able to bring their weapons to work and leave them locked in their vehicles.

The measure would exempt certain businesses from having to allow the guns, including schools, prisons, nuclear power plants, defense-related businesses and those that deal with explosive materials.

Also exempted would be company-owned or leased cars.

The business community, including the Florida Chamber of Commerce, has vigorously objected to the measure, saying it pits the property rights of employers against the Second Amendment rights permitting guns.

Thing is… gun rights are a subset of property rights. An individual can set whatever rules they wish for their property. If the employer doesn’t want employees to carry guns they don’t carry guns else they have no right to be on the property. There is no such thing as “Second Amendment rights.” The second Amendment says: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” What part of that delegates rights? It assumes a preexisting right to keep and bear arms and indicates the federal government may not infringe that right. They don’t permit guns… they disallow Congress from not permitting guns.

This is the problem with the NRA. They aren’t disciplined. They agree to all sorts of gun control laws and then pull this kind of crap.

Gun Owners of America is a much better organization.

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/…

The California State Court of Appeals announced today their decision to overturn one of the most restrictive gun bans in the country, following a legal battle by attorneys for the National Rifle Association (NRA) and a previous court order against the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. “Today’s decision by the California State Court of Appeals is a big win for the law-abiding citizens and NRA Members of San Francisco,” declared Chris W. Cox, NRA’s chief lobbyist.

In 2005, NRA sought an injunction against the San Francisco Board of Supervisors to prevent them from enacting one of the nation’s most restrictive gun bans. NRA won the injunction, but the City’s mayor and Board of Supervisors ignored the court order and approved a set of penalties, including a $1,000 fine and a jail term of between 90 days and six months, for city residents who own firearms for lawful purposes in their own homes.

Good to hear that even in California laws like this can be shot down. It amazes me how people can willfully ignore moral and practical aspects of gun ownership. Gun prohibition does not work any better than drug prohibition. Those who wish to do harm with a gun will usually have to motivation to acquire one. I’ve met several people who advocated gun prohibition and when I bring up the ease of acquiring one they dismiss it, assuming that it is difficult to obtain one. They have no evidence, they have no reason to think this way besides they don’t know anyone who they could get one from. Or they don’t realize they don’t. They always admit that while they may not know a drug dealer explicitly they could acquire pot in less than a day of trying. Guns aren’t much different. Then you have the statistics on gun ownership and crime. New Hampshire having some of the least restrictive gun laws has some of the lowest crime. This is true for many other states with lax gun restrictions. Correlation does not indicate causation of course but many gun prohibition advocates talk as if it’d be Hollywood Wild Wild West if people were allowed to have and carry guns. I was at the Liberty Forum last weekend with many people open carrying, there were plenty of heated arguments and not a single gun drawn in anger or shot (except on Thursday when they went to the shooting range.) People have the right and in some cases the obligation to protect themselves from individuals who would do them harm. A gun is a tool to help perform that self defense. You can read Rational Review for a few days to see the number of people who do that every day.