M8 Stoltzfus

Legally and morally, I do not think employees have a right to keep guns in their cars. As Case 8.4 stated, the workplace is private property and thereby the owner of the land, in this case the employer, can determine legally whether or not guns maybe allowed on the campus. With an employment at will contact, the employee is agreeing to adhere to company policy. While firing someone for simply having a gun in their car in the parking lot seems not quite right, if it was explicitly stated that it was against company policy, it is not unjust for them to be excused. Companies are right to be concerned about guns on work property. A locked car is not a vault. They are broken into a robbed frequently and to have the liability of a stolen gun is much worse than most other thing that would be left in a car. A weapon so easily accessible would not be safe. If a company did determine that their employees were significantly safer going to and from work with a gun and allowed guns on in the parking lot, I could see the value in that as well. Ultimately, the employer should get to determine and uphold a gun policy because it is company property and there are many employee’s safety to consider.

The Second Amendment states the right to bear arms is to form a militia to ensure a free state. A militia is a citizen made army for the purpose of either supplementing the national army or to protect the people from it’s own government if that government abuses it’s power. In either case, there would more than likely be advance notice to forming this militia. I would not expect people to have to leave their work place at a moments notice with their weapons to defend the people. The NRA has construed the Second Amendment to mean that citizens should be able to have a gun anytime and anyplace. They are definitely guilty of politicizing most gun issues. I think the state is right create restriction on guns in terms of purchasing and things of that sort. But in this case of guns in parking lots, it should be left to the companies and employees to determine themselves individually.

Allowing any guns, even or especially   handled by teachers, into a school of defenseless children does not make any sense to me. Guns are deadly and unpredictable. Just a few week ago, a gun-trained teacher’s fire arm accidentally went off and injured a student. If teachers had gun, there would be a greater opportunity for a untrained student to get a hold of one and create damage. Claiming that these teachers would be highly trained in impractical. Most of the teacher I know barely have time for themselves between classes, lesson planning, and grading assignments. To expect them to fit enough training and practice time with a gun to be proficient enough to only shoot an attacker is unfair. In a video I recently watched (and can unfortunately not find to reference it) a reporter from a well know new agency visited a facility where teachers were being trained to use guns in schools. In a simulated school shooter situation, one of the teachers shot a fake innocent student. When the reporter asked to trainer about it, he said that was expected and acceptable because it would save the lives of the other children. Do we really want to put teachers in the position where they are shooting students, even if it is in the crossfire with an attacker?

2 Comments for “M8 Stoltzfus”

Avatar photo

Josselynn Schneider-Curry


I thought your response well well thought out and well written. I took the argument that guns are a legal right, but you addressed some points I thought about when writing my response. Your discussion about company policy and how employees agree to that from the beginning is very valid. As we saw in the text, there are all sorts of limitations employees have found themselves under.

Also, thank you for the mention of recent accident with the firearm. I had not heard about that and is a good example of how easy it is for accidents to happen.

“Do we really want to put teachers in the position where they are shooting students, even if it is in the crossfire with an attacker?” To add on to this… Do we want to be putting teachers in a position to shoot anyone, even an attacker? What if someone didn’t want to carry a gun. What kind of pressure would they get from parents or other teachers? They went in to a profession to teach.

Avatar photo



On the flip side of what you said, if police cannot search my car without reason of suspicion, then it is therefore private property. So what I have in my car should not matter to anyone who’s property I drive onto. For instance, although I do not carry a weapon in my car, I am not going to tell the staff of Fred Meyer that I have something in my car when I park there, though they own the lot and have every right to know. They are smart enough not to ask as they are a business and want loyal customers. You make some good points.