From Deseret News archives:

It'll be guns vs. landowners in Senate

Published: Wednesday, Jan. 30, 2008 12:22 a.m. MST
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
A bill pitting gun rights versus personal property rights will now be debated on the Senate floor.

SB67 would block employers from instituting policies that would ban employees from bringing guns onto the company parking lot. The Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee gave the bill a favorable recommendation Tuesday by a 4-2 vote.

For bill sponsor Sen. Mark Madsen, R-Lehi, it's not about gun rights. It's about "life" rights and the ability of people to protect themselves on the road.

"People have characterized this as a gun rights versus property rights bill. That's missing the point," Madsen said. "What this is about is a life right versus a property right ... when you put the opposing interests on the scales, we find that life does weigh heavier than a property right."

Business owners, however, believe they should be able to dictate their own policies and manage their property as they see fit.

"This bill is not business friendly," said Monica Whalan, president of the Employer's Council. "This bill does not give the proper decision-maker the right to make the appropriate balance."

Story continues below
But if employees ban guns from parking lots, "it would be a tremendous blow" to the concealed weapons permit program, said Sen. Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan.

"You aren't going to be able to go very far, in fact I don't think you can go anywhere," Buttars said. "It pretty much neuters your right to carry a concealed weapon."

If employees want to carry a gun in their car, go ahead — just park on the street, said Sen. Ross Romero, D-Salt Lake, who with Sen. Scott McCoy, D-Salt Lake, voted against the bill.

"The property rights of the business should be paramount in this case," Romero said. "It may be a little less accessible for them to walk a little bit further and park on a public street."

Gun owners spoke in favor of the bill, saying each individual has a right to protect himself.

"If it's not approved, they are defenseless going from home to work and from work to return home," said Elwood Powell of the Utah Shooting Sports Council. "If a person decides he's not going to abide by his employer's rule, he's forced to leave (his gun) at home."


E-mail: ldethman@desnews.com

Recent comments

a. Workplace gun bans are pushed by big city corporate lawyers and...

John | Jan. 30, 2008 at 7:10 p.m.

Wonderful! Utah is doing great things to protect its citizens. I...

Pro2A | Jan. 30, 2008 at 5:16 p.m.

Maybe I am misunderstanding the issue here. Business's feel they...

Gary | Jan. 30, 2008 at 4:04 p.m.

previousnext

Latest comments

I knew her only in passing but what I know of her is admirable. I truly hope...

They had to split it up for the rest of the schools in the MWC (twice now)....

Police seek missing WVC woman

Susan I am concerned and hoping for your safe return. Please be safe, and...

Store planning for Palin crush

so if an autobiography is written by someone other then who the book is about...

then all the killer toxins utah gives off to the other states like high...

To "Not Educated | 4:48 p.m." nice hack and misrepresentation. My original...

I hope this study didn't cost much! It's just common sense that this is the...

The Utah Flash Slogan.... Come see the Utah Flash were your trust and money...

Letters: Health care scam

jeff | 8:51 a.m. Dec. 8, 2009 to: KM ============ To all you...

@GJC 4:34 p.m. If the model predicts steadily-climbing temperatures, and...

Advertisements