IBJNews

Workplace guns bill gets final legislative OK

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In a victory for gun rights over property rights, the Indiana General Assembly approved a bill that lets workers keep firearms locked in their cars in trunks or out of sight while parked on company property.

The Indiana House approved the bill 74-20 Thursday and the Senate passed it 41-9. It now goes to Gov. Mitch Daniels.

A last-minute compromise exempts some public utilities, chemical plants and agencies whose drivers transport developmentally disabled people. The bill also exempts schools, child care centers, domestic violence shelters and group homes.

Opponents say the bill can lead to workplace violence. Supporters say it merely allows people with legal rights to carry weapons to keep them locked up in their cars at work.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • safety on the job
    I am a hunter and gun owner. But I am oppose to having locked guns in a vehicle at the place of work. They are not needed at work. Our legislatures have metal detectors and State Police Officers to protect them when they are in session. We don't need someone to become upset and in a moment of passion go to their car to retrieve their gun. Such action could cost someone their life and ruin the life of the gun owner and their family.
  • amen
    There is a significant percentage of people that talk about public safetyâ?¦these folks behave as if they are bewildered that there is so much violence. But, these same folks support guns being accessible in all facets of our society. Yet no blame is put on guns. It is â??people that killâ?¦not guns.â?? What a load of garbage.
    It truly is false indignation. Americans love killingâ?¦as long as it is â??not an unborn child.â?? Movies, television shows celebrate killing and gun violenceâ?¦couple that with almost instant access to gunsâ??by any Tom, Dick, or Harry in this country. Geeâ?¦I wonder why there is so much killing?!?!?!? It is the instant answer. Guns are idolized.
    Every time someone tries to remark or discuss gun violence as a matter of public concern. Lobbyists, the NRA, and paranoid 2nd amendment peopleâ??wrap themselves in the flag, sing Lee Greenwood like it is â??Kum-Ba-Yahâ?? and squash any public discourse by labeling the concerned as communist, haters of America, or the worst label everâ?¦LIBERAL.
  • Safety vs. Rights?
    What is this love affair with guns and access to them? When is safety of our kids and neighbors and co-workers going to trump the need to have guns within reach at all hours? Haven't there been enough accidents? What am I missing here? 74-20 in the house and 41-9 in the Senate? This reminds me of the Guns in Parks bill not so long ago...why do proponents of this bill feel as if you need access to guns (in cars) at the workplace?

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. Apologies for the wall of text. I promise I had this nicely formatted in paragraphs in Notepad before pasting here.

    2. I believe that is incorrect Sir, the people's tax-dollars are NOT paying for the companies investment. Without the tax-break the company would be paying an ADDITIONAL $11.1 million in taxes ON TOP of their $22.5 Million investment (Building + IT), for a total of $33.6M or a 50% tax rate. Also, the article does not specify what the total taxes were BEFORE the break. Usually such a corporate tax-break is a 'discount' not a 100% wavier of tax obligations. For sake of example lets say the original taxes added up to $30M over 10 years. $12.5M, New Building $10.0M, IT infrastructure $30.0M, Total Taxes (Example Number) == $52.5M ININ's Cost - $1.8M /10 years, Tax Break (Building) - $0.75M /10 years, Tax Break (IT Infrastructure) - $8.6M /2 years, Tax Breaks (against Hiring Commitment: 430 new jobs /2 years) == 11.5M Possible tax breaks. ININ TOTAL COST: $41M Even if you assume a 100% break, change the '30.0M' to '11.5M' and you can see the Company will be paying a minimum of $22.5, out-of-pocket for their capital-investment - NOT the tax-payers. Also note, much of this money is being spent locally in Indiana and it is creating 430 jobs in your city. I admit I'm a little unclear which tax-breaks are allocated to exactly which expenses. Clearly this is all oversimplified but I think we have both made our points! :) Sorry for the long post.

    3. Clearly, there is a lack of a basic understanding of economics. It is not up to the company to decide what to pay its workers. If companies were able to decide how much to pay their workers then why wouldn't they pay everyone minimum wage? Why choose to pay $10 or $14 when they could pay $7? The answer is that companies DO NOT decide how much to pay workers. It is the market that dictates what a worker is worth and how much they should get paid. If Lowe's chooses to pay a call center worker $7 an hour it will not be able to hire anyone for the job, because all those people will work for someone else paying the market rate of $10-$14 an hour. This forces Lowes to pay its workers that much. Not because it wants to pay them that much out of the goodness of their heart, but because it has to pay them that much in order to stay competitive and attract good workers.

    4. GOOD DAY to you I am Mr Howell Henry, a Reputable, Legitimate & an accredited money Lender. I loan money out to individuals in need of financial assistance. Do you have a bad credit or are you in need of money to pay bills? i want to use this medium to inform you that i render reliable beneficiary assistance as I'll be glad to offer you a loan at 2% interest rate to reliable individuals. Services Rendered include: *Refinance *Home Improvement *Inventor Loans *Auto Loans *Debt Consolidation *Horse Loans *Line of Credit *Second Mortgage *Business Loans *Personal Loans *International Loans. Please write back if interested. Upon Response, you'll be mailed a Loan application form to fill. (No social security and no credit check, 100% Guaranteed!) I Look forward permitting me to be of service to you. You can contact me via e-mail howellhenryloanfirm@gmail.com Yours Sincerely MR Howell Henry(MD)

    5. It is sad to see these races not have a full attendance. The Indy Car races are so much more exciting than Nascar. It seems to me the commenters here are still a little upset with Tony George from a move he made 20 years ago. It was his decision to make, not yours. He lost his position over it. But I believe the problem in all pro sports is the escalating price of admission. In todays economy, people have to pay much more for food and gas. The average fan cannot attend many events anymore. It's gotten priced out of most peoples budgets.

    ADVERTISEMENT