2nd amendment poll in Indy Star

[indykid]

For what it's worth, a little more than halfway down on the right is a poll asking if we should have a law allowing us to keep firearms in our vehicles at work. While our second amendment and Indiana Constitution affirm our rights, many employers disagree.

IndyStar.com | The Indianapolis Star | Indianapolis news, sports, business, community, entertainment, yellow pages and classifieds. Serving Indianapolis, Indiana

Please hit this poll. As of now we are losing to the criminals.

 

[shooter521]

Done. Not that newspaper polls (especially in the Star) mean a tinker's cuss, of course...

 

[melensdad]

Done. Not that newspaper polls (especially in the Star) mean a tinker's cuss, of course...

Done and ditto

 

[clt46910]

I voted as well. Seems we are a little bit behind.

 

[HandK]

Done!

 

[jeremy]

Current as of...
20100112 1156


Should Indiana pass a law allowing employees to keep guns in their vehicles at work?
Yes: 46.0%
No: 54.0%

Total votes cast: 422

 

[IndyBeerman]

Yes: 45.6%
No: 54.4%

 

[SSGSAD]

poll

I just voted, YES, of course, we are losing by 7 %..... Vote...

 

[pudly]

Done. Not that newspaper polls (especially in the Star) mean a tinker's cuss, of course...

Technically true. But I can't help but think that some of our state legislators might look at the results and allow it to influence their vote on the current bill. Therefore it is worth a vote.

 

[shibumiseeker]

Just voted and we are closing the gap a little.

 

[MTC]

Yes 48%
No 52%

Too bad there even has to be polls or legislation on this.

 

[Roadie]

The wordind of the question is kinda misleading. I wish it gave a little more info as to the reality of the Bill. Something like:

Should Indiana pass a law allowing employees, who already have the right to carry guns elsewhere, to keep guns in their vehicles at work?

Oh well...

 

[WabashMX5]

Just voted; it's now 48.9% for, 51.1% against.

It's a tough call for me, because it pits employers' private-property rights against employees' 2A -- both of which are about as fundamental as rights get.

Employers who think "gun-free" (OSHA-for-criminals) zones are safer are demonstrably wrong, but they have a right to be wrong on their own property. It's just that, if they're not even allowed in a locked car, it has the effect of disarming employees on their commute.

If employers are worried about someone doing a parking lot smash-and-grab, then using the gun in the workplace, I wonder if those fears could be reduced by requiring a trigger lock or locked case, in addition to requiring that the car be locked.... Just thinking out loud....

 

[Brown]

Done (voted yes of course)

Gap is closing little each time

49.2% yes
50.8% No

 

[shibumiseeker]

Just voted; it's now 48.9% for, 51.1% against.

It's a tough call for me, because it pits employers' private-property rights against employees' 2A -- both of which are about as fundamental as rights get.

....

It's not quite as cut and dry as that. In essence what the employer is saying is that you may not carry a gun too and from work as well. To an extent your vehicle is an extension of your home and while not quite subject to the same privacy issues as your home, it has similar protections. That you could be fired for refusing to unlock your vehicle and allow your employer to search it is problematic.

 

[Wesley929]

560 Total votes. 49.6% Yes 50.4% No.
We're closing in on 50/50.

I like to vote in these if for no other reason just to show the sheeple that WE do like our guns.

 

[WabashMX5]

It's not quite as cut and dry as that. In essence what the employer is saying is that you may not carry a gun too and from work as well.

Right. That's what I was saying in the next sentence: "It's just that, if they're not even allowed in a locked car, it has the effect of disarming employees on their commute."

To an extent your vehicle is an extension of your home and while not quite subject to the same privacy issues as your home, it has similar protections. That you could be fired for refusing to unlock your vehicle and allow your employer to search it is problematic.

Good analogy -- especially since our State constitutional search-and-seizure provision has been interpreted to recognize a higher expectation of privacy in cars than the Fourth Amendment does. Obviously, only the government is bound by the Fourth Amendment, but the analogy is still useful.

 

[STAG556]

Good news folks, currently were at 584 votes and have closed the gap to 50/50 as at 13:16

 

[smiley69_300]

Done. Gettin closer.

Yes: 49.9%


No: 50.1%
Total votes cast: 591

 

[STAG556]

And if you refresh the page and try to vote again it doesn't count your vote... damn computers