Policy can be backed by law but does not always carry the force of law... it depends on the penalties that can be brought to bear for a violation. Being asked to leave company property over a violation of policy, while it may be legal for an employer to demand, is different than being arrested.
It may seem like hairsplitting, but the reason it was mentioned in the first place is that ST&T has a policy (not backed by law) of not endorsing or supporting illegal acts.
Violate policy at the risk of being disciplined, that we can discuss - and some might even endorse without penalty here.
Violating law, we won't discuss save to say 'don't do it.'
Clearer?
I clearly understand the difference between discussing violating the law vs violating policy, and the legal ramifications of that on this website.
And yes, your explanation is clearer, thank you.
However, members on this site come from all over the United States...and beyond. The laws affecting one member are not necessarily consistent with the laws affecting another.
I mentioned South Carolina, where I am a resident. Section 16-23-20 (Unlawful carrying of handgun; exceptions.) says:
It is unlawful for anyone to carry about the person any handgun, whether concealed or not, except as follows, unless otherwise specifically prohibited by law:
(13) the owner or the person in legal possession or the person in legal control of a fixed place of business, while at the fixed place of business, and the employee of a fixed place of business, other than a business subject to Section 16-23-465, while at the place of business; however, the employee may exercise this privilege only after: (a) acquiring a permit pursuant to item (12), and (b) obtaining the permission of the owner or person in legal control or legal possession of the premises;
And the statute I mentioned earlier says that a business owner can also restrict weapons on the premises as well.
So the reason I bring this up is specifically because in SOME places a violation of a company exclusion policy IS a violation o fthe law. And the particulars of the circumstances involved are important in making this determination.
And just because a company may only fire a person for a violation of company policy doesn't mean that the person didn't violate a law. The decision to bring charges against the individual typically rests with the company, which may or may not pursue that avenue.
As an example of variances in state laws, in Texas a business cannot deny an employee the right to legally have a firearm in their own car, even in a company parking lot. This is not the case in South Carolina, where a business can restrict this on the premises as well as the work place, per the statute I cited in my earlier posting.
So it seems to me that it behooves us to recognize the legal circumstances which are pertinent to our own situation when we make such statements about carrying at work. Since the policy of this site is not to advocate or condone breaking the law, we can't just say "I'm gonna carry anyway, bugger 'em". We have to put it into the context which is applicable to our case.
We have a lot of well meaning people on this site who rightly value their ability, and right, to provide for their own defense. And we each have a responsibility to advocate the PROPER way of going about that.
