open carry almost gone bad in lincoln

[D.A.D.]

cckyle,
This bill, had it not been sidetracked, would have resolved the issue as I understand it.  I don't know what it might take to get it moving again, but I intend on writing both to my senator and to Sen. Christensen to see if that will help in some manner.

AAllen, I will be sending my email address to you via the NFOA "Contact Us" site so I can send you the information I have gathered to this point.  I think it will enable you to understand my concerns and the concern I have for all CHP holders regarding the legal opinions held by different branches of the LE community.  I hope to have that to you within the next few hours.

D.A.D.

[D.A.D.]

AAllen,
I have sent in my contact information and have a Word document that I will send to you.

[FLUFF]

Off subject a bit. having a firearm in my vehichle at work is not a crime but it will make me uneployed real quick. I need my job so my employer is restricting my rights in a round about way..
Need to work on this >>>

FLUFF

[AAllen]

Fluff there was a bill last year and I hear there is a good chance that it will be back next year.

[lneuke]

Why would that make you unemployed?  Do you go around at work bragging you have a gun in your car?  No one except you should know, just keep it in a locked compartment and call it good.

[D.A.D.]

Gentlemen,
Having corresponded outside of this forum with AAllen and others, I would like to make this post as an update and somewhat of a conclusion to my search for clarification on State and City law on the legality of parking a personal vehicle on a City-owned parking lot open to the public especially if you are an employee of that City.

I would like to give special thanks to Sen. Mark Christensen and his staff member, Dan Wiles, for providing clarity on this issue.  Of special help was his reference to Neb. Rev. Stat. 18-1703 that I had not heard of prior to his response.  Since I had not heard it or seen it referenced in any discussions, it could be that it is not well known by others within the CHP or firearm owners community either so I will quote it here:

"18-1703. Ownership, possession, and transportation of concealed handguns; power of cities and villages; existing ordinance, permit, or regulation; null and void.

Cities and villages shall not have the power to regulate the ownership, possession, or transportation of a concealed handgun, as such ownership, possession, or transportation is authorized under the Concealed Handgun Permit Act, except as expressly provided by state law, and shall not have the power to require registration of a concealed handgun owned, possessed, or transported by a permitholder under the act. Any existing city or village ordinance, permit, or regulation regulating the ownership, possession, or transportation of a concealed handgun, as such ownership, possession, or transportation is authorized under the act, except as expressly provided under state law, and any existing city or village ordinance, permit, or regulation requiring the registration of a concealed handgun owned, possessed, or transported by a permitholder under the act, is declared to be null and void as against any permitholder possessing a valid permit under the act.

Source Laws 2009, LB430, § 5; Laws 2010, LB817, § 2.Effective Date: July 15, 2010 Cross References Concealed Handgun Permit Act, see section 69-2427."

This law (for some reason tucked away in a different section of State Law) convinces me that Neb. Rev. Stat. 69-2441(3) exempts any CHP holder from any prohibition that any City may make against the possession, transportation and secure storage of a handgun in a private vehicle parked in or on any City-owned or operated parking facility (whether an open lot or a multi-level facility) that is open to the public.  This should apply equally to any CHP holder whether or not they are an employee of the City in question because (in my opinion) any employee policies of a City are City regulations that are regulating the “ownership, possession, or transportation or a concealed handgun.”

So, DanW, AAllen, and all others, though I wanted to agree with you earlier on in this forum, I needed to find out what the laws had to say before I felt confident in exercising my rights under 69-441(3).  I hope my search for this clarification can provide more awareness of the laws to others as well. They are in no way implied to be a legal opinion, just my findings and the conclusion to which I have come.

D.A.D.

[D.A.D.]

Off subject a bit. having a firearm in my vehichle at work is not a crime but it will make me uneployed real quick. I need my job so my employer is restricting my rights in a round about way..
Need to work on this >>>

FLUFF

FLUFF,
See my posting from a few minutes ago.  It is my understanding that if your employer's parking lot (even though it is privately owned) is open to the public, then your employer cannot restrict you from securely storing a handgun in your personal vehicle while it is parked in the parking lot.  I cannot speak to your particular employer's employment policies (I would ask to see a written copy of them).  If the lot is not open to the public, then I don't think you can find relief from the employment policies because it is private property and we all want to be able to exercise our rights as property owners.

The reintroduction and passage of LB785 by Sen. Christensen would eliminate this prohibition because it basically would be legal to possess a lawfully owned legal firearm in your personal vehicle wherever your personal vehicle is allowed to be otherwise.  In other words (and this is a mind-blowing concept to those who do not understand "freedom"), if it is yours and it is otherwise legal, it is lawful to store in your vehicle whether it is a firearm or a basket of apples.

Another wildly beneficial thing about LB 785 is that does not restrict the possession of a firearm in a personal vehicle to only CHP holders or to only handguns (remember, no loaded shotguns!).  It would show that the State acknowledges this right regarding any and all firearms and firearms owners which simply gives credence to the 2nd Amendment.  This is a huge thing for the State to acknowledge so specifically.

I believe Sen. Christensen's bill, if it is reintroduced in 2013, deserves all of the support that can possibly be mustered.  Like all things that have to do with freedom and liberty, just because it is your legal right doesn't mean that it is going to be acknowledged or respected by those who don't like it.

Yes, you need your job and you need to do what you can to keep it and advance your career.  But, if  you want to exercise your Federal and State Constitutional rights, you may need to do some hard work to accomplish that goal.  "Give me liberty or give me death" isn't quite as cliche when one is talking about their own liberty or their own life.  Fight the fight, that is what freedom is all about.

D.A.D.

[cckyle]

If my understanding of the proposed bill is right, your employer cannot terminate your employment for having a firearm/ammunition in your vehicle, but it does have to be hidden from view and locked up accordingly.  I think this bill is aimed more at the CHP holders, because the firearm has to remain concealed/hidden from view.  However it would also apply if you had a long gun locked up properly in the trunk. 

To me the bill is extending the same right's you have at home, regarding firearms, to your vehicle as personal property, no matter where it is parked; as long as the firearm is hidden from view and stored properly.   

[D.A.D.]

cckyle,
It is easy to find a copy of the bill on line and it is very short.  In my opinion, I like the way it is written (using language provided by the NRA) because it does not reference personal concealed carry of handguns at all. Section 1(2) is a major portion which simply states that "any" employer "shall not establish, maintain, or enforce a policy or rule that prohibits" an employee from storing a firearm (of any type) that is legal and lawfully owned in their personal vehicles when their vehicles are where they are otherwise allowed to be.

So, yes, it is like your house to a certain degree.  You can't be fired or punished by your employer for having a legal object that they may not like in your personal vehicle.

Oh, how I miss the days of seeing a rifle in a rack in the back window of a pickup truck . . . . .

D.A.D.

[cckyle]

I had referenced the proposed bill.  It does say it has to be kept from "ordinary observation".  To me that seems to mean that if you do a walk around of the vehicle you wouldn't be able to see it.  So it couldn't be left in a gun rack.

Thinking about this though, if this bill passes; it simply states the firearm has to be kept from "ordinary observation".  It goes on to say, "OR kept from ordinary observation and locked within the trunk, glove box, or interior of the person's privately-owned motor vehicle or a container securely affixed to such vehicle".  But if the firearm was just kept from "ordinary observation", say under a coat in the back seat, if one did not have a CHP wouldn't this be considered a concealed weapon?  Or even if you had a CHP and had a rifle wouldn't this be a concealed weapons charge???  At least until you left the vehicle or you left the parking lot and uncovered the firearm.  To get a concealed weapons charge the weapon has to be concealed AND easily accessible, right???  That would be why an unloaded rifle/shotgun cased in a trunk cannot get you a concealed weapon charge because it's not easily accessible. 

Would the CHP laws/requirements trump this bill as a CHP holder? Or would this bill trump the CHP laws/requirements???  Meaning if you went to work and parked your vehicle, as a CHP holder would you no longer need to "lock up" your handgun just keep it from "ordinary observation"?? What about one who does not hold a CHP??? 

That's a lot of questions. lol.  Maybe I am just over thinking this, but the more I think about it to me it seems like in a sense this bill's contents may clash in certain areas with laws in place for concealed weapon and/or CHP laws/regulations.

Maybe we need to start a new thread regarding lb785???

Below is a link to the proposed bill in case anyone didn't have it or is interested.

http://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/Intro/LB785.pdf 

[D.A.D.]

Sen. Christensen, who introduced LB 785 in 2012, is receptive in any and all input regarding a bill that he could introduce next year.  The intent of the bill was to provide a better balance between private property rights and 2nd Amendment rights.

At this time, many employers (private and public) are using the wording of 69-2441(2) as a means of prohibiting CHP holders and all other firearms owners (remember CHP means "handguns" only) from storing their private property in their private property on someone else's private property.  If you can't park your vehicle with your firearm(s) in it on your employer's property, then the effect is that your right to possess, transport, and store firearm(s) and is rendered null and void if you don't have a place to park your vehicle.  You have to leave your firearm(s) at home and are not able to exercise your right to self-protection while traveling to and from work with a firearm because you can't leave it in your vehicle while you are working.

LB 785, whatever wording it might contain, needs to be like Neb. Rev. Stat. 12-1204.04(1)(e) and (f) which give firearm owners relief from the prohibition of firearms on school grounds by allowing them to be secured and completely covered in their vehicles while on school grounds "with no part of the firearm exposed."

I think the idea is for firearms owners to be discrete in their storage of firearms in vehicles and for employers (or people in control of the property) to relax their restrictions so that both parties are able to have their private property rights honored.  Both parties would release the other from any civil liabilities that might arise from the presence or discharge of a firearm on/in the other's property.

In this day and age, you don't want to encourage anyone to knock out your car window to help themselves to some inviting personal possession that is lying out in the open.  I just miss the days when people respected other people's property and would not steal a rifle out of a rack in the back window of a pickup truck even if the windows were down and the door unlocked.  Sigh.

D.A.D.

[cckyle]

I don't remember a time seeing rifles in rifles racks in the back of pickups, let alone windows down and unlocked doors. lol  Hard to imagine.  I did see a video on youtube once of a rifle rack that went on the ceiling in a jeep, but not in the window.  I could see this being useful for hunting/hunters still.  Is there a law outlawing rifles in rifle racks, or has it just become not common practice due to theft?  I tried to search on the Nebraska legislature site for something regarding this but couldn't find anything. 

Also lb785 didn't get voted down, did it??  I thought it was just postponed until next session, and may go up for vote next session, or no?? 

[lefty]

Years ago it was common place to see 2 or 3 rifles, shotguns and maybe a lariat or two hanging on the gun rack of an unlocked pickup with the windows down in our town.  Still see the rifles at times but the vehicles  are usaslly locked now days.  I carried a .22 Remington in my school car, which was left unlocked daily at our high school and mine wasn't the only one.  Times have changed!

[AAllen]

Also lb785 didn't get voted down, did it??  I thought it was just postponed until next session, and may go up for vote next session, or no?? 

LB785 did not make it out of committee last year.  It was just kind of being floated to see what the reception was and what may need to be changed to get a workable bill.  It is my understanding that a new bill that is very similar to LB785 will be introduced in the upcoming session. 

At this point Senator Christensen's office is looking at the comments received about it and trying to get the new bill written.  Note this bill addresses issues beyond Concealed Carry but also protects hunters that may have their bags and guns packed so they can take off traveling once they get off work, or perhaps the person that goes to the range on their way to work.  It also should or will address all weapons such as can a hunter keep a bow in their vehicle (with or without arrows), what if they were called in on their day of for an emergency and had been out hunting.

These are some of the many issues and comments that are being worked on during the off session time.

[AAllen]

To get back onto topic, D.A.D.'s initial problem is still an issue, he can see how he is not breaking the law and in fact there is a law there to protect him from criminal prosecution.  But the Lincoln City prosecutor's office interprets the laws in an entirely different way than how anything is written.  Unfortunately the only way that there can be a challenge to this would for someone to get charged, if someone has a spare 20 or 30 thousand laying around to get this started we can see if we can come up with another way.

At this point I don't see how we can legislate away the stupidity, but if someone has an idea I'm open to listening.

[D.A.D.]

I guess I'm a little slow, or ignorant, but I had a light come on in my head today.  I came to understand that the section of the Nebraska Statutes under which the concealed carry laws are listed is Chapter 69 which is reserved for laws regarding Personal Property.  The concealed carry laws are all about personal property not about owning guns.

The laws are not about owning personal property ( I like owning and using guns), but the laws are about where I can take my personal property without violating the personal property of others and of the right they have to control their property.  With the first passage of the law in 2006, cities began to say, "not on our property."  But state law was changed to say that they could not say that.  Now cities cannot ban concealed carry of my property on their property.

Businesses can allow or disallow my personal property on their personal property (inside their buildings, events, or activities), but not their parking lots.  If I can't keep my personal property in my personal vehicle while on their personal property, then I can't have my personal property anywhere but on my personal property (at home).  Fortunately, the state law was modified to recognize that my vehicle is my personal property and, as long as I stored my firearms securely in my vehicle, the other property owners had to accept that degree of respecting my rights.

The issue now is, employers, at least as they are interpreting the law to fit their bias.  Unfortunately, LB 785 or the final reading of LB 430 in 2009 were not advanced as they were presented.  If one sentence in 69-2441(2) had not been struck out, this issue would be resolved.  It read, "A permitholder carrying a concealed hangun in a vehicle into or  onto any place or premises does not violate this section so long as . . . ." it is stored securely in a personal vehicle.  This was addressed to employers not being able to bar the storage of handguns in employees personal vehicles.  But it was struck from the final law.

So this battle is clearly about property rights.  And though the Nebraska State Patrol seems to clear this up in the Nebraska Administrative Code 018.05 and 018.06, it has not been tested in court to see who has final say where the property rights line is drawn.  That is why the reintroduction of LB 785 by Sen. Christensen (and maybe other senators), properly worded and passed would clear up this huge grey area without some poor individual CHP holder losing his job and having to fight it out in court.

Sen. Christensen's bill needs to be written to contain all the necessary safeties to allow employers the comfort level (read freedom from civil law suits over damages caused by an employee with a firearm in their vehicle) to allow employees to store firearms in their vehicles in company parking lots.  If you have to park in your employer's lot and the employer says "not on my property" then you have to leave your firearm(s) at home on your property unless you have another parking option where it is legal (like on the street).

So, Sen. Christensen, is there anything we can do to help because many of us need the help this sort of bill would provide.  When can we start writing to our senators to try to pursuade them that we can be responsible for our own actions and handle our firearms properly when they are on our person or personal property (vehicle) anywhere we go?

D.A.D.

[D.A.D.]

Here is an article regarding employees storing firearms in their personal vehicles on company parking lots in Texas.  Some of you may have seen this already, but I thought I would put it out there so everybody can see what an issue this is for many firearms owners, CHP or not.

http://www.gunreports.com/news/news/NRA-ILA-Wants-Help-on-Texas-Parking-Lot-Law_4385-1.html?ET=gunreports:e1285:204086a:&st=email

D.A.D.


"Our generation has forgotten that the system of private property is the most important guarantee of freedom."   - Friedrich A. Hayek, 1944