We're getting so off topic here...
Back to the issue of whether Disney should or can tell its employees to not bring their guns to work in the cars. Based solely on the law as written Disney is well within their rights to forbid their employees from doing so as they qualify for that waiver. Second, even if that waiver didn't exist and Disney chose to not obey the law, they would sucessfully win this lawsuit. Under either the State or Federal Constitution, both the US Supreme Court and Florida Supreme Court have often weighed in on issues where employers are allowed to dictate all types of behavior on their property. There have been numerous rulings where both Courts have restricted all sorts of free speech rights of employees. The reality is Florida, like most states, is an at will employment state and employers have the right to restrict and curtail all types of activities.
For those of you bringing your guns on Disney property, I'd be very careful because Disney is private property and they may totally be within their rights to restrict you from being in possession of your gun.
Now getting back to the OT discussions...I totally believe in someone's right to own "some" guns for personal protection or hunting. But really is there any reason a citizen needs or should want to own any weapon classified as semi automatic, etc.?? If you're going to go hunting with that kind of a weapon, then you're not much of a hunter.
With respect to all these suspicious arguments about I know someone, castmember or noncastmember, who had a gun and protected themselves. By that same token I also know plenty of castmembers who have never needed a gun and have never been harassed on Disney property or at their homes.
What I can speak about is my personal experiences living in Miami during the 80s and 90s and working as a prosecutor there during the 90s. This idea that people need and use guns for personal protection is a huge urban myth (or in some cases I guess you'd say rural myth). First and foremost, during my years as a prosecutor and living in Miami, I never saw or heard of an instance where someone shot or even scared away a potential intruder or attacker with a gun. It just rarely if ever happens. When it has happened somewhere there is always a cloud of suspicion about it, like the Japanese teenager who was lost and looking for directions who was shot in the South because the gun owner thought he was a burglar. Or better yet the recent Texas case where an elderly man shot two burglars in the back who were running away from his neighbor's home. I have no sympathy for the burglars, but the guy shot them in the back and I believe they were unarmed, thus defeating any real argument of self defense or feeling that he was in danger (although the grand jury disagreed with me on that).
Do you want to know in what situations we would confront these arguments of self defense? Where one guy would shoot another? Basicaly, drug dealers and criminals who would shoot antoher drug dealer and criminal. Do you know where these guys obtained their guns? From breaking into the cars and homes of people in Florida, in particular cars. We had so many instances where lawful gun owners would come into Court asking that their guns be returned to them. Most of the time the serial numbers were filed off so we could not identify their original owners, as that would tie the person to another crime, i.e. a burglary.
And again for those who claim to know people who protected themselves with guns or heard stories, well I also know a few people who have "owned" guns. I say "owned" because everyone I know who has "owned" guns have had it stolen from them, with the exception of two friends. The others have had it stolen from their homes, apartments, and cars. I'm not including the burglary cases I worked on where guns were among the items invariably stolen.
The reality is most victims of violent crime and gun crime in this country are victimized by people they know, not some stranger in the street. Thats a fact.
