Comments on: Funny, I thought my car was my property

By: jed

jed — Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:48:50 +0000

The extension of the “defending the home” doctrine to include personal vehicles is, of course, one I agree with. In a way, I suppose, it’s similar to foreign embassies being considered a little piece of the home state within foreign soil.

But that fact that you car is, I hope, portable makes a difference. Consider the argument of burden. When balancing the rights of one party against another, is it more burdensome for Whirlpool to accomoate you, or for you to accomodate them? Since you aren’t forced to park on their property, you can easily accomodate their property right by simply not going there. You can also argue that it’s easy for Whirlpool to reverse their policy and accomodate you, except that because you have the choice of not going there, they aren’t really infringing.

And dangit, I know I phrased this much better over at THR several months ago, but I can’t find it now.

By: SayUncle

SayUncle — Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:45:27 +0000

I disagree. If you were, for example, carrying a gun into their building or on their parking lot (not in your car) i could take their side.

However, my car is equivalent to my home.

By: Kirk Parker

Kirk Parker — Tue, 16 Nov 2004 06:51:10 +0000

Scratch Whirlpool off the list of companies to do business with.

By: jed

jed — Tue, 16 Nov 2004 03:01:47 +0000

Well, I’m too late for much beyond the “ditto” comment.

I’ve had jobs where part of the company policy was to prohibit guns on the property. As the property owner, they do have that right.

This issue seems pretty divisive to gun owners. I recall a thread over at THR where this went on for a while. The basic argument being, “Nobody can deny me my right to self defense.” Except that you’re not forced to enter the property, so if you choose to abide by the policy, an enter without your gun, well, that’s a choice you’ve made. You can also choose not to enter, and retain your right to self defense.

By: Manish

Manish — Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:30:29 +0000

I agree with X..the issue is that Whirlpool owns the parking lot.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Mon, 15 Nov 2004 16:59:48 +0000

It’s not a question of whether or not the car (or, for that matter, the gun) is your property. It’s a question of how much control the company should have over its property.