When Weyerhaeuser Corp. fired a small number of employees in 2002 for keeping guns in their cars in violation of the company's safety policy, the National Rifle Association saw an opportunity to push its more-guns-are-always-better ideology one step further than it had ever gone before: into the workplace.
The NRA talked the Oklahoma legislature into passing a law prohibiting employers from banning guns in their parking lots. The law applies only to guns in vehicles, but employers with lots near protected areas or inside security checkpoints are now powerless to keep guns out. Workers at oil refineries, chemical makers, and power plants can bring high-capacity semiautomatic weapons and even sniper rifles to their job sites.
ConocoPhillips, an energy company based in Oklahoma, sued to block enforcement of the new law. ConocoPhillips understood that guns in the workplace are a recipe for trouble, and it did not believe it should be required to compromise the safety of its business simply because the Oklahoma legislature wanted to pander to gun rights activists. In November 2004, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma agreed, entering a temporary restraining order barring enforcement of the guns in the workplace law.
The NRA responded by calling for a national boycott of Conoco and Phillips66 gas stations (never mind that ConocoPhillips doesn't actually own any of these stations). The NRA bought billboards and other advertising across the country telling Americans that ConocoPhillips is hostile to gun rights and an enemy of freedom. The District Court thought differently, however, and made its restraining order permament in October 2007.
The NRA has never allowed common sense to get in the way of its ideological agenda, but the ConocoPhillips boycott set a new standard for gun rights advocacy run amok. Even where a workplace is not the site of inherently hazardous activities, managers may quite reasonably conclude that allowing guns in the area would be a bad idea. Schools, hospitals, and correctional institutions are likely to have good reasons to bar guns - whether they are kept in glove compartments or shoulder holsters.
The NRA has since pushed for passage of similar guns in the workplace laws in other states. The most disturbing part about what happened in Oklahoma is the precedent set by a law that says one person's right to have a gun trumps another person's right to keep guns off of his or her property. The NRA claims to be defending constitutional rights and individual freedom, but it apparently has no regard for the rights or freedom of anyone who doesn't want to be surrounded by guns at all times and in all places.
-
Click here to read the legal brief in the ConocoPhillips v. C. Brad Henry case
