About Us   |   Issues & Campaigns   |   Media   |   Links   |   Get Involved   |   New to the Issue?   |   Donate   
Sign Up for our Email List:  
Home > Issues & Campaigns > Guns, Democracy and Freedom > Guns in the Workplace > ConocoPhillips vs. the NRA

ConocoPhillips vs. the NRA


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.

ConocoPhillipsThe 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, is suing to block enforcement of the new law. ConocoPhillips understands that guns in the workplace are a recipe for trouble, and it does not believe it should be required to compromise the safety of its business simply because the Oklahoma legislature wants to pander to gun rights activists.

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 has bought billboards and other advertising across the country telling Americans that ConocoPhillips is hostile to gun rights because the company thinks it should be able to decide for itself how best to protect it workers and facilities.

The NRA has never allowed common sense to get in the way of its ideological agenda, but the ConocoPhillips boycott sets 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 said it plans to push for passage of similar laws in other states. If the business community allows itself to be bullied in Oklahoma, then more expansive proposals are likely to be introduced in legislatures across the nation. 

The most disturbing part about what has 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.

Additional Resources
  • Click here to read the legal brief in the ConocoPhillips v. C. Brad Henry case

 




Email this page to a friend Print Friendly Version
Kintera Empowered Community