Since parking lots are excluded under 46.035 can an employer, such as Wal-Mart, tell a licensed handgun carrier who is employed by Wal-Mart they may not bring guns and leave them in their car if the car is parked on Wal-Mart's parking lot. Is Wal-Mart violating the law by restricting the ability to carry a gun on their parking lot or is it their right as an employer to make this restriction? Another question is whether this is an appropriate question to raise in an attorney general's opinion? We are being asked to request an attorney general's opinion, but I think this is a legal question of 2nd amendment rights v. employer authority? Can the attorney general decide this issue?

[This message was edited by pkdyer on 04-20-04 at .]

Take a look at Govt. Code Sec. 411.203:
RIGHTS OF EMPLOYERS. This subchapter does not prevent or otherwise limit the right of a public or private employer to prohibit persons who are licensed under this subchapter from carrying a concealed handgun on the premises of the business.

This statute, plus the fact that the term "premises" is not defined in Ch. 411, plus the fact that there is nothing in PC Ch. 46 that contradicts 411.203, leads me to believe that a private employer can have a work rule that prohibits employees from carrying guns to the workplace, including the parking lot. If the employee receives proper notice, then I suppose the workrule violation could also constitute the crime of trespass. (Of course, a rule like this leaves the employee without self-defense tools on the way to and from work, but I suppose the remedy is to find a new job where the boss is more respectful of the right of self-defense.)

That is my opinion, and I am sure the A.G. would give his if asked by an authorized person.

So long as you fall within the ambit of the select few who may request an AG opinion, they should answer unless a fact question is presented.

I would only add that I don't think there's a siginficant Second Amendment issue implicated here. Although Wal-Mart is perhaps as ubiquitous as the federal government, it remains a private actor. Its decisions concerning use of its property do not, in themselves, implicate state action. The Second Amendment, being part of the Bill of Rights, stands as a limitation on governmental authority. As far as I can tell, there is no real limitation (other than the occasionally successful Title VII or workers' comp retaliation suit) of any kind on Wal-Mart. To oversimplify the point, Wal-Mart is as free to tell its employees that they can't have a gun in their car if the car is in the Wal-Mart parking lot as I am free to tell guests at my house that they cannot have a gun in their car if it's parked on my driveway.

Thanks for the help. The government code was just what we needed. Apparently this guy is a real zealot and we needed some type of legal answer for him so he would not try to force a AG opinion. We believed that Wal-Mart, as a private entity, was not in violation of any law, but he did not accept that answer, so the government code gives strength to our answer.