After protesting gun rule, Disney guard is fired

[Incident_command]

<DL class=byline>By Scott Powers | Orlando Sentinel Staff Writer <DD>July 8, 2008 </DD></DL>Walt Disney World (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/topic/travel/tourism-leisure/theme-park-vacations/walt-disney-world-resort-PLREC000087.topic) fired a security guard on Monday after he protested the company's decision not to allow people with concealed weapons permits to keep guns in their cars on Disney property.

Disney terminated Edwin Sotomayor, 36, of Orlando for violating three Disney employee policies, essentially for failing to cooperate with an internal investigation, said spokeswoman Zoraya Suarez. Sotomayor vowed to continue his fight.

At issue is Florida's new law that allows people with concealed weapons permits to keep firearms in their vehicles in employee parking lots

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/sfl-orl-0708disneyguns,0,3637116.story

[Wolfcounsel]

This man needs to give it up and go look for another job. How hard-headed is he that he does not realize the cold, hard facts, these anti-gun weenies must have memorized? As long as guns are banned from certain places, no psycho can shoot up the place and kill people.

No guns = Safe places

All weenies need to put up signs like that on their property.

[DeclinetoState]

http://bp1.blogger.com/__xCEBY14uFQ/R6d3MDB4QQI/AAAAAAAAAVI/PneoBUp78Jk/s400/mickey-mouse.jpg

"Mr. Sotomayor, you're fired!"

[Incident_command]

http://bp1.blogger.com/__xCEBY14uFQ/R6d3MDB4QQI/AAAAAAAAAVI/PneoBUp78Jk/s400/mickey-mouse.jpg



I SMELL A BIG COMMIE RAT!!

[Rhino]

This man needs to give it up and go look for another job.Sarcasm? The law says Disney can't do this. Disney says there is an exemption in the law that covers them, but they must see something I don't.

(7) EXCEPTIONS.--The prohibitions in subsection (4) do not
148 apply to:
149 (a) Any school property as defined and regulated under s.
150 790.115.
151 (b) Any correctional institution regulated under s. 944.47
152 or chapter 957.
153 (c) Any property where a nuclear-powered electricity
154 generation facility is located.
HOUSE AMENDMENT
Bill No. CS/HB 503
Amendment No.
616087
3/25/2008 1:50 PM
Page 7 of 9
155 (d) Property owned or leased by a public or private
156 employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon
157 which are conducted substantial activities involving national
158 defense, aerospace, or homeland security.
159 (e) Property owned or leased by a public or private
160 employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon
161 which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use,
162 storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials
163 regulated under state or federal law, or property owned or
164 leased by an employer who has obtained a permit required under
165 18 U.S.C. s. 842 to engage in the business of importing,
166 manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials on such
167 property.
168 (f) A motor vehicle owned, leased, or rented by a public
169 or private employer or the landlord of a public or private
170 employer.
171 (g) Any other property owned or leased by a public or
172 private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer
173 upon which possession of a firearm or other legal product by a
174 customer, employee, or invitee is prohibited pursuant to any
175 federal law, contract with a federal government entity, or
176 general law of this state.

[Maggie_T]

<DL class=byline>By Scott Powers | Orlando Sentinel Staff Writer <DD>July 8, 2008 </DD></DL>Walt Disney World (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/topic/travel/tourism-leisure/theme-park-vacations/walt-disney-world-resort-PLREC000087.topic) fired a security guard on Monday after he protested the company's decision not to allow people with concealed weapons permits to keep guns in their cars on Disney property.

Disney terminated Edwin Sotomayor, 36, of Orlando for violating three Disney employee policies, essentially for failing to cooperate with an internal investigation, said spokeswoman Zoraya Suarez.

Ah, the joys of tyranny. :rolleyes:


Sotomayor vowed to continue his fight.



Good luck to you, man. Prayers sent.

[LivingDeadGirl]

Sarcasm? The law says Disney can't do this. Disney says there is an exemption in the law that covers them, but they must see something I don't.

They have a permit for fireworks which are considered explosives.

However, the bill states that property owned or leased by an employer who has a permit required by federal law to manufacture, use, store or move explosives would still be off limits. Disney has a permit for its fireworks shows.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking_news/story/592379.html

[Wolfcounsel]

"Sarcasm? The law says Disney can't do this. Disney says there is an exemption in the law that covers them, but they must see something I don't." --Rhino

Sort of. It's a jab at anti-gun weenies everywhere. But look at this:
...
161 which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use,
162 storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials
163 regulated under state or federal law, or property owned or
164 leased by an employer who has obtained a permit required under
165 18 U.S.C. s. 842 to engage in the business of importing,
166 manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials on such
167 property.
... --from the same post

Don't Disney parks have fireworks displays? A loophole jumped through if it's so.


OOPS, I'm slow. LivingDeadGirl beat me to it.

[Rhino]

They have fireworks displays, but it is not their primary business, so that exemption does not apply.

[Wolfcounsel]

"They have fireworks displays, but it is not their primary business, so that exemption does not apply." --Rhino

I included that part for reference only. The pertaining part is below at 164. The identifying word is "or".

If I were the judge, I would tell them to transport their fireworks from a separate location to the place where they will be used immediately, and allow the law to apply otherwise. Anything can be explosive under the right conditions. Their primary business indeed is NOT explosive material.

What kind of dumbasses store explosive material where entertainment devices are employed publicly?

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[LivingDeadGirl]

Having been there recently, there are several areas where pyrotechnics are used throughout the day, not just the night time fireworks displays. In one of the articles I read the exemption that they are using was REQUESTED by the theme parks specifically, so it is no surprise that they would know about it and be using it.

[LivingDeadGirl]

The guard might have had a better case and been able to challenge the exemption if he had actually had a gun on him when they fired him. Instead, he was fired for not allowing the search and insubordination. Those are harder to fight.

[Rhino]

I included that part for reference only. The pertaining part is below at 164. The identifying word is "or".

If I were the judge, I would tell them to transport their fireworks from a separate location to the place where they will be used immediately, and allow the law to apply otherwise. Anything can be explosive under the right conditions. Their primary business indeed is NOT explosive material.

What kind of dumbasses store explosive material where entertainment devices are employed publicly?Still not applicable. The storage rule only allpies if such storage is their "primary business", which it is not. The permits under 18 U.S.C. s. 842 also do not apply because they do not engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials. Note that it says dealing in explosive materials, not dealing with explosive materials.

[Rhino]

Having been there recently, there are several areas where pyrotechnics are used throughout the day, not just the night time fireworks displays.Makes no difference. Using fireworks is not an exemption. Fireworks are used just about everywhere at one time or another.

In one of the articles I read the exemption that they are using was REQUESTED by the theme parks specifically, so it is no surprise that they would know about it and be using it.They requested an exemption for theme parks in general. They didn't get it.

The guard might have had a better case and been able to challenge the exemption if he had actually had a gun on him when they fired him. Instead, he was fired for not allowing the search and insubordination. Those are harder to fight.The law specifically says they can't search. His adherence to the law is what Disney classified as insubordination. I think he has a good case.

[LivingDeadGirl]

Still not applicable. The storage rule only allpies if such storage is their "primary business", which it is not. The permits under 18 U.S.C. s. 842 also do not apply because they do not engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials. Note that it says dealing in explosive materials, not dealing with explosive materials.

But they do have one of the permits, which is how they are claiming the exemption. And I would be they do IMPORT them directly from whomever they have manufacture them overseas...and may have them specifically made since they have Mickey Head fireworks, which would be covered.

[LivingDeadGirl]

The law specifically says they can't search. His adherence to the law is what Disney classified as insubordination. I think he has a good case.
But Disney is claiming that they are exempt, which would also mean that they can search.

[Rhino]

But they do have one of the permits, which is how they are claiming the exemption.They are not required to have permits under 18 U.S.C. s. 842, which is what the law specifies.

And I would be they do IMPORT them directly from whomever they have manufacture them overseas...and may have them specifically made since they have Mickey Head fireworks, which would be covered.No it wouldn't, because it isn't their primary business.

[Rhino]

But Disney is claiming that they are exempt, which would also mean that they can search.And the law says they aren't exempt, so they can't search.

[LivingDeadGirl]

They are not required to have permits under 18 U.S.C. s. 842, which is what the law specifies.

No it wouldn't, because it isn't their primary business.

They have the permit, as per the article I cited earlier in this thread. That is how they are exempt. They helped craft the exemptions to the law, so I'm sure they knew what they were doing when they put the provision in.

And there is an OR before the part that pertains to Disney, so it doesn't have to be their primary business.

[Maggie_T]

...these anti-gun weenies must have memorized?

No guns = Safe places

For criminals and terrorists.

But liberals already know that.

[LivingDeadGirl]

I do have to say I find it interesting that he told the MEDIA a week ahead of time what he was going to do. That probably didn't help, and won't help, his case either.

[Rhino]

They have the permit, as per the article I cited earlier in this thread. That is how they are exempt. They helped craft the exemptions to the law, so I'm sure they knew what they were doing when they put the provision in.They did try to get an exemption for theme parks in general, but were unsuccessful. If they had a hand in crafting the explosives exemption, I'd like to see some evidence of that. And it seems just having a permit may not meet the requirement. The argument I've seen is that the permit has to be for the purpose of engaging in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials. Lots of folks say their permit does not meet that criteria.

And there is an OR before the part that pertains to Disney, so it doesn't have to be their primary business.Actually, they don't have a permit to import. Importing requires a license, not a permit. But I found the answer on another site. Importation isn't the issue at all. Apparently BATFE says that storage qualifies under 18 U.S.C. s. 842, even if it isn't the primary business, and that's why Disney has a permit. The weird part is that the Florida law specifically states that the permit was obtained for the purpose of engaging in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials, not for storing. If you read 18 U.S.C. s. 842, you'll find that there are permit and license requirements for a myriad of activities that do not fit that description, so I'm assuming this guy is basing his case on the premise that Florida was specifically limiting the exemption to permits obtained only for those express purposes. I.e., a permit for activities other than those mentioned, such as storage, does not qualify for the exemption. Could be interesting to see how that might play out, if that is indeed the case. Folks in Florida have been talking about a "test case" for months, so maybe this one will be it.

It will still be interesting to see where this goes, because I don't think that was the intent of the legislature at all. I wonder if they'll change it.

It should also be noted that he wasn't fired for having a gun. He was fired for not consenting to a search.

[Rhino]

And apparently the legislators are saying in some other media articles that this interpretation of the exemption was not their intent. That means this exemption was not meant for Disney, so it seems obvious Disney had nothing to do with its creation. What they are doing now is trying to put a case forward to prove that the exemption indeed applies to them on a technicality.

I sure hope the media continues to cover this, because I'd love to see the outcome.

[Rhino]

Okay, I think I'm getting the general gist from stuff on several other sites. Statutes are full of little nuances that are difficult to understand at first glance.

I'll do this bit by bit in the hopes of clarifying.

Property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials regulated under state or federal law,...This hinges on the requirement that the primary business conducted must be the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials. As such this does not apply.

...or property owned or leased by an employer who has obtained a permit required under 18 U.S.C. s. 842 to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials on such property.This is where it gets interesting. Disney claims the exemption because they import and/or store fireworks, and have a permit. But Disney does not engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials, as the statute clearly delineates. So it appears the argument is going to be if the permit Disney has was required specifically to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials.

Like I said, this could get interesting.

[Rhino]

I do have to say I find it interesting that he told the MEDIA a week ahead of time what he was going to do. That probably didn't help, and won't help, his case either.I get the feeling he deliberately wanted to be that 'test case' I mentioned.

[Wolfcounsel]

I agree with you, Rhino. Guess what type of guards the Military has guarding weapons and ammunition at depots?

ARMED guards

[Incident_command]

Disney security is a joke.

[Taylor1]

I don't want to go to Disney world anymore..

[Taylor1]

Disney security is a joke.

Their guards have mouses on their hats, they've got some pretty damn good surveillance, but the only thing I could trust them with is finding a lost kid.

[DeclinetoState]

http://www.testriffic.com/resultfiles/21615goofy.gif

New Disney security guard

[Taylor1]

http://www.testriffic.com/resultfiles/21615goofy.gif

New Disney security guard

I laughed out loud.

[LivingDeadGirl]

Their guards have mouses on their hats, they've got some pretty damn good surveillance, but the only thing I could trust them with is finding a lost kid.

They are very good at that. While we were there a toddler wandered away from mom and dad. As soon as they let Disney staff know that the child was missing the theme park was locked down till they located the child...no one in, no one out. Fortunately, he had just wandered to a different area of a store they were in, but people came from EVERYWHERE to search.

And they do go through any bags you bring into the park. They found a small pocket knife in my dad's camera bag that he forgot about being there...so they do look.

[LivingDeadGirl]

I get the feeling he deliberately wanted to be that 'test case' I mentioned.

That was my thought too. He says that he took a gun, but because he didn't allow the search we don't really know and only have his word to go on. Right or wrong, I hate people like that...on either side of an issue. I would respect him more if he'd not contacted the media till AFTER he was fired.

[LivingDeadGirl]

Rhino - thanks for the extra digging :) It makes a lot more sense now what is going on. What I had been reading said that there were a group of lawyers hired by Disney, and the other theme parks down there, that helped draft the legislation...sorry if I misspoke. Universal Studios has a work study school on-site so they are exempted due to that. I don't know about the others.

I agree, this will get very interesting.

[DeclinetoState]

And they do go through any bags you bring into the park.I wouldn't want to be the security personnel on duty the day someone decides to bring Helen Thomas to the park.

[Rhino]

Disney narrows employee gun ban to property

By Scott Powers | Sentinel Staff Writer
3:07 PM EDT, August 15, 2008

Walt Disney World decided today to narrow its employee gun ban to the actual Disney World property only -- and with that move the theme park giant got the blessing of Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum for the controversial policy....

...The matter led to a still-unresolved court challenge after one of Disney's security guards tested the policy. He brought a gun to work and got fired in early July. The dispute also led to complaints filed with McCollum's consumer services division from people who wanted the attorney general to tell Disney it was wrong.

Now Disney announced it is revising its policy, though only slightly. And McCollum indicated he is satisfied with the revision, which lifts the employee gun ban on employee Disney outposts such as the company's branch offices in Celebration but not on the main Walt Disney World property....http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/orl-disney-gun-ban-081508,0,6358156.story

[Taylor1]

Celebration is a freakin' neighborhood with 2 restaurants, at least last time I went.. and they have really cool golf carts.

[Rhino]

When were you there, and are you sure you have the right place?

There are many shops, restaurants and other businesses located in downtown Celebration. Most are tourist-driven but many locals frequent the restaurants downtown. Disney Corporation has three centrally located buildings, known as the 200, 210 and 220 buildings, which house executives and employees from their cruise line, marketing, sales, ESPN, Bass Networks and other operations. Water Tower Place is located in the front entrance of the town, with shops, restaurants and a park in the center.

The Celebration Hotel hosts the Tampa Bay Buccaneers during spring training. During the holiday season the end of November, located on Main street, bubbles pour out of the street lights to replicate snow and Christmas music is streaming from the sidewalks.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/74/022306-CelebrationFL01.jpg/800px-022306-CelebrationFL01.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebration,_Florida

[Taylor1]

When were you there, and are you sure you have the right place?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebration,_Florida

Looks like that's almost all houses but then again it's probably changed a lot since I've been there..

[Rhino]

Look closer. Those are hotels, restaurants and shops, not homes. Celebration has comparatively few homes, with a population of only about 3,000. The overwhelming majority of the assets in Celebration are retail and service, since they border Disney World and since they are the only city with their own direct link to Disney property. In fact, Disney originally developed Celebration for just that purpose, to provide retail and service industry for the tourist trade at Disney World. Methinks you are thinking of somewhere else.