Universal Orlando’s Discrimination against Gun Owners Made Possible by Indifference

By David Codrea

252261_10153361815927852_7285057965039474711_n
Nice place. Too bad working there requires employees to surrender their rights during their commute, and going there establishes no duty to protect patrons they require to disarm. (Universal Orlando Resorts Facebook photos)

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “A Universal Orlando worker who was fired after someone stole a gun from his car at work has sued his former employer,” the Orlando Sentinel reported. “A licensed concealed weapons holder, [Dean] Kumanchik regularly took his gun to and from work and kept it locked in his vehicle. He parked in an area accessible to both employees and the public. In December, someone broke into his vehicle and stole the gun. He reported it to police. Upon learning what had happened, Universal immediately fired him.”

So much for doing the right thing. So much for putting 20 years of your life into a place.

Universal didn’t care. Back when Florida first passed a law allowing employees with concealed carry permits to keep their guns locked in their cars while at work, the theme park giant claimed having a public alternative education school located on a limited section of property exempted the whole place from state law. Ditto for Disney, which maintains their fireworks license means they are free to ban guns from employee vehicles.

It’s not like Kumanchik wanted to carry the gun while at work, a fitting subject for another column. For now, suffice it to say that both Universal and Disney policies mean their employees are not only disarmed while at work, but while going to and from work as well. And it’s not like top dollar-paying theme park patrons don’t have to compromise their rights by walking through metal detectors as a condition of entry.

The outrage is, the bans are based on hysteria and prejudice, a combination of hoplophobia, hostility to the Second Amendment, and of valuing political correctness over all other considerations. It’s not like corporate risk management honchos and insurance carriers are known for their leadership on challenging misconceptions, and that makes it fair to ask “Why?”

On what do they base their assumptions?

“By a factor of 12-to-1, economists believe that permitted concealed handguns reduce rather than increase murder rates,” John Lott of the Crime Prevention Research Center told Townhall. “Despite their differences, still criminologists also believe this by a factor of just 2-to-1.”

Looking at violent crimes that succeed in so-called “gun-free zones,” and at both survey results as well as at documented defensive gun use incidents provides good indications for why that is. Those whose professions require observing facts will be less inclined to be swayed by “feelings” – at least those who aren’t secure in their academic tenure, and/or feeding off of agenda-motivated grants.

Are such policies justifiable, and what should a private company’s liability be if its gun bans result in employees or customers prevented from the means of self defense being injured or killed, including while traveling to or from work? Is it strictly a private property issue, where a business owner can set up whatever restrictions he likes and you either accept his terms and conditions or you don’t? Yes, we know about Christian bakers and gay wedding cakes, so what the law should be also factors in.

It would seem liability for property hazards should also play a part. If you are injured due to an unsafe condition on the premises, there’ll be no shortage of lawyers ready to take your case on contingency.

ScreenHunter_06 Feb. 19 15.24
What does it tell you about a business that will make you disarm, but won't then guarantee your safety?

For now, gun owners have a variety of options, ranging from obeying or ignoring “No guns” signs and assuming the attendant risks, to giving your business to a more-deserving competitor, to passing out cards explaining to management why they won’t get your business, to requiring them to assume liability for injuries sustained while following their policies as a condition of patronage.

That last one could conceivably apply to conditions of employment as well. Will Universal or Disney accept responsibility to protect employees they require to be disarmed? What financial liability do they accept if an employee obeys their policy and is hurt or killed? None?

And of course, all these response measures ignore the simple fact that if gun owners made a point of withholding their business from companies that don’t honor their rights, and of giving it to those that do, economics-driven marketplace corrections would occur. Sure, it’s impractical to boycott all businesses, but some choices are easy to make.

If you see a “No guns” sign on a restaurant door, go to a place that doesn’t have one. And as far as the larger venues that don’t have alternatives are concerned, do you really need to go and drop hundreds of dollars just to stand in line for an hour to take a five-minute ride (lather, rinse, repeat)? There are enough gun owners that if a significant number of them withheld their business and made it known why, such expense-heavy places would soon feel the burn.

As long as a critical mass of gun owners values trivial entertainment more than it does rights, don’t expect anything to change. And as long as those same gun owners remain detached from the rigors of activism, finding legislators that will pass laws, and courts that will agree with financially-outgunned Mr. Kumanchik through appeals to final resolution, seems a long shot.

David Codrea in his natural habitat.

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and also posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

  • 16 thoughts on “Universal Orlando’s Discrimination against Gun Owners Made Possible by Indifference

    1. We Went To Universal Studios Orlando, 02/10/16 & 02/11/16
      Armed Security
      All Bags, Coolers, Knapsacks, Pocketbooks, etc. etc.Searched
      Empty All Pockets into Plastic Buckets
      Walk thru meatal detector, then stand with arms outstretched, while security goes over you with a handheld metal detector
      Line In Morning was at least 1/8 mile long
      Security almost as tight as Airlines

      1. All fine and good. However, we all know that TSA misses most weapons and “bad people” will learn the policies and find a “hole” in the policies, or maybe the bad guy is a security screener.
        Also, how does check points protect the customer or employer that get car jacked at the entrance to the parking lot?

      2. We all know that most weapons are not found at TSA check points, so by your words “almost as secure” is not very secure. The security is more of an illusion of security, not real security.
        The bad guys will do their homework and find the holes in such screenings, maybe by being employed as a security guard at the park.
        Also, lets consider the person that is attacked (car jacked) at the entrance or the first signal light after leaving the park, how are they protectec by park security?

    2. Do You Patronize Businesses That Undermine Your Freedoms – Fact is, mindless gun-free zones are what mass shootings have in common. They are killing zones, free from good guys with guns. That’s why the Aurora movie theater killer chose the more distant theater where guns were not allowed and thus where he wouldn’t have to worry about his plan being foiled.
      http://www.ammoland.com/2015/11/do-you-patronize-businesses-that-undermine-your-freedoms-and-values/

    3. Most of the article recites valid arguments against the policy, but obviously Universal is not convinced. They have the right to set this policy– and the employee violated it and was terminated. Yes, we have the right to not patronize them, but this is hardly “discrimination against gun owners.” The guy could have left it at home and there’s no “discrimination.” Or he could have had a $25 cabled lock box in the car out of view, but even then he’s violating the policy. Personally, I think it’s a bigger problem that their HR department decided to go out of their way to fire him, probably saying “our hands are tied, there’s no other course of action.” That’s an objectionable policy, not the no guns rule.

      1. I don’t see how they can mandate what you can and can’t have in your vehicle. I would suspect he would win the lawsuit,

      2. First of all, we do not know of the gun was secured by a cable lock or lock box in the car. Since, every device to lock a gun is not more than a minor inconvenience to the criminal and daily inconvenience to the owner, it does not really make sense for most people.
        For me the problem is that the employer is not forced to be responsible for any damage/harm done to employees and patrons both at the location and when traveling to/from the location. If this employee had returned during the robbery, would the employer been held responsible?

      3. Terry in NC: The law says that people can do. The corporation denies the people to be armed and the state law, which over rides corporate policy as no one is exempt from the law, says a Citizen not a corporation has rights not obliged by a state issued corporate charter creating an artificial person which only includes the right to conduct business and does not give them the rights of a human being, says a Citizen may do thus in pursuit of their Fundamental Liberties has the right to do.

        No the corporation, which is incorporated for the benefit of the Citizens and the state decides to punish a Citizen for exercising their rights under the law and thus violates their corporate charter. The need to have their corporate charter revokes as an example.

        You need an education because you evidently don’t have clue or I n the alternative a lobotomy because your concept of reality id so skewed that you cannot possibly be a Citizen. You have a mental disability, are ignorant to the point of incapacity or are a Socialist which are all recognized as unlawful in a Republic.

        You are the epitome of what Gruber calls American voters to stupid too know what is good for them.

        God b\less you, I hope you get home alright.

    4. Alrighty then. If you’re a private citizen working for an NBC affiliated company and have your gun stolen, you’re fired. If you’re a BLM agent whose gun is stolen by a six-time deported Mexican National who uses it to kill an American citizen, you not only get to keep your job but nobody will ever even know your name. Got it.

    5. How people pay extraordinary amounts of money to these fee-based parks is bewildering . As you said, to wait an hour or more for a 5 minute ride is ridiculous.
      “For the kids, some say”. I think not when young adults take 2 and 3 year olds, who are not able to ‘digest’ the pace of the input into their developing brains. The ‘experience’ will be more forgotten than remembered.
      A hike into the late spring woods will offer a more soothing enjoyable time for all.

    6. Being Florida residents, we would go to the attraction 2 or 3 times a month and the visits were enjoyable but,as the years went by, changes came along, and not for the good. We stopped going and it has been over 30 years since our last trip to the King Rat.

    Leave a Comment 16 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *