Man fired for have AR-15 in his trunk.

[Huntbear]

This fr@ked up... 

http://www.guns.com/indiana-man-filing-lawsuit-fired-ar-15-11051.html

[woodswalker]

Yesh its screwed up...but an ND while showing it off?...makes you wonder if he needs to be carrying it at all.

Seems a couple O' rules got lost.  Just gives the Anti's more reason/excuses that they cannot trust a gunowner to be SAFE with a firearm.

[NW-GSP]

Sounds like the state law protects him.

[csaaphill]

Well to who said he shouldn't be showing it off isn't reading the whole story or missed it. He was off duty and off company property. if he doesn't have the right to show off at home or whereever he was then where?
Whats the difference if he was showing off a .270 or 30-06 or something?
My point is what does it matter if he was showing it off or not? The only real issue here is that the gun fired by mistake. Which in this case he was lucky no one got hurt. I hope he gets his job back and all the back pay. Seems like in todays political climate someone who owns a AR-15 or mac 90 is going to be under more scrutiny than a 9mm pistol or 12 guage shotgun.
I actually just recently stoped a anti gun or anti semi automatic statement at work although they mainly ignored me and moved on to a different subjeect, but when one stated that there was only one reason for someone to own a ar or mac I stepped in and said I shot a deer iwth only a 5 round clip a few years ago with a Mac 90 that I owned at the time. I got it under Clintions semi auto ban and if Obama wins I will probably buy another one just for that same purpose to own one before they get banned. I wouldn't be so quick to judge just because the firearm is a AR-15 doesn't mean he or anyone can't show it off without getting fired.
As for going off accidently who knows what happened still shouldn't get him fired or judged an idiot prematuraly.
Just my 

[pianoman9701]

This guy sounds like an idiot and the company was probably worried about him having an accidental discharge which might kill an employee at work. How does that happen? They may well lose the case, but had I been his supervisor, I'd probably have put him in a gun course after the discharge incident just to cover my own butt and the safety of his coworkers. I'm really torn here between 2nd Amendment rights, which I hold very dear, and idiots with guns.

[Bob33]

He may have violated some criminal code, but his company had no business addressing this. It was a personal matter, not a corporate one.

"Jordan was off-duty at the time and the two men were not on company property. "

[pianoman9701]

He may have violated some criminal code, but his company had no business addressing this. It was a personal matter, not a corporate one.

"Jordan was off-duty at the time and the two men were not on company property. "

I agree, it just doesn't make me feel any safer knowing he's got a loaded AR or any other firearm, given his history.

[Heredoggydoggy]

Idiot or not, the guy was wihin his legal rights to have the gun in his car.  Having a LOADED gun in the car--that's another matter.  ADM screwed up by firing him for having the gun.  They should have fired him for his "reckless endangerment", that showed unsuitability for the job he was hired to do. 

[Bob33]

Would a company fire an employee for driving recklessly on his own time, off company property?

Would a company fire an employee for domestic violence that occurred on his own time, off company property?

As unfortunate as these situations are, the company has no right to intervene in personal matters unless they can be proved to have a direct impact on the company.

[Gringo31]

That part gets a little tricky.

Some companies feel that you being their employee means that you are representing them.  If you do something stupid, it "can" make the company look stupid........and they hate looking stupid.

[Atroxus]

Would a company fire an employee for driving recklessly on his own time, off company property?

Would a company fire an employee for domestic violence that occurred on his own time, off company property?

As unfortunate as these situations are, the company has no right to intervene in personal matters unless they can be proved to have a direct impact on the company.

Actually some can and do fire for criminal offenses and/or "immoral" behavior while off the clock. In this case the reason they used was explicitly exempted by the state laws though. If they were smart they would have left the car in the trunk thing out of the equation and said that in light of the negligent discharge they could not longer trust him in a position where he was armed, and fired him for that. 

[pianoman9701]

Would a company fire an employee for driving recklessly on his own time, off company property?

Would a company fire an employee for domestic violence that occurred on his own time, off company property?

As unfortunate as these situations are, the company has no right to intervene in personal matters unless they can be proved to have a direct impact on the company.

Actually some can and do fire for criminal offenses and/or "immoral" behavior while off the clock. In this case the reason they used was explicitly exempted by the state laws though. If they were smart they would have left the car in the trunk thing out of the equation and said that in light of the negligent discharge they could not longer trust him in a position where he was armed, and fired him for that. 

Yep.

[Austrian Hunter]

It all depends on the companies policy.  If he agreed to the policy by accepting employment he has to play by the company rules.  If he broke the rules so be it.  I agree, its f'up but the firm has the right to let him go if there was a policy in place.

[carpsniperg2]

It all depends on the companies policy.  If he agreed to the policy by accepting employment he has to play by the company rules.  If he broke the rules so be it.  I agree, its f'up but the firm has the right to let him go if there was a policy in place.

I agree 100% and would have said the same thing. It is jacked up but many comapines do have those rules. Hell I know even in my small town of atleast 5 jobs here that you can't have one with you or in your car why it is parked at work.

[Bob33]

What rules did he break? This occurred off company property, on personal time.

[carpsniperg2]

Oh I must have missed that. I was thinking it was on company time or company property. So then they are just whacking him for having a gun? Time to call the NRA

[Bob33]

"Relford told reporters that on July 6, Jordan was showing a coworker his AR-15 that was kept in the trunk of his car.  Jordan was off-duty at the time and the two men were not on company property. "

[carpsniperg2]

Yeah that is jacked up, what people do on there own time should be there business. Not like he was hurting anything at work/company time or their property.

[Austrian Hunter]

Yeah that is jacked up, what people do on there own time should be there business. Not like he was hurting anything at work/company time or their property.

  I missed that part.  NRA or any good lawyer should do it.  Plus he can use the double damages law, meaning double his severance package!