Should Employers Require Employees to Get a Carry Permit?

Man lifting his shirt to show a concealed handgun

For years, the anti gunners have railed against concealed weapon permits putting law-abiding self-defenders on the defensive (no pun intended). Many businesses and business owners have followed suit by posting the places of employment or placing a negative stigma on anyone who carries. This has forced most concealed carriers to hide more than their handgun. But why? What would happen if we flipped the script and employers started requiring employees to get their permit? That would not force them to carry, but think of the environment? Everyone you work with would have passed a background check. How much safer would you feel working in an environment where all of your fellow employees was welcomed to be armed?

Man in tan shirt and pants with his hand holding onto a gun in his waistband.
The decision to get involved in a dangerous situation is very personal. Not all situations demand your assistance.

What got me to thinking about this was a couple of stories. The first was a year or two ago when a Georgia businessman required all of his employees to get their permit. Much of his staff was women and he wanted to do his best to ensure their safety. As soon as they showed him their permit, his presented them a Taurus Judge as a reward.

Another more recent case was a success story from Cleveland Ohio. In this case the man used to work at a barbershop where the owner required the employees to get their permit and carry for their own safety as well as the patrons. Fast forward several months and the man no longer worked at the barbershop but still had his license. He was at home a little before midnight and heard a noise in his house. He was able to successfully defend himself and run off the burglar thanks to his firearm; a firearm he owned and was trained to use because of a proactive previous employer.


The business is safer. A potentially armed workforce is a helluva deterrent against someone who looks for soft targets. We need to expand on this and get the word out. Far too many in the general populace believe guns cause the crime or there would be daily gunfights at high noon. Of course, statistics have proven just the opposite to be true.

Every employee has been through a background check. Statistics have shown individuals with a concealed carry license and far less likely to commit crimes. This is a positive message for current and future employees as well as the businesses the employees interact with.

Owning and carrying a firearm is a huge responsibility that cannot be overlooked or understated. It creates a mindset of personal responsibility as well as a common group culture and bond.

The employee is under a regular scrutiny. CCWs have to be renewed; skills must be maintained and re-demonstrated.


The business may be taking on a liability of course, and the appropriate insurance coverage would be necessary. However, in some states, the legislatures have enacted protections for the business. Wisconsin, Kansas, and Tennessee offer immunity from lawsuit if the employer allows employees to be armed. From Wis. Stat. § 175.60(21)(b), (c): (b) A person that does not prohibit an individual from carrying a concealed weapon on property that the person owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising from its decision. From 75-7c10(c)(2) (2) Any private entity which does not provide adequate security measures in a private building and which allows the carrying of a concealed handgun shall not be liable for any wrongful act or omission relating to actions of persons carrying a concealed handgun concerning acts or omissions regarding such handguns. From (a) A person, business, or other entity that owns, controls, or manages property and has the authority to prohibit weapons on that property by posting, pursuant to § 39–17–1359, shall be immune from civil liability with respect to any claim based on such person’s, business’s, or other entity’s failure to adopt a policy that prohibits weapons on the property by posting pursuant to § 39–17–1359. There is some work to be done to educate the masses as to the true facts, benefits, and advantages of a workforce with the ability and training to take responsibility its own safety. However, with the increasing number of terroristic acts, random crimes, and hate crimes, this may well be the future need.

How would you feel about an employer that required each employee to obtain a CCW? Share your answers in the comment section.


The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (27)

  1. Required t get a concealed carry permit? No.

    Paid more if they do (even if they don’t carry daily)? Yes, since they are a more qualified employee, better able to defend fellow employees in a crisis situation.

  2. Why don’t we teach ccw in schools? We teach driver education in schools. If they want better safety why dont they implement some public training? At least this will set a standard.

  3. I believe very law abiding citizen no matter race or creed should be allowed to carry a firearm ANYWHERE in this supposedly free country that we live in

  4. I disagree with the whole concept of CCW Permits. A right that requires permission ceases to be a right and becomes a privilege which can be taken away at the whim of a bureaucrat. That being said, your property, your rules.

  5. I totally agree that it would be a better safer work environment if if this was allowed and encouraged no one should be shamed for being a licensed firearm owner with a Ccw and no one who doesn’t should be shamed for it it either but workplaces shouldn’t require it but they shouldn’t ban it either

  6. Back in 1985 I went to Silvertown in Winchester IN to do a Data dish install. I walked to the glass counter and looked down and there was a $10,000 bill there. All employees were required to carry. It was interesting in the variety of weapons from a snub nose 38 to a western rig 45 ( Make my day ). A sign said “We will call an ambulance for shoplifters”.

  7. I will be 68 in August and I have had a carry permit since age 21 in my home state of Pennsylvania . To answer your question about everyone have and using and know how to carry , the answer is …..YES

  8. Well, I am in favor of responsible people carrying firearms.
    I truly think that we need a nationwide carry permit and also think, an employer has no right to bar a properly permitted individual from carrying a weapon.
    Laws need changed so people can defend themselves in a time when violence can happen anywhere and any time

    My problem is the word “require”. Sorry. No one should be required to obtain a permit. Encouraged would be great, but “required” is just wrong.

    I can really get on a rant here. Basically, I am a “liberal with a gun”. I am not a leftist. My boss or government should have no say in my personal life.

    1. I own a towing co. All of my employees have permits and carry ( concealed or open ) their decision is theirs . Some of the vehicle owners have been calmer , when saying that we took their vehicle , when actually the police took it for good reason. We have been known for holding burglars at gun point . Keeps everyone on good behavior…

  9. Stupid idea. That’s like making your employees go to church (or not go to church, depending). Unless there’s a business requirement (eg, a guard), it’s none of the employer’s business and shouldn’t have the power to compel such a thing. Once allowed…where would it end? If they aren’t eligible for a permit…what then? Someone didn’t think this one through….

    1. You didn’t read the article thoroughly. It said, even though they get their permit, they would not be required to carry. Either way, it’s a private business. If that business owner SHOULD be allowed to require his employees to go to church or to carry a handgun. If someone doesn’t like it, guess what… They don’t have to work there. Butt the business owner should be able to require his employees to do whatever he wants. Now, whether that’s a good business idea/employment strategy, remains to be determined; but should be up to the business owner.

    2. With all the disdain and alarm from the gun club, and before you yell, I am also a gun owner, when the government requires you to do something relating to weapons and weapons ownership, why then is it ok for an employer to require their employees to procure a concealed carry permit? Is the business owner going to pay for that? Or for that matter require them to attend church?

  10. getting the CCW for all is a good approach. does not necessarily mean they bring the gun INTO work. could just say leave it in their car/truck. maybe i am wrong.

  11. There’s more’n one way to look at that……
    Can you imagine 2 groups of employees that are very competitive & would go so far as to cheat a bit in a ball game of some sort. Wouldn’t the publicity be a bit sensational if an armed war between them got started. 🙂
    I’m just an old redneck so with my background that doesn’t seem completely unreasonable. 🙂 Just thinking…….

  12. I like this idea of having employees get concealed permits, not only as stated must they pass a major background check, but it gives employees the ability to share some of the responsibility for security in the workplace which seems to be something that is needed more and more in the current world that we live in. I know that in some cases that there is security provided by employers, but that has not always been enough to provide the needed level of security to prevent random acts of violence or terrorist attacks. I can imagine a situation where someone enters a business from a non-security controlled area and then tries to do some act of violence only to be stopped by the armed employees of the company – that would benefit everyone.

  13. Unfortunately, this would likely be forbidden by the EEOC unless having a permit is directly associated with the job’s responsibilities. Otherwise it is just like asking prospective employees about their arrest record, and also may be a “disparate impact” issue.

  14. I fully believe in carrying a firearm IF you are both physically and emotionally able to as well as being trained in the proper use of firearms. I do not want someone who is not willing to dedicate his or her time into making sure they know how to properly use a firearm. Employers OTHER than military or Law Enforcement should NOT require anyone from being armed.

  15. This is a Great solution. The only thing in this article that I do not agree with is the sentence about “the CCP holder being under scrutiny as the CCP needs to be renewed yearly and skill must be maintained and re-demonstrated.” I have had a CCP for 46 years, first in CT and now in AL. Although the NAC is done every year at the time of renewal, I have NEVER had to show skill or re-demonstrate such. Even when i got the permit in the 70s, I did not have to show proficiency in handling the weapon that I was to ‘carry’. Perhaps in Mr. Dolbee’s state it is so?

    1. The article is theoretical of course, so I do not want to be mistaken as this being some sort of position. In Illinois, it is required to demonstrate a minimal level of proficiency to obtain your CCW. It is part of the requirement.

      I understand the arguments for and against this. One camp rightly believes, “Shall not be infringed.” Fair enough. On the other side of the coin, even police officers, retired or active, have to regularly re-qualify on a regular basis. Both arguments have merit. ~Dave Dolbee

    2. EVERY state should require a test of proficiency. In Florida, we have to take a CCW course, which is a bs course. It is often too full to be any benefit to a person. It doesn’t teach you any of the laws around carrying. It doesn’t test your proficiency. You just go there, sit in a classroom for a couple hours, and then do some very basic shooting. I think it should be like getting a driver’s license. You would need to have had a probationary license until you have x-amount of hours shooting with a permit holder, and then have to take a one-on-one test. There are way too many people that go buy a gun and pay the $50 to take a CCW class, and are carrying the next day. But in reality they have no idea how to shoot, how to react to a threat, how to react to a non-threat, or even rudimentary things like taking the gun apart for cleaning. They are usually the ones who have their gun taken away and shot with it. Or leave the gun where someone unauthorized has access to it. (Like a child or criminal, or mentally unstable person.)

    3. I don’t see why “EVERY state should require a test of proficiency.”

      Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire all now have constitutional carry, they not only do not require a test, they don’t even require a fee, application, or license for open or concealed carry.

      Coincidentally these states are ranked the #1, #2, and #3 safest in the USA in terms of homicide and violent crime, with average murder rates lower than Canada’s.

  16. I would love to work for an employer who requested me to carry. At present, that is the only time I can not carry, as I work in the nursing industry, I can not carry into a patients home. Sign me up!

  17. extra training usually comes with a raise. Does this mean that the employer is giving his employees a raise? What about people that do not believe guns are tha answer? Are you going to prejudge them? I can see lawsuits by disabled persons that may not be able to pass the physical test, beit because of limited mobility or poor eyesight.
    If the job does not require a gun, I am pretty sure the employer would be overstepping his bounds

  18. If I’m expected to work as a “Mail Clerk” and yet be Armed like “Proxy Body Guard”? Whats my Salary? Mail Clerk which gets paid about 1/2 that of a Body Guard…

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

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.

Discover more from The Shooter's Log

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading