BizFilings Logo
800-981-7183

Louisiana Laws Relating to Workplace Violence

Filed under Managing the Workplace. Fact checked on May 25, 2012.

Article Tools

A summary of Louisiana laws relating to weapons and conduct that impact workplace violence.

A citizen of Louisiana may carry a concealed handgun if that person has obtained a concealed handgun permit. No one who has a license to carry a concealed handgun may carry and conceal their handgun while under the influence of alcohol or a controlled dangerous substance. While a person is under the influence of alcohol or a controlled dangerous substance, an otherwise lawful permit is automatically suspended and invalid.

A concealed handgun permit is not valid or does not entitle a person to carry a concealed weapon in any facility, building, location, zone or area in which firearms are banned by state or federal law. Louisiana bans the carrying of concealed handguns, even with a permit, in a law enforcement office, station or building; a detention facility, prison or jail; a courthouse or courtroom, provided that a judge may carry a concealed weapon in the judge's own courtroom; a polling place; a meeting place of the governing authority of a political subdivision; the state capitol building; any portion of an airport facility where the carrying of firearms is prohibited under federal law.

A person is not prohibited from carrying any legal firearm into the terminal if the firearm is encased for shipment, for the purpose of checking the firearm as baggage; any church, synagogue, mosque or other similar place of worship; a parade or demonstration for which a permit is issued by a governmental entity; any portion of an establishment that has been granted a license for the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises; or any school firearm-free zone.

A property owner, lessee or other lawful custodian may prohibit or restrict access to persons possessing concealed handguns with permits. A person with a permit to carry a concealed handgun may not carry a handgun into the private residence of another without first receiving the consent of that person.

There is a presumption that a person lawfully inside a place of business held a reasonable belief that the use of force or violence was necessary to prevent unlawful entry, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises, if both of the following occur:

  1. the person against whom the force or violence was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the place of business; and
  2. the person who used force or violence knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.

A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat before using force or violence as provided for by this statute and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.

A finder of fact is not permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used force or violence in defense of his or her person or property had a reasonable belief that force or violence was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a forcible offense or to prevent the unlawful entry.

A homicide is justifiable when committed against a person whom one reasonably believes to be likely to use any unlawful force against a person present in a place of business while committing or attempting to commit a burglary or robbery of the business. A homicide is also justifiable when committed by a person lawfully inside a place of business against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the place of business, or who has made an unlawful entry into the place of business, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises.

For the purposes of this law, there is a presumption that a person lawfully inside a place of business held a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises, if both of the following occur:

  1. the person against whom deadly force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the place of business; and
  2. the person who used deadly force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.

A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat before using deadly force as provided for by this statute, and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.

A finder of fact is not permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used deadly force had a reasonable belief that deadly force was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a forcible felony involving life or great bodily harm or to prevent the unlawful entry.

Article Tools

blog comments powered by Disqus
Next Article in Office & HR
MA: Laws Relating to Workplace Violence

A summary of Massachusetts laws relating to weapons and conduct that impact workplace violence.

Read More »Next Article
Close