Hi, I'm looking for support for an amazing new bill. Last session the bill that would mandate employers allow CHl holders to leave their guns in the car got shot down by "property rights" types. And I support that position for the most part, BUT here is another slant on the issue.
http://www.gunlaws.com/GFZ/GFZ-BillReview.htm
The basic premise is that a "NO GUNS HERE" policy makes the place EXPLICITLY responsible for everyone's safety. Under such a law, the mall in Omaha where the lunatic shot those people would be liable. The point is that no "public accomodation" would be able to afford insurance for such a policy and would HAVE to allow legal guns.
What does everyone think?
CHARLES! Helllllooooooo!
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
-
dukalmighty
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 822
- Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 5:45 am
I believe if thy have a gun free zone and somebody gets shot they should be liable for failure to enforce their gun free zone,if i was a survivor in omaha i would be looking into a lawsuit against the mall
It is said that if you line up all the cars in the world end-to-end, someone would be stupid enough to try to pass them
-
txinvestigator
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 4331
- Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 6:40 pm
- Location: DFW area
- Contact:
-
HighVelocity
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 3374
- Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 7:54 pm
- Location: DFW, TX
- Contact:
The biggest problem I have with "property owners" making decisions about my safety is that if I was to go to work at a company that didn't allow me to have a gun in my car, that means I'd have to travel to and from the office unarmed. No thanks.
I am scared of empty guns and keep mine loaded at all times. The family knows the guns are loaded and treats them with respect. Loaded guns cause few accidents; empty guns kill people every year. -Elmer Keith. 1961
-
frankie_the_yankee
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 2173
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:24 pm
- Location: Smithville, TX
And you surely can. All you have to do is exert actual physical control over who is allowed to enter, and with what. That means guards, metal detectors, wands, bag searches, x-ray machines, etc. If you performed with due diligence, there would (or should) be little or no liability.txinvestigator wrote: I have mixed feelings on this.
If I own property, I should be able to control if you carry a gun or not.
What this proposal would inhibit is property owners pretending to exert control over who carries guns on their property by means of posting an ineffectual sign and doing little or nothing else.
Maybe not. Maybe I get tricked (by the sign) into thinking it is actually safe on your property, when in reality any BG bent on doing a shooting spree will simply ignore the sign and blaze away.txinvestigator wrote: If I post no carry signs, then you KNOW the risk and assume it.
If you posted a sign that included a disclaimer warning people that spree killers could be expected to ignore it, that would cover you. But it would kind of defeat the purpose, right? (To say nothing of how it would make the truth stand out in sharp relief.)
Ahm jus' a Southern boy trapped in a Yankee's body
txinvestigator wrote:I have mixed feelings on this.
If I own property, I should be able to control if you carry a gun or not. If I post no carry signs, then you KNOW the risk and assume it.
Am I understanding correctly that 30.05 says I can't force a person off my property solely for carrying a gun if they are carrying under the authority of their CHL?
-
Venus Pax
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 3147
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 5:27 pm
- Location: SE Texas
Private, residential properties are one thing. Businesses open to the public are another.txinvestigator wrote:I have mixed feelings on this.
If I own property, I should be able to control if you carry a gun or not. If I post no carry signs, then you KNOW the risk and assume it.
"If a man breaks in your house, he ain't there for iced tea." Mom & Dad.
The NRA & TSRA are a bargain; they're much cheaper than the cold, dead hands experience.
The NRA & TSRA are a bargain; they're much cheaper than the cold, dead hands experience.
Agreed. Also if anybody who walks may carry, there's no good reason to stop employees from carrying.
Venus Pax wrote: Private, residential properties are one thing. Businesses open to the public are another.
Please help the wounded store owner who fought off 3 robbers. He doesn't have medical insurance.
http://www.giveforward.com/ramoncastillo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.click2houston.com/news/26249961/detail.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.giveforward.com/ramoncastillo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.click2houston.com/news/26249961/detail.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;