Liability as a result of 30.06 posting

[ex_dsmr]

I think we got a bit sidetracked from the OP.

Id say good luck getting anything out of a business that chose to put up a 30.06 sign which MAY HAVE resulted in the injury or death of an innocent person.
Im not away of any case law that says an establishment is bound by provide its patrons any type of security.
One big reason is that for 99% of posted locations, you have made a choice to enter said establishment knowing that you will be unable to defend yourself. Nobody is forcing you into those locations. A bit of "cavat emptor" if you ask me.

I dont like it, but thats just the way that it is.

[Thomas]

Why stop with businesses and 30.06?

If anyone with a CHL is a victim of any crime in which the use of deadly force is justified (armed robbery in the parking lot, crazy shooter, etc), then I hope that person or the family if the victim is deceased, sues the state.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Why stop with businesses and 30.06?

If anyone with a CHL is a victim of any crime in which the use of deadly force is justified (armed robbery in the parking lot, crazy shooter, etc), then I hope that person or the family if the victim is deceased, sues the state.

Under those circumstances, governmental entities have sovereign immunity. The state will win a summary judgment and the Plaintiff may be hit with sanctions requiring him/her to pay attorney fees and court costs. I wish what you suggest was possible, but it's not.

Chas.