Is a "Gun Free Zone" Property Owner Responsible
for A Disarmed Visitor's Safety?
Image -- forum.opencarry.org
By Robert Farago. January 19th, 2016
Article Source
"If a Tennessee grocery store bans guns on its property and a black bear or wild hog kills or injures a person who otherwise would be carrying his or her gun," tennessean.com reports, "the gun owner would be allowed to sue the property owner if a newly introduced bill became law." Uh, I don't think Senator Delores Gresham introduced Senate Bill 1736 to protect licensed gun owners from bear or hog attacks.
It makes property owners liable if they disarm someone and that someone gets waylaid by a two-legged varmint. It's an idea that's been floating around TTAG for a while. So, now that it's in play (albeit without a chance of passage) how about it? Good idea? Workable? What?
There is a serious principle involved here and not limited to Tennessee -- which is, the potential liability of a business owner who chooses to disarm patrons, who subsequently suffer injury or death as a result of having their ability to carry be denied. Any "gun-free-zone", more than ever, is a potential "kill box" and it's beyond time to consider the liability aspects.
"You don't have to be Jewish to fight by our side."
© 2016 JPFO All rights reserved.
jpfo@jpfo.org
1-800-869-1884
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
12500 NE 10th Pl.
Bellevue, WA 98005 USA
"America's most aggressive defender of civil rights"
We make the NRA look like moderates
