Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Gun Free Zone Liability
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tanis143" data-source="post: 3333699" data-attributes="member: 43724"><p>That is the big difference between personal property and commercial property. In someone else's home I have a greater expectation of safety because not anyone is allowed to just walk in (granted, laws won't stop someone who is determined to get in, but in principle people won't just walk in). Businesses are the exact opposite. I walk into a QT with no guarantee that some wacko isn't just going to walk in after me (yes, I know QT allows firearms, just using them as an example). Business owners are held to keep their place of business as safe as possible for their customers/patrons. Does putting up a gun free sign decrease the safety of those in that business? That would be a study that will never happen. One of the things I've seen said (and I say as well) is that gun free zones don't work, they only make the area a target rich environment. On the flip side of that is businesses are only held liable for situations that they have reasonable control over. If you go klutzo in a store and trip over your own shoe, the store is not liable for your injury. However if they fail to put out a wet floor sign after someone spills a jug of water, they can be held liable if you fall on the wet floor. The business is not accountable for the actions of someone in their business, but can they be held liable for creating an environment that is less safe. I think that is where we disagree. Several posters on here have related this to holding the business responsible for the bad guy's actions. That is not what I am saying. I'm saying they should be held responsible for creating an environment that decreases the level of safety for their customers.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tanis143, post: 3333699, member: 43724"] That is the big difference between personal property and commercial property. In someone else's home I have a greater expectation of safety because not anyone is allowed to just walk in (granted, laws won't stop someone who is determined to get in, but in principle people won't just walk in). Businesses are the exact opposite. I walk into a QT with no guarantee that some wacko isn't just going to walk in after me (yes, I know QT allows firearms, just using them as an example). Business owners are held to keep their place of business as safe as possible for their customers/patrons. Does putting up a gun free sign decrease the safety of those in that business? That would be a study that will never happen. One of the things I've seen said (and I say as well) is that gun free zones don't work, they only make the area a target rich environment. On the flip side of that is businesses are only held liable for situations that they have reasonable control over. If you go klutzo in a store and trip over your own shoe, the store is not liable for your injury. However if they fail to put out a wet floor sign after someone spills a jug of water, they can be held liable if you fall on the wet floor. The business is not accountable for the actions of someone in their business, but can they be held liable for creating an environment that is less safe. I think that is where we disagree. Several posters on here have related this to holding the business responsible for the bad guy's actions. That is not what I am saying. I'm saying they should be held responsible for creating an environment that decreases the level of safety for their customers. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Gun Free Zone Liability
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom