Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumShould businesses that don't prohibit carrying guns have any responsibility to protect patrons?
jody
(26,624 posts)Police are a function of government.
jody
(26,624 posts)and there are others. Glad I could remove some of your ignorance.
When you are threatened by a criminal and seconds count, call the police who will be there in minutes or hours.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)or compensation for failing any legal obligation.
Peepsite
(113 posts)trouble.smith
(374 posts)nt
rfranklin
(13,200 posts)You probably have more chance of dying from that cheeseburger in your hand.
trouble.smith
(374 posts)it's a different picture. And the police really aren't able to prevent someone from doing any of that either. They'll just file the report and move on. As an ER nurse in a large violent city, I can tell you that there's no shortage of violent crime victims.
Callisto32
(2,997 posts)Thnk about it, if they did imagine the liability every time a crime is committed.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)If they remove from me that ability, then they should then take responsibility for the results.
Here in Texas that isn't a problem. Only 30.06 signs have the force of law and they are extremely rare.
jody
(26,624 posts)GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)jody
(26,624 posts)trouble.smith
(374 posts)My ex girlfriend's uncle put that fucker down.
edit: or so she claimed.
formercia
(18,479 posts)jus' sayin'
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)required to have insurance?
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,479 posts)...be required to have insurance?
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)businesses cannot opt out of allowing gun-carrying citizens.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)To the best of my knowledge, any private enterprise can restrict just about anything on their own property, with the exception of commiting certain Civil Rights violations.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)The "gun buster" signs have no force of law so people are free to ignore them. If they find you with a weapon all they can ask you to do is leave. So technically they can but practically they can't.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)because if they ask you to leave, and you refuse, they can call the police and have you removed for trespassing.
Slightly round-about route to the same effect.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)But you have to remember in some states, like Ohio, they DO have the force of law and ignoring them is an automatic criminal tresspass charge. As long as the signs are prominently displayed.
MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)Isn't that the point?
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)You have the ability to defend yourself. If you fail in that then the police will attempt to find and punish your attacker - after you have been attacked and injured. Whether that happened in a store or on the street doesn't matter.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Going to be very interesting to see how that goes. I expect an insurance settlement. A decision against the theater could make it very hard for a business or college to deny CCW or open carry otherwise.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)No one says you have to patronize a business that doesn't ban its customers from carrying guns. You make that decision yourself.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)Let's say there's one pharmacy in town and they prohibit weapons. What then?
Glaug-Eldare
(1,089 posts)In that case, there's one pharmacy in town and they prohibit weapons. That leaves you with 3 options:
1) Don't take a gun to the pharmacy
2) Get the pharmacy's policy changed
3) Start a gun-permissive pharmacy
Alternately, there's the alternative of simply carrying anyway, policy be damned. I think that's a violation of the owner's right to regulate conduct inside their pharmacy, so I don't consider it an option.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)And whether they should be liable if a patron gets injured. My answer was no.
Are you asking me what a carrier would do if they encounter a pharmacy that prohibits weapons? I guess I'd leave my gun at home then.
petronius
(26,602 posts)to bar, or not, the carrying of firearms, but whichever they choose shouldn't affect their legal responsibilities...
DWC
(911 posts)f a citizen who does not choose to exercise the right to legally carry a defensive firearm wants to patronize a business that allows firearms on it's premises, then the individual must either:
1. Patronize the business at his/her own risk without a defensive firearm, or
2. Not patronize the business until and unless it's "Guns Allowed" policy changes
It is the individual's right and free choice not to carry a defensive firearm
It is a business owner's right and free choice to establish the terms and conditions under which he/she will do business
Both are individual rights, not to be infringed. Neither bares any responsibility to the other.
the Free Market, NOT more regulation will sort it out.
Semper Fi,
ileus
(15,396 posts)By not requiring me to leave my safety device behind they promote a safer society.