• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Business Owners Face Massive Financial Risk Unless They Post Gun-Free Signs

OC4me

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
758
Location
Northwest Kent County, Michigan
Just a heads up on the latest from the anti-gun press office! Bloomberg's ilk has funded (what they would have everybody believe) is an expert legal opinion designed to scare business owners (and probably their insurance companies) into posting gun-free zone signs.

I have't read the so-called legal opinion drafted by these people, but for sure it is a bunch of non-sense. I am curious as to whether or not they even considered the legal exposure that business owner's would face for posting signs which obviously encourage criminal activity.

http://tinyurl.com/oyc9tt6

http://tinyurl.com/k44sj2y (legal memorandum here)
 
Last edited:

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,831
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
Just a heads up on the latest from the anti-gun press office! Bloomberg's ilk has funded (what they would have everybody believe) is an expert legal opinion designed to scare business owners (and probably their insurance companies) into posting gun-free zone signs.
Hmmm, doesn't appear to be a legal opinion as much as their 5 year business plan....
 
Last edited:

Deacon Blues

Newbie
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
124
Location
Birmingham, AL
It seems to me that they're overtly encouraging someone to sue a business because they got shot there. It's basically the inverse of what many of us have suggested: suing the owners of GFZs when someone is rendered unable to resist an attack.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
I wonder if the family of someone killed as a result of the gun-free zone recommendation could sue that frickin law firm? How is that for liability?
The courts will hold free from harm any lawyer or law firm that recommends a business adopt a gun free zone mindset. Provided it's legal for a business to adopt a gun free zone mindset, then the courts will hold the business free from harm, as well.

Bottom line, you can't hold either individuals or businesses liable if they're obeying the law.

Americas' best bet is to vote with your wallet. If you support our Second Amendment, whether you carry or not, and you see a business who refuses to support and defend our Constitution with some commie "No Guns" or "No Firearms" sticker then do your duty as an American citizen:

1. Don't spend a red cent in their place of business.

2. Let them know, politely, why you refuse to do business with them. A good way to handle this is to simply hand them a business card ($10 for 500) on which you simply state your reasons, along with a smile. Something along the lines of, "I'm sorry, but I cannot do business with you. Here's why (hand them the card). Thanks for listening."

3. Visit Friend or Foe (see my signature, below), and enter their business information, along with an appropriate writeup.

If they change their mind, then change your write-up. If not, you'll have made it slightly less likely they'll be able to remain in business. I know it sounds harsh, but consider this minor inconvenience to the neighborhood as compared what happens to the neighborhood if the libs disarm us all and allow the gangs to run amok.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,304
Location
SE, WI
It seems to me that they're overtly encouraging someone to sue a business because they got shot there. It's basically the inverse of what many of us have suggested: suing the owners of GFZs when someone is rendered unable to resist an attack.
In WI, businesses have immunity if they don't post.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,912
Location
North Carolina
The best course of action, for a business, is no, or little policy. Make policy, and that policy can be dragged into court, not in a good way. Make no policy other than a law abiding business, then no claims can be made. Gun buster business always put safety in their policy, for employees, and clients, IMO this a opening when that safety is clearly not there, proof by injury.
 
Top