Skip to comments.Did Colorado shooter single out Cinemark theater because it banned guns?
Posted on 09/11/2012 7:01:29 AM PDT by marktwain
With 12 dead and 58 wounded, the July 20th shooting at the Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado was sure to result in a lawsuit. On Friday, the first suit was announced, claiming Cinemark has primary responsibility. The theater did have responsibility for the attack, but not for the reasons that the lawyers bringing the case think.
The lawyer bringing the suit, Attorney Marc Bern, with the New York city law firm of Napoli, Bern, Ripka and Scholonik, suggested the theater should have had security guards the night of the attack. Yet, checking bags or metal detectors at the front of the theater that night wouldnt have prevented the attack. The killer brought his guns in through an emergency backdoor.
Armed security guards at movie theaters are rare in low crime areas, such as Aurora, especially on less crowded weeknights. And, with an audience fleeing the theater, armed guards may have experienced difficulty getting quickly inside.
So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killers apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.
Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property.
Most movie theaters allow permit holders carrying guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the only one with a sign posted at the theaters entrance.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
This is one of the few times a lawyer may do some good.
I don’t know how everyone else feels about this subject but personally I pay no attention to those signs that say that concealed weapons are not allowed. If the need for the weapon arises the fact that you were carring against the owners wishes means nothing. I was caught one time when a waitress saw my weapon and reported me to the manager...he asked me to just keep it hidden and it was no big deal.
Gun-shop employee prevents massacre(California, 1999)
A perfectly reasonable statement. Is there law to back it up? (Asking because I hadn’t been aware of that, and need to point it out to the HR doofs who put big bright “gun free” zone stickers on our office doors.)
Is that a common law doctrine, and if so, where can I find a good reference on it?
I would start with search of common sense and the law references.
See "Erik B. Scott, Costco Las Vegas."
I guess Aurora is "low crime" if you compare it to Chicago.
Who would have thought that denying the law-abiding of their right of self-defense would deny the law-abiding of their right of self-defense?
[Leaving out the /sarc tag to save precious Internet resources see Im saving the planet because I care more than you!]
I would presume that all businesses that post No Weapons Allowed stickers have previously discussed the matter with the company attorneys and insurance agent.
I doubt that the insurance policy would be a huge financial burden on any business. I mean what are the odds of a nutcase shooting up your theater?