Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tennessee Bill creates owner liability for safety in gun-free zones
Tennessee General Assembly ^ | 01/15/2016 | Representative Faison

Posted on 01/23/2016 4:12:11 PM PST by aimhigh

This legislation creates owner liability for gun owners who get victimized in a gun free zone.

(b) Any person or entity authorized to post property pursuant to § 39-17-1359 who elects, pursuant to that authority, to prohibit the possession of firearms by a person authorized to carry a handgun pursuant to § 39-17-1351, thereby assumes absolute custodial responsibility for the safety and defense of the permit holder while on the posted property and while on any property the permit holder is required to traverse in order to travel to and from the location where the permit holder's firearm is stored.

(c) The responsibility of the person or entity posting for the safety and defense of the permit holder shall extend to the conduct of other invitees, trespassers, employees of the person or entity, vicious animals, wild animals, and defensible man-made and natural hazards.

(1) Any handgun carry permit holder who is injured, suffers bodily injury or death, incurs economic loss or expense, property damage or any other compensable loss as the result of conduct occurring on property that is posted pursuant to § 39-17-1359, shall have a cause of action against the person or entity posting. In addition to damages, the person shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees, expert witness costs, and other costs necessary to bring the cause of action.

(Excerpt) Read more at capitol.tn.gov ...


TOPICS: Government; US: Tennessee
KEYWORDS: banglist; gunfree; tennessee
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last
To: aimhigh

Breathtaking!


21 posted on 01/23/2016 5:24:04 PM PST by Manhattanite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

We need this in all “shall issue” states and in all “open carry” states.


22 posted on 01/23/2016 5:24:22 PM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2000)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
Shoot back if you must, but I have issues with this sort of thing on constitutional grounds. I really am getting tired of people thinking they can force private property owners to bend to their demands. If I see a gun free zone sign and choose to disarm and go inside anyway, I made a choice. His property, his rules, his rights.

I don't want anyone telling me what I allow on my property and I afford the same respect to others... even if I think they ARE a dumbass.

23 posted on 01/23/2016 5:25:34 PM PST by FunkyZero (... I've got a Grand Piano to prop up my mortal remains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Very good. It is about time we put sanity back in our legislation.


24 posted on 01/23/2016 5:25:56 PM PST by PA Engineer (Liberate America from the Occupation Media. #2ndAmendmentMatters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

I expect insurance companies to start assessing massive surcharges on businesses that are “gun free zones”.


25 posted on 01/23/2016 5:31:22 PM PST by lightman (O Lord, save Thy people and bless Thine inheritance, giving to Thy Church vict'ry o'er Her enemies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Excellent....I hope other states legislation’s pick up on this great idea...


26 posted on 01/23/2016 5:32:57 PM PST by Popman (Christ alone: My Cornerstone...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

We have this in Wisconsin.

And if they have the no gun sign up but nobody checking, you can ignore the sign.


27 posted on 01/23/2016 5:35:53 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh; All
"Great legislation!"

Sounds good to me.

28 posted on 01/23/2016 5:38:05 PM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero
I really am getting tired of people thinking they can force private property owners to bend to their demands.

I don't see this as a demand, it's making property owners liable for their PC idiotic decisions...

If I go to the movies and want to defend myself if some lunatic goes crazy, the theater owner should be held accountable if I am not allowed to.....

29 posted on 01/23/2016 5:40:42 PM PST by Popman (Christ alone: My Cornerstone...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

HORRIBLE legislation. Who pays on ‘govt property’?? Schools and the like. Or is govt, as usual, ‘exempt’?

A private biz owner has EVERY right to refuse any person, for ANY reason they can dream up. Doesn’t mean one is obligated to patronize said biz.

One is not so lucky when it comes to govt....’obligations and visitations’.


30 posted on 01/23/2016 6:19:19 PM PST by i_robot73 ("A man chooses. A slave obeys." - Andrew Ryan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Fantastic! Needs to be duplicated in every red state! And even some blue ones where the Repubs control both houses - like Virginia.........


31 posted on 01/23/2016 6:51:08 PM PST by Arlis ( A "Sacred Cow" Tipping Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nailbiter; BartMan1; Forecaster; stanley windrush

Check this out...


32 posted on 01/23/2016 7:16:16 PM PST by IncPen (There is not one single patriot in Washington, DC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Been saying this for a long time. All places posted gun free are accepting responsibility for the safety of everyone in their gun free zone and are liable for any damages to person or property therein.

Let’s see how many places want to take that liability on. I hope this goes for any governmental establishment too including the Post Office.


33 posted on 01/23/2016 7:24:17 PM PST by Boomer (Liberal Propaganda is like visual/audio Meth. It ruins the mind and rots the teeth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

I love it. I’ve been looking for a new state in which to live. Might have to go for a visit and see how the business climate is.


34 posted on 01/23/2016 9:46:56 PM PST by Organic Panic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero
"...His property, his rules, his rights..."

And his responsibility.

This doesn't force anyone to do anything. If they want to make their location a gun-free zone, they are still perfectly entitled to do so. However, by disarming individuals who are authorized by the State to carry and, as a result, are making those individuals incapable of defending themselves, they must .. and should .. assume the responsibility for their defense.

35 posted on 01/23/2016 9:52:17 PM PST by BlueLancer (Once is happenstance. Twice is circumstance. Three times is enemy action.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero

I really am getting tired of people thinking they can force private property owners to bend to their demands. If I see a gun free zone sign and choose to disarm and go inside anyway, I made a choice. His property, his rules, his rights.


So if you don’t want to disarm, you don’t go in, right?

What if you don’t want to disarm, but have to go in?

What if some guy then starts to shoot up the place?

Who’s responsible for your safety?


36 posted on 01/23/2016 10:03:49 PM PST by chaosagent (Remember, no matter how you slice it, forbidden fruit still tastes the sweetest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero

” His property, his rules, his rights.”

I also agree with you about private property. However, commercial businesses are required to accept all customers nowadays, and I don’t see why I should be rejected just because I have a permit to carry.

I’m not so clear about the liability of the property owner for acts out of his control though.


37 posted on 01/23/2016 10:50:00 PM PST by VanShuyten ("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
This is exactly what I have been saying is needed for a long time now. If any person or organization prohibits citizens from defending themselves, thehave assumed a duty to protect. Legislation that spells out exactly that duty is overdue. This is something that needs to be brought up before each canidate for political office no matter how high or low, and they should be forced to take a stand on one side or the other. This is exactly the kind of common sense legislation that is sorely needed. Let the victim disarmist state in no uncertain tems why they dont support it.
38 posted on 01/23/2016 11:11:25 PM PST by zeugma (Want to know what freedom smells like? Hoppes #9.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero
If I see a gun free zone sign and choose to disarm and go inside anyway, I made a choice. His property, his rules, his rights.

So...you're saying one class of citizen is responsible for the consequences of his choices, but another (property owner) isn't?

Interesting...

39 posted on 01/24/2016 4:16:39 AM PST by gogeo (If you are Tea Party, the GOPee does not want you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: VanShuyten
I do understand your point, but I also disagree that private businesses should have to allow ANYthing that they don't want. I don't think they should be sued into oblivion for not baking gay cookies, and I don't think they should be coerced into allowing guns on their property if that is what they choose.

These aren't government buildings or services (in which case there should be NO provision to allow them to ban firearms). The way I see it, you either believe in private property rights, or you don't. Trying to play the middle makes us no better than those on the other side.

40 posted on 01/24/2016 6:36:44 AM PST by FunkyZero (... I've got a Grand Piano to prop up my mortal remains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson