anti-gun posting- collecting evidence

[mec]

I didn't find this suggestion with the search engine. Sorry about the rep if it has been suggested
Since high profile shootings and robberies tend to take place in "gun free" environments, there may be some case law to be made when these things happen in businesses that post signs that create a criminal offense ref: licensed concealed carry. It would be a good idea to get photographs of such signs that identify the exact business/location. They should be date-marked to indicate that they were in place at the time of the perpetration and witnessed.

 

[hso]

The state 2A organizations and websites I'm familiar with all have lists of anti gunowner businesses. They have pics of the postings at the businesses at times, but the list would serve.

How's the fact that the businesses post against carry do us any good when we've never had a case against such a business won by the pro 2A side?

 

[mec]

people bring lawsuits all of the time to explore their merits. I have not seen any mention of failed law suits and this particular area may be little explored. The business might be liable for denying a public remedy without out substituting adequate security to replace it.
Timing would be important. Any hint of civil action or even troublesome publicity might prompt the business owner to take down such a sign and claim that the premise was not posted at the time of the event.
If you are aware of a body of case law on the subject I apologize for wasting your time.

 

[hso]

The family lost that was pushed by the Brady Center to file the lawsuit against Lucky Gunner and the other retailers that the Aurora theater murderer bought ammo, magazines and gear from and they were ordered to pay the legal fees of the defendants (LG, etc). Since Brady pushed them into it they should pay the $200,000+ due the defendents.


The 41 plaintiffs suing the theater itself had to wait until after the criminal trial was over, but the trial is only expected to take 3 weeks and they're not expected to win.

All the case law is against the idea of making a lawsuit work where the business isn't negligent and you can't be negligent for the criminal act of an outsider, BUT your idea of taking pics and posting them to get attention focused on the businesses that don't want us to enter them has and does work in getting some businesses to drop the prohibition.

 

[hso]

The family lost that was pushed by the Brady Center to file the lawsuit against Lucky Gunner and the other retailers that the Aurora theater murderer bought ammo, magazines and gear from and they were ordered to pay the legal fees of the defendants (LG, etc). Since Brady pushed them into it they should pay the $200,000+ due the defendents.


The 41 plaintiffs suing the theater itself had to wait until after the criminal trial was over, but the trial is only expected to take 3 weeks and they're not expected to win.

All the case law is against the idea of making a lawsuit work where the business isn't negligent and you can't be negligent for the criminal act of an outsider, BUT your idea of taking pics and posting them to get attention focused on the businesses that don't want us to enter them has and does work in getting some businesses to drop the prohibition.

 

[Frank Ettin]

... I have not seen any mention of failed law suits and this particular area may be little explored....

I seriously doubt that. In the last ten years or so there have been any number of incidents with respect to which the liability, if any, of a business for not permitting the lawful carrying of guns on the premises could have been litigated. I'm aware of no case in which a business has been found liable, on the grounds that the business didn't permit the lawful carrying of guns, for injures arising from a violent incident on the business premises. No one has ever been able to cite such a case. While that's not definitive, I would have expected the RKBA advocacy groups to have publicized any such litigation success. Thre are several likely reasons for this.

1. In general, the law doesn't make a business responsible for the criminal acts of a third party.
   
   
2. There is also the question of causation. In order to hold someone liable for an injury you suffer, you must first be able to establish that but for his particular action, you would not have suffered the injury.
   
   So you now claim that if you had been lawfully able to carry a gun, you would have been able to successfully, under the exact circumstances of your particular incident, defend yourself and avoid injury. That can be a pretty tall order. For example, could you prove to the satisfaction of a jury that had you been able to lawfully carry a gun, you would have been carrying it at the particular time? Could you show to the satisfaction of a jury that you had the level of training and skill necessary to effectively use your gun under the exact circumstances of your incident? Could you show to the satisfaction of a jury that you would have used your gun effectively enough to prevail and escape injury? Remember, sometimes good guys fighting back still get hurt, and sometimes good guys lose.
   
   Basically, what you could have been able to do under particular circumstances is too vague and speculative.
   
   
3. In many States laws permit businesses to bar the lawful carry of guns on premises. Some state laws even specify the type of signage to be used.

In general suing a business for not permitting the lawful carrying of guns is pretty much a non-starter. On the other hand, political and market pressure could cause a business to reconsider a "no guns" policy.

 

[mec]

Thanks Frank Ettin. That very likely is the reason no case law shows up. When Texas passed the CHL law in 1996, the anti-gun people told businesses that they would be liable if they DID NOT post the criminal trespass signs. A few did so and almost all removed them because of loss revenue and pressure from customers.

The current climate is shaped by the Bloomberg MOMs, the controversy over Open Carry and grandstanding on both sides of the issue.

A attorney active in gun rights checked WestlawNext and found no listing for Texas PC 30:06