[axxe55]

Originally Posted by Flat Tire

You can't hold a city or property owner liable for a GFZ when this type of thing happens. How could any one prove they have the skill to stop that particular gunman. That will never happen. You can sue ( because some scumbag lawyer will take your money ) But you will never win a penny. And a good judge will throw it out.

funny you should say that. lady one a huge lawsuit settlement from McDonald's years ago for getting burned by hot coffee! funny part is the judge didn't throw it out, (i would have) and a jury awarded her the money, ( i wouldn't have given one dime) you can never tell what a judge and jury may decide upon.

[axxe55]

just for the sake of argument, that a business owner wanted to allow his patrons to CC in his business because he himself was pro gun, but wasn't allowed to because the city or county declared by ordinance that it was unlawful. if something were to happen, like what did in Aurora, would anyone feel the business owner was liable, for obeying the law? i would see the city as being at fault and liable, for not allowing people the right to defend themselves against such a heinous attack.

[gearhead396]

Originally Posted by axxe55

i am not saying anything, merely repeating what's been said. if the entire City of Aurora is a GFZ, the theater is simply complying with a city ordinance. so therefor IMO, the City of Aurora is liable for the deaths for not allowing law abiding citizens to exercise their right to defend themselves.

this is strictly my opinion and is not a legal precedent. that will be up to judges and juries to decide who, if anyone is liable for the deaths.

Oh ok understood

[Tackleberry1]

Originally Posted by dog2000tj

Why shouldn't a property owner be liable? it's their policy that results in someone not being able to defend themselves. it's their property and they have an obligation to provide a safe and secure environment.

that's what liability insurance if for ... liability! if a property owner lets thier property fall into disrepiar and a piece of the building fell and hit you in the head, guess who's responsible? the property owner! if you tripped over a sidewalk expansion joint and got injured (1/4" deflection is the max allowed by code), guess who is responsible? the property owner!

a little factoid - NYC has been paying out over $60million a year over the past several years to settle trips/falls on it's sidewalks

if someone puts in place a policy that prevents you from exercising your inalienable right to protect yourself, and then you end up getting hurt and/or killed, absolutely the property owner should be held liable!

I like ^^THIS^^ line of reasoning...

10 years in commercial Construction here and I agree. Property owners pay excessive amounts to comply with building codes and ADA requirements and settle out of court for buckets of money everytime a handicap citizen finds and ADA ramp that exceeded allowable slope...potential injury...not even actual injuries and the settle.

Would not take many settlements to get the insurance companies attention who would compensate by jacking up the premium on owners who declared there business a GFZ.

Tack

[billt]

I think you're going to see a lot of this "gun free zone" nonsense go away quietly after this. Especially if either Aurora, Colorado or AMC Theaters is on the ass end of a big law suit because of it. There was a big stink raised about this after Virginia Tech. You can bet there will be an even bigger one raised here, as there damn well should be. As I said, I've simply violated all of these "gun free zones", and will continue to do so. The risk is well worth the reward.......Even if you don't go to midnight movie premiers. Nut cases are everywhere. Why comply to a stupid request, that in the long run could very well get you killed?

[msup752]

Here in MI, business owners can put up signs prohibiting weapons on their property. Only a few do it.
I have had a lengthy discussion with many of the officers I work with on what would happen if I did go in one of these posted businesses with my pistol. The most likely is nothing as the weapon is properly concealed.
Next scenario is the weapon is suspected and/or seen and an employee confronts me and asks me to leave. I would drop everything and go.
Next would be the business calls the police, not wanting to confront an armed person. If I were to be confronted and the police were called, I would calmly leave so I would not be violating the wishes of the business owner and explain that to the police if they even talk to Me.
If the police just show up, I have to tell them I have a pistol and then this is where it gets tricky. Most officers agree they would verify my ID and CPL and warn me not to enter the business again if I am carrying a weapon under trespass law. However, if I were to be in Ann Arbor, I would likely be arrested and my pistol confiscated as the sign is the trespass notice. It is really the officers call.
I vote with my dollars and avoid businesses that post such signs. My daughter no longer gets to go to Toys R Us, for example. My wife never used to support me on this, saying to just leave my gun in the car. Her attitude changed on that a while ago.

[ScottA]

I've searched the Aurora, CO city website, and I can't find any mention of a gun free zone.

[JonM]

Here in wisconsin our ccw law has a neat little provision in it, if a business puts up a gfz sign that business can be held liable for gun violence on their premises. If they do not post a gfz sign they cannot be sued for damages caused by a ccw person or a criminal type.

This little bit is what makes wisconsin's ccw law so powerful.

This gun free zone idiocy wont end until some huge corporation or govt entity gets sued for a LOT.

[alsaqr]

I've searched the Aurora, CO city website, and I can't find any mention of a gun free zone.

A CO CCW allows for concealed carry in every city of the state. The state of CO concealed carry law supercedes all city laws outlawing concealed carry. Denver pushed the issue in court and lost.

http://www.rmgo.org/gun-law-faqs/concealed-carry-permits

18-12-214. Authority granted by permit - carrying restrictions.

(1) (a) A permit to carry a concealed handgun authorizes the permittee to carry a concealed handgun in all areas of the state, except

(2) A permit issued does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun into a place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law.

[Sniper03]

I also think they should be liable. However in these cases I believe the weapon should strictly by concealed. But the bottom line, if it is not a Federal Building, Government Building that is posted or Airline I "Will" be carrying! Sign or no sign and no one will know I am.

03