Should Your Small Business Welcome Legally Carried Guns?

OC for ME · Aug 21, 2014

There are some social issues in our country that are just downright contentious and even after years of public debate, sides seem as polarized as ever. Most don't impact the small business owner, but gun law is an issue that some owners need to consider.

http://smallbusiness.foxbusiness.co...-small-business-welcome-legally-carried-guns/

Safety of your customers? Which ones the unarmed ones?

skidmark · Aug 21, 2014

I thought they did an adequate job of stressing the liability risk involved in prohibiting effective and efficient means of self defense. What is needed is (and I can't believe I'm saying this) more businesses being sucessfully sued for failing to meet a reasonable duty to care for the customer.

That's going to be a tall order.

stay safe.

OC for ME · Aug 21, 2014

I'm with ya, we can't have small business exercising their property right, can we.

OC for ME · Aug 21, 2014

Lawfully armed citizens "trespassing" upon private property, it could be argued, would not benefit from such a tort. Guns not welcome, you ain't invited. Visitor? Nope, trespasser. As a criminal, now, I have no duty to care for your well being while you are trespassing upon my private property.

Boycott the business, let them know that you will and why, and hope for a change in policy. One example is provided in the story.

Grapeshot · Aug 21, 2014

Nightmare said:
Under the common law of torts, there is the duty of care to a visitor invitee/licensee.

I looked briefly also at attractive nuisance doctrine but it is the landowner unable to appreciate the hazard (of barred/invited armed visitors) in this case.

I used to organize a sporting event held way out in the country in South Carolina, a Bicycling Century ride and Kayak paddle at Givhans Ferry SP. Near the entrance to the park was a small general store with many obvious security arrangements - barred windows, video and locked front door. When I introduced myself and announced the impending 300 customers, the obviously armed proprietor was not too impressed. He explained that he had to run his bar across the street and the store single-handedly and that he "had built his own prison." I have never forgotten the idea of us building our own prisons.

Many operate that way, literally and figuratively.

Prison or fortress - all in the POV.

Grapeshot · Aug 21, 2014

skidmark said:
I thought they did an adequate job of stressing the liability risk involved in prohibiting effective and efficient means of self defense. What is needed is (and I can't believe I'm saying this) more businesses being sucessfully sued for failing to meet a reasonable duty to care for the customer.

That's going to be a tall order.

stay safe.

OC for ME said:
I'm with ya, we can't have small business exercising their property right, can we.

Right to be safe vs property rights - a dilemma of some long standing.

I lean toward Quasi Public as a solution. You invite the public onto your property, you are treated as if you were a public/municipal facility.

solus · Aug 21, 2014

found it interesting the channel 12 Augusta GA spot about the T-Bonz steakhouse didn't get coverage on the forum (or i missed the headlines back in may)

ipse

OC for ME · Aug 21, 2014

Grapeshot said:
Right to be safe vs property rights - a dilemma of some long standing.

I lean toward Quasi Public as a solution. You invite the public onto your property, you are treated as if you were a public/municipal facility.

No arguments from me, except the "invite" part, gun owners are not invited by definition.

solus said:
found it interesting the channel 12 Augusta GA spot about the T-Bonz steakhouse didn't get coverage on the forum (or i missed the headlines back in may)

ipse

+1

However, folks around here typically get all worked up when we hear of a "infringement" if you will. A business that desires lawfully armed citizens to patronize their establishment is not as much fun to discuss, unless the employees are hot chicks, like a certain eatery in Rifle CO.

color of law · Aug 21, 2014

Grapeshot said:
Right to be safe vs property rights - a dilemma of some long standing.

I lean toward Quasi Public as a solution. You invite the public onto your property, you are treated as if you were a public/municipal facility.

I agree, but the SCOUS says no except in a very limited cases. The exception is when the shopping complex gives the appearance of a town, streets, stop signs, street lights, etc.

In Ohio the law holds harmless businesses where gun shootouts occur.

Open carrying in businesses is 99% positive, but it's that 1% that can screw-up your day.

marshaul · Aug 21, 2014

Grapeshot said:
Right to be safe vs property rights - a dilemma of some long standing.

I don't think so. Rights neither conflict nor overlap. If there appears to be a conflict in rights, a closer examination will reveal that there is only a right, and an action which is incorrectly interpreted as a right.

sudden valley gunner · Aug 21, 2014

marshaul said:
I don't think so. Rights neither conflict nor overlap. If there appears to be a conflict in rights, a closer examination will reveal that there is only a right, and an action which is incorrectly interpreted as a right.

+1

I'll tend to side with the property owner to set his own rules. If an individual still voluntarily abides by those rules he has waived his right to do .....

F350 · Aug 22, 2014

skidmark said:
I thought they did an adequate job of stressing the liability risk involved in prohibiting effective and efficient means of self defense. What is needed is (and I can't believe I'm saying this) more businesses being sucessfully sued for failing to meet a reasonable duty to care for the customer.

That's going to be a tall order.

stay safe.

A judge recently allowed "reasonable care" law suits against the Aurora movie theater to proceed. He based his opinion on the "fact" that the theater could have reasonably foreseen a theater being the target of a mass shooting.

BTW that theater was not the largest one showing Batman, or the one closest to his apartment; it was the only one posted against lawful carry.

OC for ME · Aug 22, 2014

Let the verdict do our trumpeting for us. If a lawyer can sway the jury to see the obvious, then the number and size of the check(s) they will have to write will be the trumpet.

Custodian · Aug 23, 2014

color of law said:
I agree, but the SCOUS says no except in a very limited cases. The exception is when the shopping complex gives the appearance of a town, streets, stop signs, street lights, etc.

In Ohio the law holds harmless businesses where gun shootouts occur.

Open carrying in businesses is 99% positive, but it's that 1% that can screw-up your day.

The obvious, best approach, I think, is hold any private business in harm, that invites the general public to their place of business, but demand that you disarm while on their property.

Its the immunities that harm the citizen. Qualified and absolute immunity for law enforcement and the courts as well as this, well, uhm, private property/business immunity for businesses. Get rid of them, and allow these people to be sued into non-existence, and the problem would go away overnight, once, sad to say, tragedy strikes.

color of law · Aug 23, 2014

Custodian said:
The obvious, best approach, I think, is hold any private business in harm, that invites the general public to their place of business, but demand that you disarm while on their property.

Its the immunities that harm the citizen. Qualified and absolute immunity for law enforcement and the courts as well as this, well, uhm, private property/business immunity for businesses. Get rid of them, and allow these people to be sued into non-existence, and the problem would go away overnight, once, sad to say, tragedy strikes.

On the other hand once the business owner knows they are not held liable, the business no longer has an accuse to disallow gun toters. Unless the business owner has an actual prejudice towards guns. Civil Rights cover race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Does carrying a gun fall within a religious belief?

Then said he unto them, But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.

Should Your Small Business Welcome Legally Carried Guns?

OC for ME

Regular Member

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

OC for ME

Regular Member

OC for ME

Regular Member

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior

solus

Regular Member

OC for ME

Regular Member

color of law

Accomplished Advocate

marshaul

Campaign Veteran

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member

F350

Regular Member

OC for ME

Regular Member

Custodian

Regular Member

color of law

Accomplished Advocate