• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

No Guns Allowed

Max

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
335
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
I suspect the antis will try to persuade as many organizations, businesses and individuals to post "no guns allowed" signs as possible. This was in the Journal Sentinel,

"But under the bill, private individuals and groups that allow concealed carry on their property would have blanket immunity from any legal liability from that decision. Those who post signs prohibiting concealed weapons would not receive that immunity."

This is a crucial piece of information in the upcoming gun ban skirmish. If they ban guns, they increase their liability. It might be a good idea for all of us to have fliers informing folks of the increased liability with us so that if we encounter a "no guns allowed" sign, we can leave the flier with those in charge. Your thoughts?

Here is a link to that article, http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/124289954.html
 
Last edited:

davegran

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
1,563
Location
Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wiscon
An excellent idea!

.... It might be a good idea for all of us to have fliers informing folks of the increased liability with us so that if we encounter a "no guns allowed" sign, we can leave the flier with those in charge. Your thoughts?

Here is a link to that article, http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/124289954.html
It is an excellent idea! Why don't you work up a rough draft to get us started?
 
M

McX

Guest
it's a misprint! it's not no guns allowed, it's: dont say No Guns aloud!
 

Max

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
335
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
It is an excellent idea! Why don't you work up a rough draft to get us started?

It would be my pleasure to put together a rough draft BUT I am confused as to where to find the final draft of the bill that the governor will sign. If you can point me in that direction I will get working on it right away. Thanks.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
Max said:
This was in the Journal Sentinel,
"under the bill, private individuals and groups that allow concealed carry on their property would have blanket immunity from any legal liability from that decision. Those who post signs prohibiting concealed weapons would not receive that immunity."
(Emphasis added.)
I hope that some places are dumb enough to do just that.
I'll carry openly, at least until someone trespasses me.
Then I'll get contact info for owner/corporate & explain why I won't be back, & that the law protects from liability only those companies that allow cc.
 

Max

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
335
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
Just a rough draft. I am sure there are many here that can do much better then I. We need to persuade anyone banning guns to change their mind so the freedom to carry becomes nearly universal in this state.

"While attempting to patronize your business, I noticed you had a sign barring handguns on your premises. While the current state law provides immunity from liability should one chose to allow gun on their premises, no such immunity exists for those that do not.

"943.13 (6) A person that does not, under this section, prohibit an individual who is carrying a firearm from entering or remaining on property that the person owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising from its decision."

I ask you to reconsider your position on this as I would like to continue to patronize your business but will not be able to as long as you ban guns. No doubt others that value our constitution will cease to patronize your business as well and you have increased your liability for your decision to ban law abiding citizens from carrying on your property. One final thought, do you think someone planning an armed robbery of an establishment would pick one with a sign banning guns, knowing nobody is armed there, or an establishment without such sign where it is likely someone is armed?

Thanks for your time."
 

Flipper

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
This was a comment to the MJS article on the bill passing. I don't know what the cited case "principles" refers to.


dans78 - Jun 21, 2011 9:13 PM

» Report abuse


1 1

OK...looks like I answered my own question. This pulled from the TTAG website:

Wisconsin holds a landowner liable for “for injuries resulting from conduct foreseeably creating an unreasonable risk to others.” Thus, if the owner refuses to allow a guest the means to protect himself, that foreseeably creates a risk of injury should the guest be attacked on the premises while disarmed, under the principles of Pagelsdorf v. Safeco Ins. quoted above. And yes, I are a lawyer.


REEdiculous. Law, or at least prosecution of the law, sure presumes an awful lot...like the outcome of an attack would be BETTER had someone returned fire.
 

rcav8r

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
252
Location
Stoughton, WI
Maybe someone could come up with a WI specific card with the liability part on the back of the card. As it is, quite a few of those other cards are just fine on the front.
 

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
where is the logic ? the guy that is bent on killing everyone inside will laugh at the NO GUNS ALLOWED sign before he walks in and starts shooting. I wonder if a NO GUNS ALLOWED sign would have prevented the Luby's Massacre
 

Big Dipper

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
144
Location
Illinois & Wisconsin
I wonder if a NO GUNS ALLOWED sign would have prevented the Luby's Massacre

It wasn't until 1995 (four years after the Luby's Massacre) that Texas passed a shall-issue law. Suzanna Hupp had a gun in her car, but NOT on her person because concealed and open carry were both prohibited in 1991. Because her parents were murdered there and she could have done something if her gun was with her she went on to campaign for the Texas concealed carry law.

So, in effect there was a "No Guns Allowed" sign at the time of the massacre! And, it prevented a possible response from a citizen.
 
Last edited:

phred

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
768
Location
North Central Wisconsin, ,
"Business" Cards

I just used the MS- Word files, front and back from this site

http://paopencarry.org/no-guns-no-money-cards

I set the front side left margin at 0.6"
I set the back side left margin at 0.4"

I printed the front side on my ink jet and then just turned the paper over and printed the back side. Mine all lined up. Using a razor knife and stiff straight edge, they can be cut into cards. I used some pretty heavy paper.
 
Top