Suing a business for being anti-CHL

[VMI77]

What about a place that you are legally required to be and also legally required to be disarmed such as jury duty?
What if you are severely harmed there, and there is evidence suggesting that you could have escaped harm if you had just been armed?

The big difference is that the court is actually taking significant measures to prevent you from being harmed (such as armed officers inside and outside the courtroom and screening people entering the courthouse for weapons) --though they may occasionally prove ineffective against a determined attacker-- while the these anti-gun businesses actually do nothing to provide security, letting the bad guys enter armed, and only prohibiting people who are legally armed and obey the law from entering with a gun.

[mgood]

I'm all for holding them accountable if they deny me my right to defend myself and then they fail to defend me and I'm injured.

The problem I see in winning such a case is that you'd have to show that they knowingly made the place less safe by prohibiting the lawful carry of firearms.
We see a 30.06 posted business as less safe. And we have good reason to feel that way.
An anti-gunner sees a suposed gun-free zone as more safe, however disillusioned we believe them to be.
I'm afraid that the general, non CHL, public will not necessarily see having armed citizens around as making things safer. They may think less guns = more safety, even if they agree with our second amendment rights on general principle. I think you've got the group on one side that thinks one way and a group on the other that thinks just the opposite, while the majority in the middle could go either way, and may "tolerate" us rather than support us. If/when such a case goes to court, a lot will depend on those people in the middle. Lawyers for both sides will attempt to strike any potential jurors who lean strongly one way or the other.

[JNMAR]

I guess I just don't get it. If a business owner posts his business with 30.06 and I'm aware of this and disarm and go on in anyway how am I going to say it's his fault if I get hurt by a BG?...isn't it simpler and healthier to just shop elsewhere? Why would I want to go get myself shot in his business just so my family could sue and maybe win but most likely lose? Come to think of it I don't wanna go stand behind a truck that's backing up for the same reason. I don't mind my day job too much so I believe I'll just keep on working and earn my money that way.

[RPB]

I guess I just don't get it. If a business owner posts his business with 30.06 and I'm aware of this and disarm and go on in anyway how am I going to say it's his fault if I get hurt by a BG?...isn't it simpler and healthier to just shop elsewhere? Why would I want to go get myself shot in his business just so my family could sue and maybe win but most likely lose? Come to think of it I don't wanna go stand behind a truck that's backing up for the same reason. I don't mind my day job too much so I believe I'll just keep on working and earn my money that way.

So, drive 60 miles to another city to shop elsewhere?
120 mile round trip to buy eggs/milk, see a movie... whatever?
Not everyone lives in a big city with lots of stores and theaters.

I do agree, I'll pay my dollar votes elsewhere, but not everyone can ... we have no theater in my town, one is 15 miles away in the next city or 28 miles away in another ... we have 1 grocery store, it isn't posted (Thank goodness) because... The NEXT closest city to me has a grocery stor (one mom n pop type), but they don't take credit cards or checks ... (No movie theater there either, but a new restaurant just opened I think)

I have lived in Houston and Dallas in the past, but a majority of towns aren't the size of those metroplexes nor offer all the shopping choices in them. If you lived here, to do a Wally Walk, you'd need to pick a nearby town that had a WalMart, cause the County Seat city doesn't.

Most of Texas doesn't have the big city choices you have in the higher crime areas, but we do get some spillover criminals from those areas, it's nice to be in my bank and know I am not defenseless.. since they built a prison not real far away and at least one guy escaped and took the highway intersection in the center of town.

[mgood]

Fortunately, the parts of rural Texas that I've seen have very, very few 30.06 signs. My experience in small, middle-of-nowhere towns in Texas (I grew up in one) is that if you said Joe has a gun, you'd get "so what" looks as if you said that Joe drives a pickup.

[VMI77]

Fortunately, the parts of rural Texas that I've seen have very, very few 30.06 signs. My experience in small, middle-of-nowhere towns in Texas (I grew up in one) is that if you said Joe has a gun, you'd get "so what" looks as if you said that Joe drives a pickup.

Maybe I don't get around much, but I go to Austin quite a bit, have been out to West Texas lately, and around the DFW area, and I've only seen TWO legitimate 30.06 signs, both at facilities in Austin I have to travel to in the course of my employment. I've seen local AEP offices with "no gun" signs --not the proper 30.06 signage, and a couple of ghostbuster no gun signs in the liberal sanctuary developing in Marfa.

[bdickens]

Fortunately, the parts of rural Texas that I've seen have very, very few 30.06 signs. My experience in small, middle-of-nowhere towns in Texas (I grew up in one) is that if you said Joe has a gun, you'd get "so what" looks as if you said that Joe drives a pickup.

Even Urban parts of Texas have very few 30.06 signs. I have only seen four in the entire Houson Metro area.

[jimlongley]

At risk of throwing things off track, but it seems to me that the OP was about suing just because the sign existed.

Couldn't a logical connection be made to suits over "Jim Crow" laws in the last century?

SCOTUS has held that self protection is a valid basis for keeping and bearing arms, and that it is a protected right. It doesn't take much of a stetch, although it might require another trip to SCOTUS, to extend that to a 30.06 or other no guns sign/policy as denying a civil right.

I printed out the Chicago firearms registration and ownership forms with every intention of filling them out and sending them in, but they have done something very political with them and made application for one based on grant of the other, and without the first, which requires Chicago residency, you can't even fill in the second. Maybe there's a potential suit there, because denial is going to be automatic, but I'll bet if I send them in I won't even get an answer.