Do "anti-CCW" stores have a greater legal responsibility to protect customers?


No, by my logic, and as was pointed out so well by BC1, "You, and only you, are responsible for your security and the security of your family and loved ones." This is our right and our responsibility. Therefore, when a shop owner tells a customer that they may not exercise that right, THEY ASSUME THAT RESPONSIBILITY ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS. Your example of an airliner makes my point. I cannot, by law, carry a weapon on board. Because of that, the government, which denied me the right to provide for my own protection in that particular situation, has assumed that responsibility on my behalf. That is why we go through all the monkey business at the security checkpoints prior to boarding. I want to clarify one thing: I would agree that, under normal circumstances in which a business owner has made no demand that guns not be carried onto their premises, that business owner has no obligation to provide security beyond that with which they are comfortable. That leaves a customer free to take those measures THEY deem appropriate to insure their own safety. I continue to take issue, however, with the idea that a business owner may simply tell customers or employees, "You may not protect yourself while on the premises of my business, nor am I going to do it for you. While you are on the premises of my business, you're just going to have to take your chances." I will not do business with such an organization if at all possible.

I end with this observation, one I have already made. The sign you post in your window or on your door keeps out the LEGAL firearms. I guarantee that it has no affect on someone carrying ILLEGAL firearms.
 

chiefpropellerhead:252655 said:
I understand where Boatswain2pa is coming from. I also understand where mappow is coming from, the angle of a business owner. As a business owner, my focus is to provide a service or goods to my customers. That is probably my main focus. As a business owner, am I legally responsible for providing security for my customers? The answer to that is probably not. I guess it all boils down to what our expectation is for the possibility of a crime happening. The the type of business, what goods or services they sell, location of business and clientele probably has to be considered. If the business has a high expectation for the possibility of security related incidents then they will probably beef up security. The cost of that security will roll down hill to the customer through increased prices. Business owners are in the business to make a profit. If I were in business my goal would be able to make a profit at the end of the day. If that is not my goal then I wont be in business for very long. If a business decides that they do not want anyone carrying weapons in their business that is their right. As a cwp holder, if I do not feel safe going into that business without my weapon I have the choice of going somewhere else where I can. I rarely visit restaurants that sell alcohol for consumption on site. That is because I can not legally carry my weapon in there. When I do go to a restaurant that sells alcohol to eat lunch then I am taking a calculated risk that nothing is going to happen. We have to find a good balance between being a tree hugging pacifist that likes to think all CWP holders are paranoid or the 2nd amendment survivalist that thinks you must be locked and loaded 24x7 no matter where you are. There, that ought to set some folks on fire this morning. LOL...

Well...paint me a 2nd Amendment survivalist! And proud of it! :)
 
No, by my logic, and as was pointed out so well by BC1, "You, and only you, are responsible for your security and the security of your family and loved ones." This is our right and our responsibility. Therefore, when a shop owner tells a customer that they may not exercise that right, THEY ASSUME THAT RESPONSIBILITY ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS. Your example of an airliner makes my point. I cannot, by law, carry a weapon on board. Because of that, the government, which which denied me the right to provide for my own protection in that particular situation, has assumed that responsibility on my behalf. That is why we go through all the monkey business at the security checkpoints prior to boarding. My ultimate point is that a business owner may not simply tell customers, "You may not protect yourself while on the premises of my business, nor am I going to do it for you. While you are on the premises of my business, you're just going to have to take your chances."

I end with this observation, one I have already made. The sign you post in your window or on your door keeps out the LEGAL firearms. I guarantee that it has no affect on someone carrying ILLEGAL firearms.

Ditto! I agree with you completely.
 
No, by my logic, and as was pointed out so well by BC1, "You, and only you, are responsible for your security and the security of your family and loved ones." This is our right and our responsibility. Therefore, when a shop owner tells a customer that they may not exercise that right, THEY ASSUME THAT RESPONSIBILITY ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS. Your example of an airliner makes my point. I cannot, by law, carry a weapon on board. Because of that, the government, which which denied me the right to provide for my own protection in that particular situation, has assumed that responsibility on my behalf. That is why we go through all the monkey business at the security checkpoints prior to boarding. My ultimate point is that a business owner may not simply tell customers, "You may not protect yourself while on the premises of my business, nor am I going to do it for you. While you are on the premises of my business, you're just going to have to take your chances."

I end with this observation, one I have already made. The sign you post in your window or on your door keeps out the LEGAL firearms. I guarantee that it has no affect on someone carrying ILLEGAL firearms.

You cannot be serious. Good luck telling any business owner what YOU have decided are THEIR responsibilities. With the plethora of "protect me" laws coming from our government these days, I would not be surprised if one day someone passed a law to force business owners to protect those of you who feel you need it. Absent any such law, I am far more comfortable with a business owner telling me he will not protect me, than with an individual who believes that he or she can tell a business owner they have to provide security for them. The cost of which is paid for by all customers. As for me, I shop where I want and if I feel unsafe for any reason, I just avoid the store. How hard is that?
 
To take this one step further...I work in a gun free zone, a cleege campus. I have always told my wife that should I be killed in an active shooter incident while teaching, she neds to sue the university and the state. Sure, I could ignore it and risk my job and state license...or quit and lose my livelihood. I should have to do neither.
 
If a store prevents me from defending myself (or my family) to my full legal ability by prohibiting me from carrying my firearm, then do they have a greater responsibility for providing for my (or my families) protection?

Unfortunately, the answer is; "Nope".
You are on your own.
 
The person who wants no guns on their property has the right to post such a notice. No obligations.
We have the right to go elsewhere. No obligation but we SHOULD let them know why we and our dollars went elsewhere.

It would be VERY interesting if those who own businesses in Wisconsin would post how much their liability insurance increased because WI is now a CC state -- be SURE to ask your agent "Why?" . Or how much their insurance company offered to lower it if they posted a "No Guns" sign.

Not picking on WI, it's just that they're the newest place with CC.
 
mappow:252649 said:
Soooo, I have a paint store and I don't particularly like firearms. I have posted NO GUNS ALLOWED in plain sight IAW State Law. Now, per your question, I'll have to provide stock clerks/SWAT employees to keep the area secure and stocked. Who will be eating this additional cost? Just asking :>)
can we get the name of your store, so we can post it in the business against concealed carry thread
 
It would be nice if there was any obligation attached to slapping signs on windows. Like have an attendant that you can hand your gun to at the door (which is the way it would have been done in the Old West. They would hardly have expected you to go back to the stable and leave your gun on your horse).

I say again this isn't about protecting property rights but about creating a hassle for people that carry. Of course in THEORY you can just walk away or leave your gun in the car but in actuality there are so many instances where neither is practical it's not really much of a solution.
 
Interesting. I find the quote you include with your post to be diametrically opposed to the point of view you express in this post. I guess the implication is that the only rights you are truly interested in protecting are your own. You are your own minority? Because, if you truly believe the idea underlying this quote, then, regardless of your personal view of concealed or open carry, you would also defend the right of other individuals to carry despite your own discomfort.

I was playing the devils advocate in my response to the OP. I do believe that NO ONE should be able to dictate to you your rights and use of your property. If I was to open a business targeting one-eyed, one-legged lesbian Aleut's with red hair then that should be the demographics I choose to serve. I should never be forced by any entity to modify my operation on my property. Not that this business plan would be profitable, but it’s MY choice and MY business.

With that said, the business owner has no real obligation to protect you any more then any other of his customers that conducts business on his property. The assumed liability is just that, assumed. The business owner must ensure that the business is reasonably safe and in good order to facilitate business. If it’s not safe and conducive to conduct business then the market will take care of that by not conducting business there and constant law suits for damage or injury.

Another QUOTE from Rand:
I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
 
Here in Wisconsin, a sign also needs to be posted if the business does not want CCW in their store. Obviously, if they are posted I will not support the business as much as possible, but there are times I may have to go into those stores, so I will disarm myself in accordance with the law. Under WI law, any business owner cannot be sued or held responsible for what a CCW holder does(ie. shoot someone). The business is protected from liability by the law. Now if they have a sign up and I or a family member would get attacked in one of these stores that did post a sign. You can bet your ash I will be filing a law suit against them and taking everything they own. By posting the sign and refusing my rights, they are now taking my Saftey in their hands and with it the liability of anything that would happen. My wife works for an insurance company and they are advising business owners to not post since the state law protects them and they could be liable if they did post a sign. Just my opinion, but here in WI, I would not post a sign for that fact alone. I am a small business owner also.
 
A suggestion for anyone that thinks an entity that denies you your civil Rights has no obligation to protect you; Read a book entitled "Guns in the Work Place"
 
I have the picture of the "no weapons" sign. I misled a bit, not the typical circle with a diagonal line. Link Removed To me this would be the correct sign to use. This sign is at Locke Supply.
 
I have the picture of the "no weapons" sign. I misled a bit, not the typical circle with a diagonal line. Link Removed To me this would be the correct sign to use. This sign is at Locke Supply.

I LIKE it!!! It still isn't going to deter a bad guy, but it at least sets the minds of legal carriers at ease.
 
I LIKE it!!! It still isn't going to deter a bad guy, but it at lease sets the minds of legals at ease.

No sign is going to deter a bad guy. They are going to do what they are going to do regardless of what signage is put up. I think this is the viable choice tho, for any business. It just might put the thought in a bad guy's head, "Hey, someone in here could be armed!" If the sign would stop just one crime, it would be worth any cost in my opinion. My credit union has no signs posted about weapons at all. I asked the president one day about the signs about weapons. I normally do not inform people that I carry, but I have known and dealt with this man for many, many years. I told him that I carry and that is why I noticed and asked him about the signs. He told me that you can get so many signs on the doors that you can't see who is coming in but please don't bring a gun in here. They were robbed about a week after that. I was in his office about a week after they were robbed and I jokingly asked him what he thought about carrying a gun now. He smiled and said, fine with me, just don't use it for the wrong reasons. I am going to email him that photo and see if he likes it.
 
What I was referring to was, if a store did not allow a person to carry and there was a shooting inside the store. Wonder how this argument would hold up in court...

Sorry I should have made my thought clear.
 
What I was referring to was, if a store did not allow a person to carry and there was a shooting inside the store. Wonder how this argument would hold up in court...

Sorry I should have made my thought clear.

And that is the purpose of my post. What if a store prevented me from carrying my firearm and a violent criminal harmed my child in that store in a scenario in which if I had my firearm I could have been more likely to have been able to protected my child?

Any lawyers here know if this argument has been made in court yet?
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,542
Messages
611,255
Members
74,961
Latest member
Shodan
Back
Top