Earlier this week I mentioned that Civil Liability for Posted Properties was on my wish list for 2010. I’d like to expand on that.
In Tennessee, there is a provision that allows businesses and government entities “to prohibit the possession of weapons by any person otherwise authorized” by the Handgun Carry Permit law. They must post a sign with specific language at every entrance in order for the prohibition to hold up. Places that post these signs are called “posted properties.” There are relatively few posted properties in Tennessee, but I avoid them if at all possible.
Now that restaurant carry has passed, there is a full court press to get restaurants to post. One of the reasons mentioned is “concerns over what liability restaurants might have if they don’t [post] and a shooting occurs.”
Well that’s an easy one. TCA 39-17-1359(b) states “Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter, reduce or eliminate any civil or criminal liability that a property owner or manager may have for injuries arising on their property.” As a business owner, you are just as liable for shootings if you post that sign than you are if you don’t. I mean, it’s right there in black and white.
I think that should change.
If you tell me I’m not allowed to protect my family while I am in your establishment, it says to me that YOU are taking that responsibility. I want that written into the law. You post a sign, you are specifically liable for anything that might happen to anyone on that property.
I think that’s fair. You aren’t liable for the “innocent bystander shot by carry permit holder” scenario that has never happened if you don’t post, but you are liable for the convicted felon that murders an employee over a $10 drug debt if you do post.
That’s on my wish list. I doubt I’ll ever get it. In the meantime, I’ll continue not giving my money to people who don’t want my business.
related posts:
Restaurant Carry Legal Challenge | 2009 Legislative Roundup | watch how you phrase it |
Well, you may never get it codified into law (much though I would approve of it myself), but there is already something approximating a judicial precedent for it here in TN, in the form of McClung Vs. Delta Square Limited Partnership. Granted, that case did not pertain directly to firearms, but it certainly goes in the right direction with regard to liability.
.
This liability frenzy is just another symptom of an overarching problem we have been having with the debate, though… Did fast-food joints flip out when concealed carry was legalized here in TN? Did they start getting frantic about their liabilities, or what would happen if someone actually had to defend themselves in the fast food establishment? Not really. And yet here we are, with folks spreading hysteria over a non-issue… it is almost like they do not have a rational reason to be opposing handgun carry into restaurants