d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Should Gun Free Zones Be Legally Liable
Prev1345
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Views: 836Replies: 44Track Topic
Member
Posts: 9,290
Joined: Jun 29 2009
Gold: 18.00
#41
Jan 18 2016 05:59pm
Quote (Caulder10 @ Nov 22 2015 07:50pm)
This is where you failed, and makes me wonder at your ability as a lawyer.
In all likelihood he would not do a damn thing. Rarely is a gun toting civilian capable of acting in violent situations. There is as much chance that they would escalate the situation, or do absolutely nothing but panic and freak out.


Oh my GOD, when you're in an enclosed space with a crazy armed person hell-bent on executing coldly everyone in the place, the LAST thing anyone would want to do is "escalate" the situation! I'll take my 0% chance of survival and executed point blank thanks!


E: Alright moving beyond responding to nonsense


The answer is no, because private property.

This post was edited by Cover3 on Jan 18 2016 06:01pm
Member
Posts: 51,928
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,933.00
#42
Jan 18 2016 06:03pm
Quote (Caulder10 @ Nov 22 2015 06:50pm)
This is where you failed, and makes me wonder at your ability as a lawyer.
In all likelihood he would not do a damn thing. Rarely is a gun toting civilian capable of acting in violent situations. There is as much chance that they would escalate the situation, or do absolutely nothing but panic and freak out.


1 in 14 Americans is a veteran of the armed forces (only about 10% of them are very old WWII/Korea vets). You should probably backpedal on who you think might be capable of violence.
Member
Posts: 30,815
Joined: Mar 12 2008
Gold: 252.29
#43
Jan 18 2016 06:15pm
Quote (Scaly @ Nov 21 2015 06:12pm)
For once I agree with cambo.


Only communist men agree with him.
Member
Posts: 8,010
Joined: Jan 21 2009
Gold: 17.00
#44
Jan 19 2016 05:56pm
Quote (tman65ky @ Nov 21 2015 01:01pm)
Interesting concept I saw debated on another forum. Should gun free zones be civilly culpable for injury or death if they do not provide adequate security for their patrons? If so then what is adequate security? If not why? Again this is a civil and not a criminal matter.



No they shouldn't
Member
Posts: 25,660
Joined: Mar 16 2008
Gold: 3.60
#45
Jan 20 2016 01:37pm
Quote (Valhalls_Sun @ Nov 22 2015 01:11pm)
No you still can't hold anyone responsible except the shooter. I'm speaking as a gun owner and a a strict believer in freedom to own and carry. I also believe that a property owner has the right to establish his property as weapon free. Of course schools have to be. and Federal, State and County buildings are guarded by armed members of the police. I don't know about the DMV or the Post Office.

We are actually sponsoring a CCW class at our house this spring and our son-in-law who is a postal carrier is taking the course I'll have to ask him Thursday what their rules are.

Back to the subject. We need to keep responsibility where it belongs and that's on the finger of the person that decide to start killing people. Not the business owners, not the gunstore owner's not the gun makers but the asshole who want's to make people die. Lay the blame where it deserves to be laid.


firearms are prohibited in any federal building
especially the post office
having one in the post office is supposedly a fine and/or 2 years automatic
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1345
Add Reply New Topic New Poll

© 2003-2024 d2jsp  Contact