The truth about the Tennessee gun free zone responsibility law...

[2aguy]

anti-gunners attacking the "common sense" gun law, that makes any business that violates the rights of Americans by banning guns responsible for any harm, are either lying or uninformed or both. they are anti-gunners after all so lying and being uninformed is part of their job description......

The Tennessee Law states that if a business doesn't violate the rights of Americans...and allows concealed or open carry on their premises....cannot be held responsible if a gun carrying citizen causes damage......but you wouldn't know that by posts of the anti gunners....

GUN WATCH

The legislature has provided a carrot and a stick to protect the right of armed self defense. If a property owner or manager does nothing, they are granted immunity from civil liability that results from the presence of legal weapons on the property. There are exceptions if the damages were the result of gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct.

That is a powerful incentive for property owners or managers not to put up "No Gun" signs, or to take them down if they are now in place.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"The truth about the Tennessee gun free zone responsibility law..."

The truth is that there is no such thing as a ‘gun free zone.’

Citizens licensed to carry concealed firearms are at liberty to do so even over the objections of private property owners.

That’s because private property owners don’t know someone is carrying a concealed firearm…

Because the gun is concealed.

 

[2aguy]

"The truth about the Tennessee gun free zone responsibility law..."

The truth is that there is no such thing as a ‘gun free zone.’

Citizens licensed to carry concealed firearms are at liberty to do so even over the objections of private property owners.

That’s because private property owners don’t know someone is carrying a concealed firearm…

Because the gun is concealed.

Wrong.......if the gun is concealed and is discovered it is a class b misdemeanor here in Illinois .....you assholes create gun free zones and then expect law abiding gun owners to violate it......moron.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“That is a powerful incentive for property owners or managers not to put up "No Gun" signs, or to take them down if they are now in place.”

No, it’s an idiotic law that exhibits the hypocrisy and stupidity common to most on the right.

Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ for the rights of private property owners – so much for that.

Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ of ‘small government’ – so much for that as well; republicans: more government, more government regulations.

Indeed, property owners should file suit to challenge the constitutionality of the measure as a violation of the 14th Amendment, being a deprivation of property and liberty without due process of law.

 

[2aguy]

“That is a powerful incentive for property owners or managers not to put up "No Gun" signs, or to take them down if they are now in place.”

No, it’s an idiotic law that exhibits the hypocrisy and stupidity common to most on the right.

Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ for the rights of private property owners – so much for that.

Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ of ‘small government’ – so much for that as well; republicans: more government, more government regulations.

Indeed, property owners should file suit to challenge the constitutionality of the measure as a violation of the 14th Amendment, being a deprivation of property and liberty without due process of law.

Nope.....you guys made baking a cake a civil right......if baking a cake is a civil rights issue than prohibiting someone from exercising their 2nd Amendment Right is a violation as well........you guys passed the Civil Rights act of 1964 which went too far....you wanted the government to dictate to private businesses......and now you are using it to attack Christian bakers, photographers and wedding planners......so violating the 2nd Amendment is just as wrong....

Asswipe.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

“That is a powerful incentive for property owners or managers not to put up "No Gun" signs, or to take them down if they are now in place.”

No, it’s an idiotic law that exhibits the hypocrisy and stupidity common to most on the right.

Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ for the rights of private property owners – so much for that.

Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ of ‘small government’ – so much for that as well; republicans: more government, more government regulations.

Indeed, property owners should file suit to challenge the constitutionality of the measure as a violation of the 14th Amendment, being a deprivation of property and liberty without due process of law.

Main problem in this post is using Republican and Conservative interchangeably, while assuming Republicans today are what they're supposed to be. You're wrong on both accounts.

 

[Silent Warrior]

“That is a powerful incentive for property owners or managers not to put up "No Gun" signs, or to take them down if they are now in place.”

No, it’s an idiotic law that exhibits the hypocrisy and stupidity common to most on the right.

Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ for the rights of private property owners – so much for that.

Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ of ‘small government’ – so much for that as well; republicans: more government, more government regulations.

Indeed, property owners should file suit to challenge the constitutionality of the measure as a violation of the 14th Amendment, being a deprivation of property and liberty without due process of law.

It's funny you use the Bill of Rights as your avatar, then prove you know nothing about it. You claim to care about private property owner rights and their right to put up a sign to bar legally carried guns on their property. What if they barred minorities, gays, women, or transgendered? You pick what rights from your avatar that you want honored and ignore the rest. Of course this is typical of the far left so you are not alone. How foolish.