The problem one will have with recovering on a lawsuit like this is proving that the injuries claimed would have been avoided if one had been armed.
Also, a violent crime is a independent intervening event that breaks the chain of causation which is essential to liability. IOW, you can't show, legally, that the injuries were caused by the business operator.
Search found 2 matches
Return to “Tennessee Bill would allow lawsuits over gun-free zones”
- Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:14 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Tennessee Bill would allow lawsuits over gun-free zones
- Replies: 27
- Views: 5363
- Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:07 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Tennessee Bill would allow lawsuits over gun-free zones
- Replies: 27
- Views: 5363
Re: Tennessee Bill would allow lawsuits over gun-free zones
Premises owners/lessees have a duty to keep business invitees from being injured, to discover and correct dangerous conditions. In some states, that duty may extend even to trespassers now. These are terms of art in law.
The customers at the Sugarland kidnapping and robbery will assert claims against the business, if experience is any guide.
The question will be whether business invitees as a group are safer carrying guns or not carrying guns. Those of us who carry believe one way, but there are substantial numbers who believe the other way. If gun carriers manage to avoid hurting others when they shoot at perps, it may eventually be accepted. If not, the argument will be lost.
What about perps wounded by carrying customers? Might a business be liable for the perp's injuries if injured by a customer carrying?
The customers at the Sugarland kidnapping and robbery will assert claims against the business, if experience is any guide.
The question will be whether business invitees as a group are safer carrying guns or not carrying guns. Those of us who carry believe one way, but there are substantial numbers who believe the other way. If gun carriers manage to avoid hurting others when they shoot at perps, it may eventually be accepted. If not, the argument will be lost.
What about perps wounded by carrying customers? Might a business be liable for the perp's injuries if injured by a customer carrying?