I think that due to the ease of access to outer fences, even if the gate security were tighter, getting a weapon inside would be extremely easy if someone so inclined to do so. With that, I am not sure they could or would be held liable.mojo84 wrote:Wondering what kind of potential liability is created by giving the false appearance of safety and security when in fact, there really isn't much and the wanding is as ineffective as is being discussed here. If a store or private enterprise did such, I think they would be held liable if something bad happened. See Cracker Barrel thread where one seems to think they may be held liable for not responding to a domestic dispute as one thinks they should. I don't see where Cracker Barrel provides the appearance of security like they do at the state fair.
With a store, however, IMHO, I would think that if they are posted they could and should be held liable as they have decided to prevent us from having the ability to protect ourselves and they are not providing us protection either. Last time I checked, a 30.06 sign wouldn't stop a bullet
.