Search found 2 matches
Return to “This is an interesting take on GFZ”
- Sat Jan 23, 2016 2:29 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: This is an interesting take on GFZ
- Replies: 11
- Views: 2507
Re: This is an interesting take on GFZ
Before CHL's were allowed, no one had a choice. Store owners could not choose whether to allow handguns or not, because citizens could not legally carry them. Now store owners do have a choice and the choice they make should reflect in the potential liability which they bear.
- Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:19 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: This is an interesting take on GFZ
- Replies: 11
- Views: 2507
Re: This is an interesting take on GFZ
As a lawyer, this looks pretty straightforward. The story says that three things must be proven to win a case under the proposed law:
the plaintiff had to be authorized to carry a gun at the time of the incident
the plaintiff was prohibited from carrying a firearm because of the gun-free sign
the property owner was not required to be posted by state or federal law but was posted by choice of the defendant
I don't see anything that says that the plaintiff has to prove that he could have outshot the bad guy, or that he was a faster draw than the bad guy, etc.
Those three things would take about 5 minutes to prove in front of a jury.
the plaintiff had to be authorized to carry a gun at the time of the incident
the plaintiff was prohibited from carrying a firearm because of the gun-free sign
the property owner was not required to be posted by state or federal law but was posted by choice of the defendant
I don't see anything that says that the plaintiff has to prove that he could have outshot the bad guy, or that he was a faster draw than the bad guy, etc.
Those three things would take about 5 minutes to prove in front of a jury.