TexasCHLforum.com

An insurance company I once worked for insured a convenience store in which a man was killed in the parking lot during a drive by shooting. He wasn't even a customer, he was just hanging out talking to somebody. His survivors sued the property owner on grounds that the lighting in the parking lot was insufficient for some reason. Of course we settled because a trial would have cost more. There are literally thousands of similar stories I and others could tell. I don't see any difference between that and what this Tennessee law is trying to do.

While I hate to throw more business the trial lawyer's way, this is another example of how our respect for property rights, particularly commercial property rights, work to our detriment. We really need to rethink our approach to this type of stuff, imho.