On the other hand I also hope that someone sues the mall for their willful act of making the mall a safe zone for criminals.
Sue the mall? Ten to one there’s some stupid law that prevents guns in mall. There’s also probably some stupid law that prevents smoking in the mall. These malls aren’t operating under private property rights anymore. They’re “public spaces” and consequently every yahoo voter with an agenda gets to set the rules on property that he or she doesn’t own.
And consequently, if the malls did have private property rights, it would certainly be in their rights to prevent arms inside.
likwidshoe - 08:12pm on 12/06/2007
Lik, from the story it says that the Mall put up no guns allowed signs which overrules a persons concealed carry permit.
So in this case the legislature respected property rights, but the property owner made the wrong call.
Normally I wouldn’t say that a property owner owes a duty to protect people from a criminal act. But in this case their act disarmed any potential permit holders.
The fact that they created those conditions creates a liability.
The Whistler - 08:12pm on 12/06/2007
The fact that they created those conditions creates a liability.
Yeah, but that kind of freedom goes both ways. Guns are also a liability, thanks to America’s penchant for blaming and suing the victim.
Was the sue the mall part just a glib comment? They are one of the many victims in this whole mess.
likwidshoe - 08:12pm on 12/06/2007
Was the sue the mall part just a glib comment?
No, I feel that their policy contributed to the tragedy. Of course it would take the right person to sue.
Suppose a person normally did carry but left his firearm in the car that day and was shot and injured (or had a family member injured/killed). I think they should have a case that since the mall disarmed them they had a duty to provide security and didn’t.
The Whistler - 08:12pm on 12/06/2007
Here’s the problem, right here.
Gov. Dave Heineman said Hawkins became a ward of the state on Sept. 17, 2002,
No, I feel that their policy contributed to the tragedy.
No way. I blame the kid. What’s his name again?
Robert Hawkins
There’s the loser rat-face’s mug.
He contributed 100% to this tragedy.
I think they should have a case that since the mall disarmed them they had a duty to provide security and didn’t.
That’s the thing. They willingly disarmed when they went into the “gun free zone”. They’re not autobots stripped of all free will. Everybody who freely enters such places are placing their safety into faith.
How does a proposal for suing the mall square away with personal responsibility? These people willingly went into a place where they willingly rescinded some of their ability to engage in self defense. You take your chances when you do things like that.
This would be a better case for government schools. Not some private business establishment where choice is an element in play.
likwidshoe - 09:12pm on 12/06/2007
Well you do have a point that the people didn’t actually have to enter the mall. On the other hand the mall did invite them in under a condition and I still think because they didn’t allow patrons to protect themselves they had a duty to provide security.
The Whistler - 09:12pm on 12/06/2007
WTF have you done Rob? I have to agree to my browsers acting as servers to access SAB? This website locked up both Opera (my preferred browser) and Firefox 3.1 Beta (secondary). I’ll try again in a week or so, but whatever it is that you have changed in the last day sucks camel nuts. Is this some Grand Plan to promote Fookabee while Thompson supporters wallow around in your digital detour? Screw that. Make money. Make lots of money...if I had some, I’d send it your way, but whatever you have done in the last day is bullshit. I can’t even access the website to skool lik. Or vice versa, as the case may be. He is a cerebral mofo. Regardless, you have done something to SAB, and it sucks.
title should read in what was a gun free zone
when we we learn? How many more times?
Sue the mall? Ten to one there’s some stupid law that prevents guns in mall. There’s also probably some stupid law that prevents smoking in the mall. These malls aren’t operating under private property rights anymore. They’re “public spaces” and consequently every yahoo voter with an agenda gets to set the rules on property that he or she doesn’t own.
And consequently, if the malls did have private property rights, it would certainly be in their rights to prevent arms inside.
Lik, from the story it says that the Mall put up no guns allowed signs which overrules a persons concealed carry permit.
So in this case the legislature respected property rights, but the property owner made the wrong call.
Normally I wouldn’t say that a property owner owes a duty to protect people from a criminal act. But in this case their act disarmed any potential permit holders.
The fact that they created those conditions creates a liability.
The fact that they created those conditions creates a liability.
Yeah, but that kind of freedom goes both ways. Guns are also a liability, thanks to America’s penchant for blaming and suing the victim.
Was the sue the mall part just a glib comment? They are one of the many victims in this whole mess.
No, I feel that their policy contributed to the tragedy. Of course it would take the right person to sue.
Suppose a person normally did carry but left his firearm in the car that day and was shot and injured (or had a family member injured/killed). I think they should have a case that since the mall disarmed them they had a duty to provide security and didn’t.
Here’s the problem, right here.
http://tinyurl.com/36egwe
No, I feel that their policy contributed to the tragedy.
No way. I blame the kid. What’s his name again?
Robert Hawkins
There’s the loser rat-face’s mug.
He contributed 100% to this tragedy.
I think they should have a case that since the mall disarmed them they had a duty to provide security and didn’t.
That’s the thing. They willingly disarmed when they went into the “gun free zone”. They’re not autobots stripped of all free will. Everybody who freely enters such places are placing their safety into faith.
How does a proposal for suing the mall square away with personal responsibility? These people willingly went into a place where they willingly rescinded some of their ability to engage in self defense. You take your chances when you do things like that.
This would be a better case for government schools. Not some private business establishment where choice is an element in play.
Well you do have a point that the people didn’t actually have to enter the mall. On the other hand the mall did invite them in under a condition and I still think because they didn’t allow patrons to protect themselves they had a duty to provide security.
WTF have you done Rob? I have to agree to my browsers acting as servers to access SAB? This website locked up both Opera (my preferred browser) and Firefox 3.1 Beta (secondary). I’ll try again in a week or so, but whatever it is that you have changed in the last day sucks camel nuts. Is this some Grand Plan to promote Fookabee while Thompson supporters wallow around in your digital detour? Screw that. Make money. Make lots of money...if I had some, I’d send it your way, but whatever you have done in the last day is bullshit. I can’t even access the website to skool lik. Or vice versa, as the case may be. He is a cerebral mofo. Regardless, you have done something to SAB, and it sucks.