Tennessee gives the go-ahead to bill that would allow legal repercussions for gun-free-zones
Yes, gun-free-zones are unconstitutional, and yes this does seem like not the best of compromises, but at this point it will have to do. To me it’s disappointing that it has to come down to this when gun-free-zones are targeted constantly and should be abolished- not just sued.
92% of mass shootings since 2002 have happened in gun-free-zones. It’s time we do something about it.
Take a look at this update from The Tennessean.
Several other gun bills have been proposed this session, with some gaining momentum recently, including one sponsored by Sen. Dolores Gresham, R-Somerville, that originally sought to allow any valid handgun permit holder the ability to sue a person or business in the event that the gun holder was injured or killed by “invitees, trespassers, employees of the person or entity, vicious animals, wild animals and defensible man-made and natural hazards” while in a gun-free zone.
Gresham amended her bill to address concerns expressed by some of her colleagues. While discussing the amendment, Gresham said her goal was to rewrite the bill to get property owners to take down signs indicating gun-free zones.
She cited comments from John Lott, a Fox News columnist, who spoke in favor of several gun bills on Feb. 10 and who also said posting gun-free signs can create problems.
“What you are essentially doing was saying ‘Active shooters welcome here,’ ” Gresham said, noting that the original version of her bill would have made a business owner liable for anything that happened to a gun owner while on the premises.
“This one says, take the sign down and you will have civil immunity in case anything happens,” she explained.
Harris said he opposed the bill because it would set a dangerous precedent in the treatment of private property owners.
Gresham’s amendment was adopted before the committee voted 6-2 in favor of the bill, which now heads to the Senate floor. Harris and Kyle voted against the measure, while Overbey abstained.
So, once again, I appreciate this bill, but I still think it’s not enough. Gun free zones should be removed for the kill-zones that they are.
This means that law-abiding citizens who have a lawful permit to carry a gun and use it for self-defense have to wait until they are injured or dead before they or a family member can sue the person or business responsible for the gun-free-zone. To me that’s not enough.
It is our constitutional right to bear arms, we should be able to defend ourselves wherever we go without being faced with a felony.
We hope Tennessee has the sense to pass this, in the meantime be aware of your local bills and changes happening in your state.
