Citation needed

If it is public property, then state or federal law dictates. I do believe that the 2nd Amendment already addresses govt infringement and as such no state or federal law is needed. But we allowed the Govt to start dictating our gun rights extra-constitutionally at least as early as the GCA. Shame on us. As long as the GCA/NFA stand, then the Fed and the States will enjoy a fairly broad spectrum, (right up to and just a hair shy of an outright ban), of ways to mess with our 2nd Amendment rights.

Not a damn thing you or me can do about it.

And as for the NRA? They enjoy making that money. They have as much interest in ending all gun control as Jesse and Al have in eliminating all racism. They don’t want it all to end. Ask them about work on repealing GCA/NFA and see how quickly you get horse-laughed as a nut. They are making too much money off of keeping us rubes on the hook while they “make it look good”… So shut up, quit your bitching and pony up those donations and membership fees.

I will always advocate for further training, regardless of your profession. It is true, that training doesn’t guarantee your safety (or the safety of those around you), but neither does having a gun. Both simply (substantially) increase your odds of successfully surviving a life-threatening scenario that calls for such action.

As for business owners and what level of responsibility they have to their patrons, I’m opposed to the arbitrary, invasive, and often erroneous laws forced upon business owners under the pretext of “building codes,” “fire codes,” and “health codes.” The business owner’s responsibility to the patron only goes so far as to supply satisfactory service and completion of whatever transaction they are transpiring. If something happens to the patron outside the context of this transaction, even if it is within the property of the owner, then I don’t see where the owner is at fault (unless it is a result of negligence on the part of the proprietor). A business owner has no more responsibility to supply adequate security for their patrons than the police do for the individual citizen (hence why case law concerning this matter is sparse, at best). At the end of the day, the only person responsible for your safety is you. Anyone who seeks to off-set their inadequacies in this regard (often at the fault of ignorance and naiviete) by shifting the blame to someone else is someone who is wholly irresponsible. Leaving us to wonder how natural selection failed in this regard.

But a discussion of small business regulations is adversely outside the scope of this article, so I apologize for the deviation.

Why would you ask this? Multiple courts have ruled that sworn officers have no duty to protect an individual, why would this be an expectation of someone with an enhanced license?

Example:
//www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/subway-stabbing-victim-sue-city-cops-didn-stop-attack-article-1.1409451