this does not conflict with private property rights. they still have the ability to refuse weapons from the property. but in doing so they are no longer immune from liability for someone being injured as a result.
I agree...
property owner has the right, but is still responsible if something happens..now, if they had security or something to protect (sign for wet floors as an ex) then they aren't or at least limited their responsible ..you have to minimize the risk or show an effort of doing such.
Starbucks is/was a gun free zone, so if anything happens....they can be held responsible...but you better have good lawyers to go after them for money...