Tennessee law combatting "gun free zone" businesses

kohburn said:

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.

Click to expand...

MattS said:

I think you're conflating rights with motivations for denying them.

It's acceptable for private businesses to prevent someone from making a political speech on their property. What they can't do is deny that privilege based on an immutable characteristic like race, religion, or, in some states, sexual orientation.

Failure to respect private property rights is a tactic that the "other" guys use. And a tactic that I refuse to adopt.

Click to expand...

MattS said:

I think you're conflating rights with motivations for denying them.

It's acceptable for private businesses to prevent someone from making a political speech on their property. What they can't do is deny that privilege based on an immutable characteristic like race, religion, or, in some states, sexual orientation.

Failure to respect private property rights is a tactic that the "other" guys use. And a tactic that I refuse to adopt.

Click to expand...

Civil Rights Definition
1. the personal rights of the individual citizen, in most countries upheld by law, as in the US.
Collins English Dictionary

Click to expand...

civil rights
Civil rights are the rights that people have in a society to equal treatment and equal opportunities, whatever their race, sex, or religion.
COBUILD Advanced British English Dictionary

Click to expand...

MattS said:

In my opinion this is the wrong approach. Since I imagine that this law applies almost entirely to "places" that one voluntary enters, just don't go in if you don't feel safe. There is no need to pass costs on to business owners (even ones I disagree with) because of the actions of others.

Click to expand...

Brooklyn said:

Stop it. They can not ban all expression . The claim that ccw is disruptive is a,non starter. The claim that I can't wear an NRA hat because it's disturptive is problematic because it enforceseems the hecklers veto..

Speech making may ,in fact, be disruptive , but it is a far cry from the conduct ...or rather lack of conduct, under discussion.

To allow such restrictions on self defense , absent a viable showing of harm to the business, is non tenable, and grantees it's second class status.

Moreover,the need to defend oneself is not deferable. Irreparable harm,in the form of death or grave injury, can befall a victim as a result of such forced delay of exercising that right.

No such claim can be made with respect to political speech, yet another reason why time place and manner restrictions do not, a priori ,eviscerate the right.

Click to expand...

ON MARCH 16, 2016, THE SENATE ADOPTED AMENDMENT #1 AND PASSED SENATE BILL 1736, AS AMENDED.

AMENDMENT #1 rewrites this bill to provide immunity from civil liability to a person, business, or other entity that owns, controls, or manages property and has the authority to prohibit weapons on that property by positing under present law, with respect to any claim based on the person's, business's, or other entity's failure to adopt such a policy. This amendment will not apply to a person, business, or other entity whose conduct or failure to act is the result of gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct.

Click to expand...

Summary
As enacted, provides immunity from civil liability to a person, business, or other entity that owns, controls, or manages property and has the authority to prohibit weapons on that property by positing, with respect to any claim based on the person's, business's, or other entity's failure to adopt such a policy. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

Click to expand...

MattS said:

In my opinion this is the wrong approach. Since I imagine that this law applies almost entirely to "places" that one voluntary enters, just don't go in if you don't feel safe. There is no need to pass costs on to business owners (even ones I disagree with) because of the actions of others.

Click to expand...