Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of BizPac Review.
Tennessee’s uber-conservative legislature has been doing some pretty amazing things of late, but Senate Bill 1736 arguably tops them all.
In an ironic twist for a society that has become increasingly and almost absurdly litigious and yet so full of ninnys who get a “thrill up their leg” at the mere thought of taking away your right to defend yourself, Tennessee has turned those two things completely upside down by exposing those very ninnys to the only thing they understand – the prospect of a big fat lawsuit.
Introduced in January and effective July 1, 2016, the bill says if a citizen with a legal concealed carry permit gets injured in a “gun-free zone” where they have effectively been stripped of their Second Amendment rights, said citizen will be allowed to SUE the person or business who set up the “gun-free zone” in the first place!
According to Bearing Arms, “Any permit holder injured as a result of being stripped of their right to self-defense, and their handgun, in a posted gun-free zone can file a lawsuit within two years of the event as long as they meet the following requirements: 1.) were authorized to carry a gun at the time of the incident 2.) prohibited from carrying a firearm because of a gun-free sign 3.) the property owner was not required to be posted by state or federal law and posted by choice.”
So, supposing a Tennessee convenience store owner posted one of those “no gun” signs in his store because he just knows the criminals are going to look at that sign and say, “Dang it, I guess I can’t rob this store. There’s a NO GUN sign!”
Except, let’s say some criminal ignores the sign (the nerve!) and robs the place anyway. Supposing that happens, and a conceal carry owner who obediently left his firearm at home or in his car so as not to disobey the law gets injured by the criminal, the conceal carry owner will then be able to sue the store owner for damages.
“It is the intent of this section to balance the right of a handgun carry permit holder to carry a firearm in order to exercise the right of self-defense and the ability of a property owner or entity in charge of the property to exercise control over governmental or private property,” the bill states.
The absolutely brilliant purpose of the legislation is to place the responsibility for protection on the business or property owner, since they have effectively disarmed the law-abiding public who would otherwise be able to protect themselves from “defensible man-made and natural hazards.”
Let’s hope every other state follows Tennessee’s example!
Sign up for our morning news blast HERE
Latest posts by Scott Morefield (see all)
- West Point accepts Parkland student’s application to military academy after his tragic death - February 21, 2018
- Nancy Pelosi is in middle of grandstanding at Arizona townhall when question yelled from audience grinds it to a halt - February 21, 2018
- Columbine survivor blows media’s plan to exploit naive students – here’s what happens when they grow up - February 20, 2018