Businesses in Texas that require customers to disarm themselves before entering, may soon have to pay for any injuries inflicted on the unarmed, visiting patrons. This offers licensed gun owners an opportunity to be compensated for being denied their American right to carry a gun, in order to protect themselves. The state senator, Bob Hall, is working hard to have this law passed.

 

Hall, R-Edgewood, wants to propose a law that will make gun-free businesses liable for “any harm that befalls patrons as a result of being deprived of his or her weapon.” The law, Hall says, would “encourage Texas businesses to do the right thing and allow their patrons to carry the firearms they have lawfully trained with for self-protection.”

 

“Currently, while these gun-free zone businesses possess the right to prevent legally licensed to carry permit holders from carrying a firearm while on their premise, there is no designation of responsibility to provide for the safety of their patrons during an active shooter situation,” Hall said in a Monday email. “That is about to change this coming legislative session.”

 

In Texas, the law allows licensed gun owners to carry. However, the law also allows private business owners to post signs, stating that their facility is a gun-free zone. This is where the law would come into play. This would allow a licensed gun owner to sue the business owners if they are injured in the posted gun-free zone.

 

In announcing his proposal, Hall referenced the attack earlier this summer on a gay club in Orlando that left 49 dead. Guns are banned in nightclubs and bars in Texas, and it’s illegal for license holders to be drunk while carrying. A security guard at the Orlando nightclub engaged the attacker, but was unable to subdue him.

 

“Businesses that establish themselves as ‘gun-free’ provide a guaranteed path of least resistance for terrorists and psychopathic murderers by ensuring that all of the law-abiding patrons in their establishment,” Hall said, “including those licensed to carry a firearm, have surrendered their right of self-defense at the door.”

 

This law may also open doors for students and teachers to open carry on campuses. However, it may only apply to the public schools, and not the private ones.

 

For more on this story, visit dallasnews.com.

  • I was attacked again because I am trying to help Israel with the Israel Longhorn Project at http://longhornproject.org. Called the 911 for help and the police hung up on me.

    America is turning into an Anti Semitic and Racist Country. The only way to stop it is to support Israel.

    I now carry a Buck knife and a hand ax, ice pick and a baseball bat in my car to protect myself because I not allowed carry gun.

  • We must stop putting our cultural values on Muslims; they are not Americans coming from a modern 21century society. They are Muslims coming from a 7th century society.

    There is no such thing as Radical Islam there is just Islam. Calling it Radical Islam is putting our cultural values on Islam rather then looking it through their eyes or their cultural values of Islam.

    We are disrespecting them. Islam is a different culture with different values and traditions, language, history, food and geography. Think of it this way. Without respecting differences we would not have Italian or Chinese food.

    • Chris Robinette

      Then we do not need any muslim in our country at all, right. Being that anyone of them who believes in the training doctrine Qur’an are nothing but a ticking time bomb for jihad action.

      • chocopot

        The last thing we need in this country is a bunch of seventh-century savages with a superiority complex and an inclination to kill anyone who does not agree with them.

        • ARJAY

          They DO sound like the libTURD/socialist/marxist/democRATS/etc., don’t they?!?!

  • akoby

    Hillary wants to make gun manufacturers liable every time a criminal misuses a gun. Therefore it is only fair that the opposite holds true, If a gun owner is prevented from carrying his/her firearm in a legal situation, then the person who wanted the gun-free zone should be able to be sued for preventing the gun-owner from protecting him/herself,

  • SemperFlyBoy

    We can choose to wait for police to protect us, which they cannot; we can choose to expect businesses to protect us; which they cannot, or we can choose to protect ourselves.

  • Oldshooter

    I see no connection between the proposed law, with which I strongly agree BTW, and the issue of open carry on campus. The bill simply makes it legal (meaning we no longer have to wait for some individual to take a case like this to court and set a legal precedent) for an LTC holder in TX, who is injured in a place of business that posts 30.06 AND 30.07 signage banning ANY type of licensed carry on the premises, to sue the owners for not providing adequate protection for the patrons when denying them the right to defend themselves while there.
    What would be even better, and more appropriate in America, especially TX, would be legislation specifically forbidding any business that offers services or products to the public, from banning ALL types of carry on their premises. The concept of “Private Property Rights” should not be applied to public businesses. The whole “Private Property” = “Owner’s Rules” concept is idiotic on its face. Businesses that serve the public are already legally prohibited from denying services to a variety of special “Protected Groups” like Gays, Muslims, Women, people with handicaps, Black or other minority racial members, etc. Businesses are already required by law to provide handicap parking and accessibility, meet safety, fire, and health inspection requirements, etc. Merely because you are a private business owner, doesn’t confer any right to violate the civil rights of your patrons.
    The simple fact is that “Gun Rights” ARE “Civil Rights,” the 2nd. Amendment says so, and there should be no need for a special law to protect the rights LTC holders in the public square. For that matter, since we are all supposed to be considered equal before the law,there should no need for any special laws to protect the civil rights of ANY specific group of citizens, and the existence of such special protected groups has actually led to the infringement of civil rights of the public generally. A problem that is now being clearly demonstrated by the current need for some kind of special law or legal/financial incentive to protect the rights of lawful gun owners.

  • Tom Hood

    Already have savages here there called Redneck’s

    • CBUJAN

      Then move ! I rather have a redneck by my side than a pussy.

      • Bill Hood

        your sister a good kisser?

  • Bob

    They are now in TN. New bill lets you sue their butts off if something happens

  • frankenbiker

    I think its a bad idea. If they pass this, then being able to sue gun manufacturers will also be allowed. But this is just my humble opinion. However, if they do allow victims of gun crimes to sue the manufacturer, then HELL YEAH, they should be liable.

    • Lowell

      Right, and people should also be allowed to sue automobile manufacturers if bank robbers t-bone them in a police chase!!!

      • frankenbiker

        Yeah and utensil manufacturers could be sued if people chock on their food. Its total bullsht.

        • Clay Fitzgerald

          “… chock on their food.” What the…?

          • frankenbiker

            Sorry about that didn’t mean to offend your sensibilities.

          • Clay Fitzgerald

            You didn’t offend my sensibilities, you only demonstrated your ignorance. How about accepting it graciously and acknowledge the mistake or perhaps you revel in being a dumbass.

          • frankenbiker

            Hey I was being sincere, what the hell is your problem, I made a mistake, jezzus get over it dude. Or do you revel in being a fcking low life jerk with nothing better to do that troll the articles looking for spelling and grammar mistakes?

          • Clay Fitzgerald

            Being a low life jerk is something you revel in. Having to try to make your point by deliberately misspelling words that would otherwise get your comment rejected shows that you enjoy life with critters leaving slime trails wherever they go. One comment about you making a stupid mistake doesn’t make me a troll, dope. Now it’s time for you to drop dead, meathead!

          • frankenbiker

            Now you want me to drop dead, you sir are a class act to be sure. Good luck with your life full of anger. Seriously though, please get some professional help.

          • Clay Fitzgerald

            If you ever wanna see a low life jerk… take a look in a mirror! And you’re far, far beyond any help, professional or otherwise. Here’s a bit of advice for ya – don’t try to engage in a battle of wits unarmed.

          • frankenbiker

            You mean like you?

          • Clay Fitzgerald

            Sigh… still unarmed I see.

  • mossbergman

    sounds fair to me

  • terrymengle

    What would happen if a person with a concealed carry permit just ignored the Gun Free Zone designation. Is this designation backed by established law or by the business owner???

    • Clay Fitzgerald

      I don’t know if it’s universal, but in the state where I live if the business premise is posted that firearms are not allowed, a violator can be charged with some degree of trespass, even if one is licensed to carry concealed handguns… if discovered.

    • ARJAY

      In some states, those signs are treated as LAW and you can be prosecuted for ignoring those signs.

      That’s exactly why I do NOT patronize those BUSINESS establishments. If ALL licensed carriers would never purchase their products or services, they would go out of business OR CHANGE THEIR NO FIREARMS policies!

      • Michael E Heis

        They won’t go out of business, too many sheeple for that to happen

        • ARJAY

          I know. That’s why more and more BUSINESSES are going with the so called “gun free zones”!!

  • jerry young

    I agree they should be held responsible with the way the liberals are pushing that gun manufacturers and sellers are to be held responsible for the actions of criminals why shouldn’t those who would deny us the right to defend ourselves be held accountable when an innocent is harmed on their property too, along with them we should hold all anti gun politicians accountable as well, if you deny someone the right of protection then you should be accountable for their injuries!

  • beltedmagnum

    I refuse to go into any business that has a gun free zone sign on the entrance. I take my money somewhere else.

  • tdg54

    While I understand the move, I get zero sense of safety knowing I, or my family if I happen to be DEAD, will be compensated if I’m shot in some GF zone. I’d prefer to just be allowed to carry in case that moment arises. It is called CCW for a reason, and so I do, even in GF zones, but I’d rather it wasn’t an issue, so I’d prefer they just abolish GF zones.

    One more thing: I promise I won’t shoot anybody who messes up a food order, calls me names in a bar, does something stupid on the road, tries to steal my property, or any other petty day to day “stuff.” Come at me or my family with intent to commit great bodily harm, and all bets are off.

    BTW…you WANT me to be present in a GF zone when evil strikes…guaranteed.

    • Clay Fitzgerald

      In many states that allow concealed carry, even licensed, if you are prohibited from carrying a firearm into an establishment where state law does not allow non-LEO’s to carry, like bars, taverns, cocktail lounges, clubs, schools, courthouses, etc. it is a criminal act to do so.
      A better plan is for you avoid those establishments if you want to carry concealed all of the time.

      • ARJAY

        Not only that, but WHY SPEND YOUR MONEY IN THOSE places?!?!

        I just do NOT understand why (CCW/CPL) people support those businesses!!!!!!

        • Clay Fitzgerald

          Well, if you want to go out for a beer or have to appear at a courthouse or attend a function at your child’s school… sometimes you make a choice and sometimes you just don’t carry. When it’s a business that can otherwise legally allow one to carry firearms, concealed or not, that’s one thing and like you, I make a conscious choice NOT to give them any of my business. However, when it is a specific law that doesn’t allow one to carry in certain types of establishments, then one must be a little more circumspect. If you get hauled into court over a civil matter not involving guns, you’ll have absolutely no choice except to be held in contempt by the court… and then it’s possible that you would loose your right to have firearms.

          • ARJAY

            A COURTHOUSE is NOT a BUSINESS! A SCHOOL is NOT a BUSINESS! If a class of BUSINESSES such as BARS that HAVE NO CHOICE because of gubbermint being the reason you can not carry a firearm, that is DIFFERENT!

            In Michigan you can’t carry a firearm in a hospital. You HAVE NO CHOICE!!

            If you have 2 grocery stores in town and ONE of them bans firearms and the other does NOT ban firearms, I will NEVER ENTER THE STORE THAT BANS FIREARMS!! THAT’S MY CHOICE!!! If a state law says ALL grocery stores must be so called “gun free zones” you have NO CHOICE but to enter that BUSINESS if you are going to buy groceries!!

            A movie theater that bans firearms VS one that does NOT BAN firearms, YOU HAVE A CHOICE as to which one you want to enter! I will never enter the one that BANS firearms!!!!!!

            Do you understand now what I’m saying?

            I’m talking about BUSINESS OWNERS that CHOOSE to make their BUSINESSES so called “gun free zones”!

            That’s THEIR choice and MY choice is to NEVER darken their BUSINESS with MY hard earned money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Clay Fitzgerald

            Hey, dummy, that isn’t what I posted in the comment you responded to. Reading comprehension is definitely NOT one of your strong points.
            Besides that, my original comment was to tdg54, not YOU!

          • ARJAY

            READ MY 1ST PARAGRAPH AGAIN CLAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            Read the short thread again @$$hole. I agreed with you UNTIL YOU responded to MY post (that AGREED WITH YOU) when YOU brought up schools and courthouses!!!!

            I was ALWAYS referring to BUSINESSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BUSINESSES that have made THEIR CHOICES to BAN FIREARMS from their BUSINESSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            Not BUSINESSES that the gubbermint says HAVE to ban firearms from THEIR businesses.

            SEE the difference?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

            The DIFFERENCE is the BUSINESS owners that MAKE THE CHOICE TO BAN FIREARMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            Check YOUR COMPREHENSION SKILLS, IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!

            Remember, YOU started the name calling!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Michael E Heis

        Love how “LEOs” are better than us with regards to carry laws. From my experience the opposite is true, as shown by the news on an almost daily basis.

        • Clay Fitzgerald

          Grant you that there is a certain degree of truth to what you say, however, the exceptions for the most part have to do with LEO’s carrying firearms into those establishments while on duty or official business. The details are usually spelled out in the details of the laws and the rules that implement them.

  • MuslimLuvChrist

    the best sign for criminal activity is,
    “gun free zone”,

    the best sign for no criminal activity is,
    “armed guards on duty”!!!

  • ARJAY

    This is exactly why I will NEVER enter a BUSINESS that is a declared so called “gun free zone”! PERIOD!!!!!!

    IF you are “only” injured, you have a chance to sue for damages! HOWEVER, if you are KILLED in this so called “gun free zone” you have NO RECOURSE, BECAUSE YOU ARE DEAD!!!!

    Your family can sue, but I’d rather not take the chance of getting killed in the so called “gun free zone”!!!!

    So I stay OUT of them. I will NEVER SUPPORT a BUSINESS that doesn’t support the 1st and 2nd (at least) Amendments of the Constitution of these United States of America!!!!

    I will ALWAYS support the BUSINESSES that do NOT infringe upon my rights that are PROTECTED by the Constitution!!

  • ARJAY

    If businesses can’t discriminate against homosexuals (FORCED to supply products and services against the owners religious beliefs-their 1st Amendment protections).

    How can businesses discriminate against us licensed to carry gun owners (2nd Amendment PROTECTIONS)?!?!?!?!

    Same principal!!!!

Become an Insider!

Enter your email address below to stay in the loop and read our latest and greatest updates!

Send this to friend