Sign in / Join

Tennessee Senator Sponsors Groundbreaking Bill Against ‘Gun-Free Zones,’ If Passed, Victims of Violence Can Sue for Being Deprived of Right to Carry

Share:
NOT YET A MEMBER OF THE GRASSFIRE SOCIAL NETWORK? CLICK HERE!

Tennessee Senator Dolores Gresham (R) is now sponsoring groundbreaking legislation which places a different type of target on ‘Gun-Free Zones,‘ one that opens these Unconstitutional areas up to potential litigation.

The bill, HB2033 states clearly that if an individual whom bears a valid permit is denied their right to carry upon entry of a property and is subsequently injured during a violent incident while on “the posted property,” that individual would now be allow to sue the property owner.

Love it…

Via IJReview


State Representative Jeremy Faison (R-11) is shepherding the bill through Tennesse’s State House. The House (HB2033) version of the bill has an added introduction:

“Firearms and Ammunition – As introduced, establishes that if a person or entity posts to prohibit the possession of firearms on the property, the posting entity, for purposes of liability, assumes custodial responsibility for the safety and defense of any handgun carry permit holder harmed while on the posted property. – Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.”

According to The Tennessean, the bill would allow an individual to file a lawsuit if they sustained injuries that could have been prevented with the defense of a firearm in a “gun-free zone” location.

There are stipulations, of course. To be eligible to sue, one must be a licensed firearm carrier who was prevented from carrying their weapon onto a premises because of its status as a “gun-free zone.” Additionally, the “gun-free zone” in question must be one imposed at the discretion of the business, rather than by the state or federal government.

This bill would put the onus of security and liability on the gun-free business.


Do you support this bill? Let us know in the comment section below.

Share:
  • jbsteele

    I somewhat disagree with the “stipulations” The gun-free zone in question should be one that the gun carrier must use. Any business should have the right to ban weapons, and any gun carrier should be free to take his business elsewhere. So most of the zones open for suits would be ones mandated by government at some level. You can’t avoid schools or courts.

FIGHT THE MEDIA

GET GRASSFIRE UPDATES!