fight over concealed weapons in wisconsin courtrooms

[Phantasmal]

then would you object to a person walking into your store with a concealed pack of cigs? a concealed weapon? I know the degree/rapidity of injury they can cause vastly differs. Just looking to see if it is enough of a difference to draw the line between the two. Especially given that the same concealed weapon could also be used to save you/others.

I guess I misunderstood you, to me, there is a world of difference between a gun and a pack of cigarettes. Cigarettes don't discharge by themselves. Cigerettes can be used to burn someone who you feel has threatened you, but aren't on the same level as a gun. I just see a lot more potential trouble with a concealed gun, then a cigerette, knife, fork, spoon, pencil.

 

[leaningright]

Just playing devils advocate... but in store 1 above, would the owner be held liable if a person with a CCP was denied the ability to carry in the store and was subsequently shot during a robbery? Or would the owner of the gun assume responsibility upon entering a facility where the gun owner knew he wasn't allowed to carry?

Don't mind devil's advocacy at all. I have thought about the situation you described because this very issue is a topic of discussion I have had with a very good friend of mine for years....one of those ongoing things. To answer you, I really don't know considering the screwed up way the courts rule nowadays. On the surface I'd say the owner would suffer no culpability but hey, a business can get sued and lose over a hot cup of coffee. I have always told my friend that if the guy with the CCP was very concerned about getting shot during a robbery in a place he couldn't carry then he should shop elsewhere. The point you raise, SF, is a very good, discussable point.

 

[Phantasmal]

Let's just say for the sake of argument that I am a flaming liberal and my business caters to the liberal types, providing them a place where they can come drink their lattes or cappuccinos or whatever...all while watching the latest MSNBC episodes of Rachel Maddow or Mr. Ed. I should have the right to put a state sanctioned sign on the window prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons since I have an objection to it. After all, it's my place of business.

Now let's say (more realistically) that I have a business which caters to the gun toting, Outdoor Channel watching, anti-Obama, black coffee drinking, bible thumping rednecks. I should have the right to do the same thing. Again, it's my place of business.

Now, in business 1 above, I wouldn't expect STY to frequent the place no more than I would expect Jarod to frequent business 2. It then becomes their choice.

I agree, seems like the reasonable approach.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I guess I misunderstood you, to me, there is a world of difference between a gun and a pack of cigarettes. Cigarettes don't discharge by themselves. Cigerettes can be used to burn someone who you feel has threatened you, but aren't on the same level as a gun. I just see a lot more potential trouble with a concealed gun, then a cigerette, knife, fork, spoon, pencil.

Guns also do not discharge by themselves. As I stated, the degree of injury and the rapidity is vastly different... which is why I was curious if you would draw that line. I was playing devils advocate more than anything. I detest smoke, so hypocritically I support a ban on smoking in public establishments... while I would not have a problem with a business owner saying 'no CC in my store'.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Don't mind devil's advocacy at all. I have thought about the situation you described because this very issue is a topic of discussion I have had with a very good friend of mine for years....one of those ongoing things. To answer you, I really don't know considering the screwed up way the courts rule nowadays. On the surface I'd say the owner would suffer no culpability but hey, a business can get sued and lose over a hot cup of coffee. I have always told my friend that if the guy with the CCP was very concerned about getting shot during a robbery in a place he couldn't carry then he should shop elsewhere. The point you raise, SF, is a very good, discussable point.

Yeah, purely guess work, but given the litigious nature of our society, one that owners should think about when making the decision. My personal opinion is that they should have the right to say no guns. I think that is a bad call, but it is their business.

Those that go to the trouble of getting a CCP/registering their gun/taking the safety classes etc... are not likely to be the ones that would come in and rob or just shoot up a place. Those that are likely to rob/shoot up a place are not likely to care that an owner said 'no guns allowed'... in fact I think they would think 'sweet, I am less likely to get shot if I rob this place vs. that store over there that allows CCP owners to carry'

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

we're going to eventually do away with that as well. business' that operate in the public sphere will have a limited property right in that they won't be able to ban weapons.

I'm sorry, but no. I have absolute right of association and who I do/do not let on my property and in what condition they conduct themselves.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

a pencil can be used to harm you or others in your business, are you going to prohibit them? how about forks and knives?

If I felt like it, sure. I, as a property owner, can maintain any standard I wish. If I only allow people who carry pink salmon on their shirt sleeves, I may not have a sound business strategy, but it's my right.

 

[Phantasmal]

I'm sorry, but no. I have absolute right of association and who I do/do not let on my property and in what condition they conduct themselves.

Exactly, no shoes, no shirt, no service!

 

[SmarterthanYou]

If I felt the need to prohibit these items, I should be allowed to do so.

then the next question would be, how would you protect your patrons in the event of a crime and to what degree should you be liable for failure to do so?