Sunday, February 05, 2017

THE PRO-GUN MOVEMENT BELIEVES IN FREEDOM! (BUT NOT FOR YOU, LIBTARD)

Gun advocates believe that they have the right to carry firearms pretty much anywhere -- and one pro-gun legislator in Florida believes this so much that he wants to infringe on Floridians' right not to have guns at the businesses they run.

At National Review, gun blogger Andrew Branca explains:
A new proposal would hold store owners responsible for the mayhem that results when they decide to ban guns on their premises....

SB 610 provides that a “gun-free zone” store “assumes absolute custodial responsibility ... for the safety and defense” of any person who disarms in compliance with the store’s policy and who is otherwise licensed to carry a firearm for self-defense. It ensures that the store’s liability for failing this responsibility is not limited to actual damages suffered by injured customers who disarmed in accordance with store policy, but also includes such customers’ “reasonable attorney fees, court costs, expert witness costs, and other costs.” And it requires any business enacting a “gun-free zone” policy to clearly display notice of its legal responsibility.
So if you run a gun-free store and violence of any kind breaks out, the presumption is that an armed citizen who was deprived of the precious right to carry a weapon in the store would have prevented that violence by definition if allowed to use it, therefore the violence is entirely your fault, by law.

This bill was introduced by a state senator named Greg Steube. You've probably run across his name, though you may not remember it. He's the legislator whose bill would have allowed citizens to carry weapons in Florida airports -- a bill that was up for consideration just before a mass shooting at the Fort Lauderdale airport:
On Friday, a gunman opened fire in the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport airport in Florida, killing at least five people and wounding eight....

But just last week, Florida lawmakers began rallying support for SB 140, a state bill that would repeal laws which, among other things, ban guns in airport terminals like the one where the shooting occurred. If passed, the legislation would allow those with concealed carry licenses to bring guns into passenger terminals....

Florida’s bill was sent to committee just three days before the shooting. It was deemed to have a high likelihood of passing out of the Senate Judiciary Committee; similar legislation had died in committee previously because the former chair didn’t schedule a vote, but he lost his bid for reelection. The new chair, Greg Steube (R), is a sponsor of the bill and huge proponent of getting rid of gun-free zones.

“If you want to kill as many people as possible before the cops arrive then you are likely to go to a place where law-abiding citizens can’t carry,” Steube said when he filed the bill. “That’s what we’ve seen, time and time again and why I think we shouldn’t have them.”
Maybe you thought the Fort Lauderdale shooting stopped the Florida legislature's gun obsessives, or at least slowed them down. It's true that the earlier bill hasn't moved forward since the airport shooting. So Steube just came back with another bill intended to create more potential free-fire zones.

These people never rest. They won't quit until they can carry weapons everywhere and it's difficult or impossible for the rest of us to say no. In a few years, I assume "everywhere" will include your home.

6 comments:

Roger said...

I don't really understand why they are so fearful of designated gun-free zones. If I declare my coffee shop a gun-free zone and you carry a concealed weapon into it, what law says you can't just ignore my wish?

Never Ben Better said...

They want to shove their guns in our faces, Roger; not just concealed carry, they want the right to display them openly, to cow and intimidate everyone who objects, to brandish their dominance over everyone, everywhere.

brett said...

I think its more about grievance than issues. During Obama's era, some liberals were able to enact some gun restrictions in some limited places. Now's the time for payback for that. Any wins by the left must be addressed. The language in the proposed law suggests it's written specifically to win an argument more than to enhance gun freedoms.

Yastreblyansky said...

I hope they do this. When somebody sues Mother Emanuel for failing to defend itself against Dylan Roof that could be the moment the American public finally starts to understand what gun nuts have really wrought.

Jimbo said...

So logically, if someone brings a firearm into a business establishment and intentionally or accidentally discharges it and, in so doing causing damages, injury or death, the the business owner presumably can sue the gun owner the way this bill allows the gun owner to do? In FL, I doubt it because something, something, freedumb.

homelessonthehighdesert said...

Round here, the locals laugh at the newcomers packing open-carry. It's kinda' like those big ass trucks with tires the size of volkswagons and the hood ornament a perfect rendition of the human female reproductive system: pussies.

Cowards and candyasses.
Ten Bears