One Group Has Jaw-Dropping Plans For “Gun-Free Zones” That’ll Enrage Millions There’s no doubt about it, gun free zones do absolutely noting to prevent mass shootings.
Just take a look at a list of all the recent mass shootings the mainstream media has focused on and you’ll see 90%+ took place in a gun free zone. Which is of course why pro-gun groups have another name for the gun free zone…referring to them as target rich environments.
One pro gun group thinks they’re so awful they’d like it so the creators of the gun free zone are actually the one held responsible for deaths that take place inside of these “protected spaces.”
Guns.com writes:
"A gun rights group on Monday called for liability in mass shootings to be shifted to the entity or person who created a gun-free zone on which the incident occurred.
"The Second Amendment Foundation released its report on resolutions adopted at its September policy conference in Phoenix, Arizona, where the gun rights group reaffirmed its belief that that prohibiting guns in specific areas makes them vulnerable to mass shootings.
"The SAF also voted to unify support of urban and rural gun ownership, going as far as to put in writing its undeniable support of a measure in Utah correcting language to the 1934 National Firearms Act and 1968 Gun Control Act defining suitable firearms as those “particularly suitable for sporting purposes,” where self-defense isn’t mentioned.
"The bill, H.R. 2710 – also supported by the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the National Rifle Association – would further protect large caliber rifles and shotguns from the classification of “destructive devices” under the NFA and would prevent the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives from from being able to reclassify ammunition to “armor piercing.”
"A recent scare over the potential ban of green tip rounds for all but military and law enforcement use caused panicked purchasing in the civilian community, in turn increasing the ammunition’s value significantly.
"The argument was over whether that type of round, used in AR platform rifles, was suitable for sporting use. ARs have become increasingly popular in hunting.
"The committee also urged lawmakers to pass legislation protecting businesses and organizations that don’t post signs banning guns and called for gun owners to practice their Second Amendment rights and "joyously act in what an outsider might describe as ‘irrational self-reliance.'"
This is a reasonable action to pursue.
Businesses who look to infringe on a person’s second amendment right to protect themselves ought to be held liable for any injury taking place there.
That’s what the Supreme Court rules on plenty of other acts that are in violation of a person’s constitutional rights, so why not have it be the case here too?
Do you like the idea that it should be the people who prevent others from protecting themselves who should be held responsible for harm done to a person?
Or should the gun manufacturer’s be the ones who have to pony up?
Tell us in the comments below.
Poster Comment:
Putin says to Americans, "Hang on to your guns." He knows well what happens when people lose them. Tyranny develops quickly.