[Gondring]

hope that the survivors of such shootings start filing law suits, perhaps even class-action suits against shopping malls, banks, universities, schools, and such places that have taken away the right of self-defense from the people. If they post such a sign, they have assumed the duty to defend the people inside. If they are negligent in that duty, then they should be sued into bankruptcy. All those signs do is proclaim “Victims Here!”

That doesn't follow.

The mall is private property, and they have every right to make it a gun-free zone. I'm sure that if FReepers own stores, they wouldn't want the government coming in and telling them they had to paint their shelves pink, or play the Adhan, or allow foul language, etc.

Similarly, potential customers have every right to avoid the mall, and if they choose to enter, the Gun-Free Zone signs clearly let them know they are entering a place that isn't safe.

[Luke Skyfreeper]

Property owners also have every right to polish their floors to a glossy shine and coat them with silicone lubricant. But I guarantee if they do, and a customer slips and cracks his head open, they’re going to be sued for all they’re worth. As they should be.

[Luke Skyfreeper]

(And incidentally, there’s a hell of a difference between painting the shelves pink and creating an environment that attracts people like Matthew Murray.)

[Ogrrre]

Yes, they do have the right to make it a gun free zone if they wish. But, when they do make it a gun free zone, knowing that criminals will not obey their little sign, they also take upon themselves the responsibility to protect their customers from such predators. If they fail in their assumed obligation, then they are liable for the results.
Every right has an accompanying responsibility.