On 11 May, 2010, Judge Adlelman issues a summary judgement which says in part:
No reasonable person would dispute that walking into a retail store openly carrying a firearm is highly disruptive conduct which is virtually certain to create a disturbance. This is so because when employees and shoppers in retail stores see a person carrying a lethal weapon, they are likely to be frightened and possibly even panicky. many employees and shoppers are likely to think that the person with the gun is either deranged or about to commit a felony or both. Further, it is almost certain that someone will call the police. And when police respond to a man with a gun call, they have no idea what the armed individuals intentions are. The volatility in such a situation could easily lead to someone being seriously injured or killed.
Here is the link to the freerepublic posting:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2511593/posts
There is quite a bit of detail on this thread at opencarry.org.
Here is a live link for the previous story about Judge Aldeman’s ruling:
Ping...
Many retail employees confuse employee policy with things the customer can and can't do.
Sounds like the good Judge is advocating conceal carry - make it so then ya baffoon.. If everybody is soo scared of armed citizens..
I’d wager 70% of the customers in that store would support and weren’t bothered in the slightest.
Whatta weinie...
Isn’t such commentary something called Dicta?
Setting up a point of contention that can be referred to by other Judges? Perhaps in order to establish some sort of case precedence for future disassembly of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.. the Right to Open Carry?
......”it is ‘great misfortune that dicta are taken down from judges, perhaps incorrectly, and then cited as absolute propositions.’ “
That would seem to indicate a deliberate strategy by one Judicial activist to set up the slam for another fellow traveler down the road.
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d047.htm
W