Posted on 07/24/2012 6:08:18 PM PDT by Talisker
So let's say someone was in the Aurora theater, armed and with a carry permit, in defiance of the signs banning weapons.
Maniac starts shooting. Armed citizen fires back, and stops the carnage.
Then what?
Is he arrested? He's carrying legally, and he just stopped a massacre. Is he sued? For what? Stopping the massacre is an overwhelming defense.
Practically speaking, when someone is legally armed, what can be done to them? How can any charges or lawsuits stand? In other words, what practical power does any corporate policy have that deprives people of the right to self-defense, while providing no corporate lethal defense for those disarmed people?
What would be happening, right now, to such a citizen if the Aurora perp was wounded or dead, right now, because he was shot in the theater by that armed citizen and thereby stopped from going any further than he did?
Manager would probably discreetly remove the sign when no one was looking.
Or maybe plain clothes police would be shot at by uniformed police. Then sherrifs and state patrol would have imposters dressed like them and all shooting at each other and at the end everyone in the world is killed except the joker. /s
Yes, you already answered that in your earlier post. That is not the question I was asking. You did not answer my question. What about when a shooting is now in progess? What happens to the CC weapon carrier who chooses to fight back rather than lie there and get shot? See my question below.
So what happens if a madman (or mad woman) bursts into the premises and starts shooting to kill as many people as he can? And thus a CC weapon holder, draws his handgun and shoots the madman, thus saving countless lives. What happens to the CC weapon holder who brought his weapon onto the premises in violation of the posted warning but saved countless lives?
Carried by 6
Judged by 12
I guarantee you that corporation would absolutely wither under public support for the lifesaver.
Especially now after the CO incident.
Chances are, in such a scenario, nothing. The chain could ban him from their premises, but they probably wouldn’t given the huge negative publicity and economic loss that would follow banning a hero.
Under other scenarios where it would be discovered someone was carrying they’d ask them to leave, or put their gun in their car and come back.
Possibly true in CO, though I doubt it.
In Florida only violent felonies remove the right to claim self defense as a justification for homicide. And there are exceptions even to that.
I carry everywhere I rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.
It has happened before in less extreme circumstances, even in NYC, I believe.
?
By shooting more people?
Causing fewer casualties, perhaps, or preventing more casualties?
"I guess what Im getting at is that for any disarmament contract to be viable, it seems to me that an equal assurance of protection must be made towards the disarmed."
Therefore if anything happens you should be able to sue the pants off that business.
Missouri’s law is the same, you are asked to leave with your weapon. No charges unless you refuse to leave.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.