BREAKING: This State Just SHUT DOWN “Gun-Free Zones” In A MAJOR Way… Obama Is LIVID

RSS Feed

BREAKING: This State Just SHUT DOWN “Gun-Free Zones” In A MAJOR Way… Obama Is LIVID

January 20th, 2016

Awake Goy

Dean James AMERICA’S FREEDOM FIGHTERS–

Those of us on the RIGHT know that GUN-FREE ZONES are where criminals will go to commit their crimes. No guns? Perfect. It’s a no brainer for anyone with braincells, which liberals have been proven to show that they DON’T have.

Now, lawmakers in one state have taken a stand against these gun-free zones and are allowing anyone that is injured on the property of one of these zones to SUE THE HELL OUT OF THEM!

I love this. In California we are prohibited from carrying protection, which is my Constitutional right but I will tell you, deciding whether to be unprotected or choose to break the ‘law’ by carrying is an every day decision I have been forced to make.

Well, according to The Tennessean, Senate Bill 1736 — sponsored by Republican state Sen. Dolores Gresham — has a very specific purpose: to balance property rights with the constitutional rights of concealed carry permit holders.

The bill allows Tennessee residents who were injured on the property of an establishment that was a “gun-free” zone to sue the proprietor for their injuries.

If a Tennessee grocery store bans guns on its property and a black bear or wild hog kills or injures a person who otherwise would be carrying his or her gun, the gun owner would be allowed to sue the property owner if a newly introduced bill became law.

Sponsored by Sen. Dolores Gresham, R-Somerville,Senate Bill 1736 has a very specific purpose.

“It is the intent of this section to balance the right of a handgun carry permit holder to carry a firearm in order to exercise the right of self-defense and the ability of a property owner or entity in charge of the property to exercise control over governmental or private property,” the bill states.

To accomplish that goal, the legislation allows any Tennessean with a valid gun permit to sue a property owner in the event of injury or death provided the incident occurred while in a gun-free zone.

A handgun carry permit holder who is injured by any of the aforementioned would be able to file a lawsuit within two years of when the event occurred, provided they meet the following requirements:

the plaintiff had to be authorized to carry a gun at the time of the incident
the plaintiff was prohibited from carrying a firearm because of the gun-free sign
the property owner was not required to be posted by state or federal law but was posted by choice of the defendant

Now THIS makes sense- for now at least. Gun-free zones need to be abolished. They are dangerous areas that put Americans at risk.

If a criminal wants to commit a crime or commit a terrorist act they will certainly choose a place where EVERYONE else is prohibited by law to have a firearm in their possession. It’s not rocket science. It’s common sense.

God bless you my patriot friends and please stay safe and always be locked and loaded.