“If you create a pretend gun-free zone, you’re liable for any harm it causes.”
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- Backgrounder
Originally introduced in Arizona as The Defenseless Victim Act of 2002, this bill recognizes that so-called “gun-free zones,” recklessly made and typically with no alternative security provided, border on the absurd, i.e., “NOTICE: You are protected by this sign.”
The original impetus for the bill came after “gun-free” massacres at the Luby's cafeteria in Texas, the Wakefield, Mass. slayings, and finally the hijacked airliners on Sept. 11, 2001, where pilots and passengers were defenseless, in the false name of security.
Congress responded to the Muslim jihad assault on our airlines with the “Arm The Pilots” law. The rest of the nation needs a similarly common-sense response.
The death toll at pretend “gun-free zones” continues to mount. The list is well known and needs no repeating — which mass murderers revel in –, and repetition is known to encourage copycat activity.
These posted locations are proud of their “no guns allowed” signs, laws or policies that keep out even FBI-certified citizens with proper permits — despite the disastrous results. The murderers, as in all such cases, disobey the signs or laws, which surprises no one, not even the media. The news media continues to suppress stories where armed individuals stop such mayhem. See, for example, The Bias Against Guns, by John Lott, for numerous egregious examples, or just Google the subject, which mainstream outlets refuse to do, or refuse to reveal.
Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act
The Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act says that, in public places, if you create one of these dangerous make-believe gun-free zones, you’re liable for any harm it causes. There is no cost or budget item associated with enacting this bill.
The idea that make-believe gun-free zones are safe — is fraudulent.
It is a mythology perpetrated by anti-rights activists who can often be recognized for their beliefs that:
- 1 – self-defense should be illegal,
- 2 – guns should be confiscated,
- 3 – no one but “authorities” should have guns,
- 4 – your right to arms can be denied by posting signs,
- 5 – a government can take care of you better than you can.
The anti-self-defense lobby tells you to rely on the police for your safety, but they always omit these inconvenient facts:
- 1 – Police have no legal duty to protect you;
- 2 – Authorities routinely respond only after an event to pick up the pieces;
- 3 – When seconds count, the police are just minutes away;
- 4 – They like parading around in full battle dress for the cameras, for hours, after the action is over.
In the tragic homicides referred to above, and countless others you see on TV, the police don’t draw their guns; they draw chalk lines when you’re gone.*
A person who would deny your right or ability to self-defense is as violent and wrong as the person who assaults you.
Acting in self-defense against a criminal assault is legally guaranteed in all 50 states and federally, as it should be. It is as old as the first written laws of civilization (Code of Hammurabi, Five Books of Moses). Denying the fundamental right to self-preservation is unjust, immoral, dangerous and should not be tolerated.
The notion that make-believe gun-free zones are safe is a fraud perpetrated on the public:
- a) Only innocent victims like you and me are affected. Armed criminals ignore no-guns signs and could care less — they’re laughing at you.
- b) No alternate form of security is provided. You are knowingly and recklessly made vulnerable, while property management accepts no responsibility for your safety or their negligent behavior. The bill addresses only blatantly anti-gun-rights actions that would callously disarm you and ignore your plight.
- c) Despite bias in news coverage and the fear-mongering left, privately held firearms have repeatedly been shown to deter and prevent crime in one scholarly study after another (detailed at great length in Armed, by Kleck and Kates). Since the nation’s inception, we have known and embraced the freedom-giving truth that guns protect the innocent, and that this is good.
- d) Denial of your civil rights under color of law is a federal offense under 18 USC §241 and 18 USC § 242:
The Gist: Anyone who, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, custom or regulation, willfully deprives any person of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, shall be fined, or imprisoned for up to one year, or both.
If bodily injury results, or if the violation includes the use or attempted or threatened the use of a dangerous weapon, explosive or fire, the prison term rises to up to ten years. If death results, or if such acts include kidnapping, attempted kidnapping, aggravated sexual assault, attempted aggravated sexual assault, or an attempt to kill, the violator may be fined, imprisoned for any term of years up to life, or put to death.
Initial reactions to the Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act have been highly supportive by knowledgeable people in the gun-rights movement. It has the potential and broad value to become a significant national issue. This could turn into one of the key gun topics of the decade (literally, the right to bear arms), especially if terrorist attacks and media-fueled copycat mass murders continue and defenseless innocent victims are slaughtered.
What good is the right to arms, if possession is banned everywhere?
The public-opinion value, forcing the opposition to support helplessness and victimization, are worth the effort. Now is an excellent time to bring this issue into the spotlight. All state legislatures should at least have similar bills introduced showing support for the principles involved.
The bill was first introduced as HB2456, sponsored by a dozen representatives, in the 45th session in Arizona (2002). The legislators say it gives them something to sink their teeth into. Give your legislators something this good — ask them to introduce the Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act in your state, for all the right reasons. Three states have had the bill on their floor, Arizona, Georgia and New Hampshire. Your state belongs on this list. Reach out to your elected representatives and encourage them to act. Bring the bill language to them, in person, on paper. Much more effective than just another email.
Some additional observations appear following the bill text below.
- This is useful law, supportive of our fundamental rights,
- A deterrent to criminals who would perpetrate attacks,
- A winner in the publicity battle over gun rights,
- It places responsibility squarely on those who cause harm by their direct actions.
It deserves to be enacted. Please give it your support. Ask your representatives to introduce and vote for The Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act.
ADDITIONAL IMPORTANT POINTS
- If you have a problem with holding people accountable for death and mayhem they cause by enabling crime, then, of course, you’ll be against the Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act. That’s a position some anti-rights activists may take. Bring ‘em on. If nothing happens, i.e., they’re correct, and make-believe gun-free zones are pleasant, safe and crime free, then the bill has ZERO effect on anything — and costs nothing. Personally, I think that facet is particularly edifying. Sort of like, what harm could it do?
- Despite what some people have claimed, private property rights are unaffected by the Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act. Read it yourself and see. Gun-free zones are allowed, entirely at a property owner’s free discretion just as they are now, and property rights remain 100% intact. You can keep guns, ban guns, allow only one type, open, discreet, it doesn’t matter, and the new law is silent on this. There is NO coercion (and also no government spending!) in this bill at all. That’s a big part of its beauty. In fact, only people who would ban your rights and ignore your plight are affected in any way, and then just if you’re attacked and harmed on their grounds. No blood no foul. It’s an indeed balanced and even-handed bill.
- Also, note that genuinely private property like your home or ranch are exempt from the bill. ONLY public property or property open to the public is affected. There is a definite difference (well, some diehard libertarians might not agree, but you can’t please everyone) between truly private property (like your home) and a place that is open to the public and privately run, like a mall, or WalMart. Public areas have a well-established duty to provide a reasonably safe environment, and they have been getting a free ride on this issue, at your expense. They can still ban guns remember, and you can always go shop elsewhere. For a wonderful “No-Guns-No-Money” wallet card that you can leave with stores that won’t allow you to enter armed, visit the Arizona Citizens Defense League site.
- All this does is make clear that whoever creates an obviously dangerous situation, by forcing the disarmament of innocent people entering — which they’re still fully entitled to do under the bill — there’s a consequence for that risky action. As there should be for creating such a self-evidently unsafe situation. And it only matters if the danger manifests, and some psychopath turns some hair parlor into a victim zone. If there’s no assault, then there’s no problem. Gun-o-phobes can sleep tight thinking the rest of us are just a bunch of paranoids. The bill merely addresses criminally misguided notions of safety.
- You may find that your legislators object on the grounds that are hard to justify. I’ve had some tell me the bill would be fine if it only limited businesses, and left the government’s make-believe gun-free zones, like parks and buses, intact (talk about hubris!). Other legislators, including an attorney whose clients are in business, say businesses should be excluded but the government must be controlled! Just emphasize that make-believe gun-free zones are dangerous — who sets them up is not the issue.
- Try thinking of this as the Luby’s Massacre Act. Maybe that will help emphasize the blatant and profound fraud of proposing make-believe gun-free zones as safety nets. The heartless, insensitive, thoughtless perpetrators of defenseless victim zones should be ashamed of themselves. At the very least they must be held accountable.
- Try thinking of this as the Come-And-Go-As-You-Please Act. Instead of disarming in your car, using gun lockers, or avoiding some places altogether, you just travel about, armed or not as you prefer, and that’s all. It’s so much better when public places just let people come and go as they please, without signs and bans, to quietly go about their business. This is how most public places act, and it is responsible or even patriotic. Think about it — on a day-to-day basis, places without these deceptive gun-bans operate just fine. Going into 2018, Arizona has more than 325,000 CCW-permit holders, and many other openly armed citizens, routinely, legally and peacefully coming and going.
- Think about what the opposition will have to sound like to say they don’t want any liability for murdered victims they had disarmed. They have to stand up for defenselessness. It’s a good time for the Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act.
* This phrase from a Cartridge Family Band song is used with permission.
A version of the bill was first introduced in Arizona (HB2456 in 2002) by Rep. Randy Graf (R-6th), with considerable support (12 sponsors!).
In 2003, Rep. Graf re-introduced it in Arizona (HB 2320). The state of Georgia joined the effort to enact this important new legislation with HB31, introduced by Rep. Bobby Franklin (R-17th). At least two other states actively considered the bill. In 2008 the bill was introduced again in Arizona as SB1159. Prosecutors opposed the bill several years ago on the grounds that: without those excited utterances we won't be able to convict half the people we do. This is a partial list.
Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Bloomfield Press, founded in 1988, is the largest publisher and distributor of gun-law books in the country. Our website, gunlaws.com, features a free national directory to gun laws and relevant contacts in all states and federally, along with our unique line of related books and DVDs. “After Your Shoot” for media review is available on request, call 800-707-4020.
Our authors are available for interview, call to schedule. Call for cogent positions on gun issues, informed analysis on proposed laws, talk radio that lights up the switchboard, fact sheets and position papers. As we always say, “It doesn't make sense to own a gun and not know the rules.” Visit: www.gunlaws.com