It is interesting that those businesses and other entities that are attempting to interfere with the lawful carrying of concealed firearms by licensed people onto their premises are neglecting three issues that place those businesses and entities at profound legal risk.

First, in any instance where a restricted person is injured or killed in an incident that could otherwise have been repelled or discouraged through the presence or use of a properly permitted firearm, the limiting business or entity would likely eventually be held legally responsible for the same. This responsibility would also likely extend to situations in which the lawfully armed citizen could have protected other individuals from the same or similar threats.Second, businesses and other entities excluding all firearms from their premises are issuing, in effect, an implied warranty of freedom from danger from any firearm while within or upon the same.

Third, as otherwise lawfully armed citizens are forced by circumstance of policy to leave their firearms in their cars, the firearm becomes the potential target for theft. The forcing businesses and entities would likely be held legally responsible for increases in auto burglaries in the area of their premises, the losses associated with firearm thefts and the losses associated with the future use of the stolen firearms.

In conclusion, if you are a business or entity that has or is considering restricting the licensed carrying of concealed firearms onto your premises, think, and then think again.

Steve James

Salt Lake City