Posts Tagged ‘accidents’

Who Needs Gun Laws? Our Top Editorial Graphics in April

Monday, May 4th, 2015

dogsNRAztrackingpoint 12-year-old - Google Searchtown meetingWisconsin Carry Issues Statement In Support Of 'Open Carry Texas
National Gun Victims Action Council (NGVAC) is a non-profit network of 14 million gun victims, survivors, the faith community and ordinary people leveraging their buying power to change America’s gun laws. NGVAC initiated the successful action that caused Starbucks to change its gun policy. NGVAC pursues novel legal strategies to reduce gun violence and encourages corporations to be proactively involved in advocating for sane gun laws. NGVAC can be found at www.gunvictimsaction.org.
 
Join our action to tell corporate America to get off the “sidelines” and take a stand against gun violence including the “can’t miss” sniper rifle sold to civilians. When corporations want sane gun laws, we will have sane gun laws. Follow us at @GunVictimsAct

Commercial and Residential Building Owners Face Massive Financial Risk Unless They Post “No Guns Allowed” Signs—Law Firm

Friday, April 24th, 2015

By Elliot Fineman

CEO

National Gun Victims Action Council

NGVAC Tell and Compel Initiative

 

Since “Concealed Carry” has become the law of the land, and open carry is allowed in several states, National Gun Victims Action Council (NGVAC) has speculated that property owners would be liable for gun injuries on their property if they did not ban guns. Now, Mayer Brown LLP, a top-ranked international real estate, finance and litigation law firm, has weighed in on the question at our request.
 
Mayer Brown, named “Firm of the Year” in the Appellate Law category by U.S. News & World Report for the second consecutive year, advises that “a property owner who did not put up the [no guns allowed] signs” would face the argument that it was entirely “foreseeable” that gun violence, injury or death “would occur, since he or she failed to prohibit” guns carried either concealed or openly on his property. Click Link for Illinois Property Owners Research Memorandum
 
Just as supermarkets would be responsible if someone slipped on a spilled liquid and coffee shops would be responsible if someone burned themselves with a hot liquid, property owners are governed by a “common-law standard of care,” Mayer Brown LLP told us, that requires them to provide a safe environment for employees, visitors and customers. Failure to satisfy the common-law standard of care has resulted in massive financial awards against property owners. Several years ago, airlines, theme parks and health clubs began to be sued under this precept for failing to keep external defibrillators available for customers and employees.
 
Property owners who fail to put up signs banning guns may well be found guilty of not maintaining a “common-law standard of care” and face significant financial risks, says Mayer Brown. Even defending such a suit would prove extremely costly.
 
What does this mean to you if you own property or are injured on a property by a legal gun carrier? It means that:
 
If you are shot accidentally or otherwise in a gun-related incident whether in an office, retail, mall or residential building, you can sue the property owner if “No Guns Allowed” signs were not posted.
 
Additionally, if a Building Owner does not put up a sign, you are at increased risk of being a victim of a gun incident at your place of business, where you shop or where you live.
 
The Mayer Brown memo centers on Illinois in response to the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, implemented in 2014, but the principles are the same in every state including states with laws immunizing property owners.
 
Of course, the NRA will reflexively argue that people are less safe in a building that bans guns because they cannot “defend” themselves and others. But the Mayer legal research memo makes clear there is a body of evidence demonstrating that armed citizens do not protect themselves and others the way they think and, in fact, make the environment far less safe than if no guns were present. This is why all major corporations/companies—including the NRA—ban guns from their headquarter buildings.
 
Further, the memo reports that even fully trained law enforcement officers miss about a third of their shots. “It is not foreseeable or likely that armed individuals could successfully defend themselves in a crisis situation” and they may “create more danger,” says the memo, “A court could hardly claim that a duty of care was violated because a property owner put up signs to help prevent this additional danger posed by would-be heroes.”
 
If the NRA threatens to sue a business or Building Owner for not allowing guns, the owners will be on strong legal ground defending such a suit. Nor is the Building Owner even taking a position in favor or against guns. Owners are prudently making a risk avoidance (elimination) decision.
 
The Mayer Brown memo also removes the necessity of individual businesses located on the property owners’ property from having to make individual decisions about gun signage; the Building Owner or property owner’s ban accomplishes that in one felled swoop for all the chains and businesses located in a shopping center, mall, office or residential complex.
 
What can you do? You can discuss the financial liability risk and dangers of allowing guns at the places you shop, work, visit and live. Now that this legal research memo is public information, a property owner cannot claim he did “not know” as a defense. The memo establishes that the danger of gun injuries when guns are allowed is entirely “foreseeable.” Foreseeability is the legal standard for establishing liability.
 
This legal guidance is good news for anyone who wants to shop, dine, work or be in public spaces without the heightened risk of gun violence. Concealed and open carriers can walk up and down the street with their guns—but if they enter restaurants, stores, theaters, offices and other businesses with signs up they will be in violation of trespassing laws and subject to personal liability. The memo provides many powerful reasons for Building Owners to post “No Guns Allowed” signs.

 

NRA Puppet of the Week- Marion Hammer, Repeat Winner

Sunday, March 22nd, 2015

NRA_PotW_lg_Hammer
 
When it comes to gun activism you are a busy bee. After getting Florida’s Stand Your Ground law on the books, you pushed for a law criminalizing doctors who ask about a gun in the home. “Physicians interrogating and lecturing parents and children about guns is not about gun safety. It is a political agenda to ban guns,” you said. Now you are accusing Florida police chiefs who spoke against a bill allowing guns on campuses of “lobbying” with tax dollars. Like the $400,000 in tax dollars each gun homicide costs taxpayers?
 
Gun Loving Ghoul “OK” With A Little Homicide, You, Marion Hammer, are the NRA Puppet of the Week
 
Join our action to tell corporate America to get off the “sidelines” and take a stand against gun violence including the “can’t miss” sniper rifle sold to civilians. When corporations want sane gun laws, we will have sane gun laws. Follow us at @GunVictimsAct
 

See List of All NRA Puppets

 

The NRA Doesn’t Hate All Gun Laws–Look at The Ones it Likes

Sunday, March 1st, 2015

The NRA hates the government’s jackbooted ATF agents and loves to whip up its wild-eyed prepper population: they’re coming to take your guns. Yet the NRA has quietly enacted a lot of regulations of its own which it relies on the same government jackbooted agents to enforce. Who can say hypocrite?
 
oppressFor example, the gun lobby-backed Tiahrt amendments tacked on to U.S. Department of Justice appropriations bills since 2003 prohibit ATF from releasing firearm trace data for use by cities, states, researchers, litigants and members of the public. Tiahrt amendments also mandate the destruction of all approved gun purchaser records within 24 hours and prohibit ATF from requiring gun dealers to submit their inventories to law enforcement.
 
Let’s get those bad guys!
 
The NRA actually got a program passed to help felons and others whose gun purchasing rights were revoked petition for them to be restored. “Felons Finding It Easy to Regain Gun Rights,” said a chilling New York Times report in November of 2011. Why should someone’s gun rights be abridged just because they’re a violent criminal?
 
After the NRA got laws passed that make it legal for employees to bring their guns to work and leave them in the company parking lot, it added some spite. It pushed for laws in some states to make it illegal for employers to even ask if the employee brought a gun to work! It’s none of their business–until workplace shootings occur.
 
The bills are similar to the NRA’s moves to make it illegal for doctors to ask patients if they have guns in the home–those meddlers. Of course the NRA doesn’t mind doctors stitching up the children who find Dad’s gun practically every week.
 
The NRA has also pushed laws to make it illegal to publish the names and addresses of gun owners even though the information is considered in the public domain like real estate transfers. Guns make them so safe–owners don’t want anyone to know they have them. What will the neighbors think? What if bad guys break in and steal them? Maybe they need more guns to protect their guns.
 
Of course the NRA’s favorite law is the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act which gives gun makers, gun dealers and trade groups complete legal immunity from negligence and product liability lawsuits. Passed after Columbine and Red Lake, but before Virginia Tech, Tucson, Aurora and Newtown, maybe the gun lobby knew what was coming.

 

.

Join our action to tell corporate America to get off the “sidelines” and take a stand against gun violence including the “can’t miss” sniper rifle sold to civilians. When corporations want sane gun laws, we will have sane gun laws. Follow us at @GunVictimsAct


Visit Us On TwitterVisit Us On FacebookVisit Us On YoutubeVisit Us On Google PlusVisit Us On Pinterest