New Gun Buster Sign for WI - Page 2

New Gun Buster Sign for WI

This is a discussion on New Gun Buster Sign for WI within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I would tread lightly about printing up and displaying a poster that IMHO is misleading in it's statement,People and businesses on the fence may fall ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 25 of 25
Like Tree15Likes

Thread: New Gun Buster Sign for WI

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179
    I would tread lightly about printing up and displaying a poster that IMHO is misleading in it's statement,People and businesses on the fence may fall on the anti's side if they feel you tried to pass erroneous information off as the truth
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Chapstick View Post
    I love it! Do you mind if I print that out and start giving them to businesses that don't permit carry?
    Telling a business that their no gun policy makes them an open checkbook should harm come to you as a guest is sure to be seen as so much hot air and will only serve to make you look foolish. As for the claim that Wisconsin law makes that so......Let's see the statute.

  3. #18
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,783
    Quote Originally Posted by dukalmighty View Post
    I would tread lightly about printing up and displaying a poster that IMHO is misleading in it's statement,People and businesses on the fence may fall on the anti's side if they feel you tried to pass erroneous information off as the truth
    Well said and quoted for emphasis. Wisconsin law does not impose such liability and arguing that it does will reflect poorly on those that carry.

  4. #19
    Member Array Mograthi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    34
    someone else posted the statute and yes while it does not directly say that the business is liable, it says those that do not post are immune from liability. What a lot of folks, including multiple law firms in Wisconsin, are saying is that since the statute specifically provides immunity for those that do not post, that the implied reciprical meaning is that if you do posted you/the business assumes liability should something occur on your posted premisis.

    Until we have actual cases go to trial and case law precedents set, we all can just interpret it how we like. i wouldn't bother so much with making a point to tell the business they can be held liable because they posted, if I was to bring that portion of the law to their attention I would just point out that if the business chose not to post that they gain liabilty immunity under the state law. That being said I dont like their food so I dont go there no skn off my teeth. I however love Red Robins burgers and was sad to see their business posted in Green Bay.

  5. #20
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Mograthi View Post
    someone else posted the statute and yes while it does not directly say that the business is liable, it says those that do not post are immune from liability. What a lot of folks, including multiple law firms in Wisconsin, are saying is that since the statute specifically provides immunity for those that do not post, that the implied reciprical meaning is that if you do posted you/the business assumes liability should something occur on your posted premisis.

    Until we have actual cases go to trial and case law precedents set, we all can just interpret it how we like. i wouldn't bother so much with making a point to tell the business they can be held liable because they posted, if I was to bring that portion of the law to their attention I would just point out that if the business chose not to post that they gain liabilty immunity under the state law. That being said I dont like their food so I dont go there no skn off my teeth. I however love Red Robins burgers and was sad to see their business posted in Green Bay.
    The portion of the statute as copied below would seem to mean that a business allowing concealed carry on the premises would be immune to liability as a result of accident or misconduct on the part of the person carrying the weapon. It would be a real stretch to in any way interpret that as any liability for anything resulting from their not allowing concealed carry on their premises.
    (b) A person that does not prohibit an individual from carrying a concealed weapon on property that the person owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising from its decision.
    We can wish the laws were what we like but that doesn't make it so. People who believe it is clever to circulate a sign like the one shown here would be better advised to stick to fact.
    Last edited by wmhawth; January 28th, 2012 at 04:52 PM.

  6. #21
    Member Array Mograthi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    34
    Agreed, I am not condoning putting such a sign up nor telling a business they will be sued should something happen. I will however point out to someone that by not posting they gain immunity from liabilty should something happen, that is if I even bother to say anything. It would be nice if the state or doj would do away with the ambiguity on the law and spell it out in clear tearms, but we will have to wait until a case goes to court and legal precedence is set one way or the other.

    Until then if one must make a point to a business or individual, one should stick to the known facts of the law, which at this point is liability immunity should one not post.

  7. #22
    Senior Member Array mastercapt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    502
    Point of order:
    Could this immunity clause be the ground for carrying in a business here you are an employee?
    Does an employer still have the righ to forbid carrying by employees, or is that point treate separately?
    Just a thought....

  8. #23
    Member Array Mograthi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    34
    In Wisconsin that point is seperate. An employeer has the right to deny carry on the premises by posting a sign' but the law specifically states that they can not prohibit one from keeping the gun in the emoloyees vehicle even if it is on company property. The sign is the same sign used to prohibit the public from carrying in their business by the way, so one sign applies to employees and customers equally and equally they can not prohibit you from having your weapon in your vehicle on their property.

  9. #24
    Senior Member Array RightyLefty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    542
    Since I was the poster who brought up posting a no guns sign means it assumes liability by a business; I never said that. I said those who post a sign are "open to litigation." That doesn't mean they are automatically liable if something does happen. That will have to be proven by someone who brings a lawsuit forward against a business. They may or may not be a fault. But as someone else has mentioned you have to read into the law what the law says. If it says immunity can be given to a business that allows you to carry then it also suggests a lawsuit may be brought against those who don't allow you to carry. Again, doesn't mean they are necessarily liable just means that a lawsuit could be filed. And no I don't suggest posting a sign like that either. That is a tongue and cheek stretching of what the law says.

  10. #25
    Member Array rlimke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    WI, USA
    Posts
    110
    People, this was meant as a "tongue in cheek" poke at the absurdity of this sign keeping a businesss place safe. Please do not use this sign to try and persuade a businees to change it's mind. Living in the People's Republic of Madison, WI has jaded me a bit, and my sarcastic side has peeked out. FOR HUMOR PURPOSES ONLY.
    jerp likes this.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

busters sign
,

firearm posters for wisconsin

,
gun buster sign
,

gun busters

,

gunbuster

,
new gun posters...
,
powered by mybb georgia birth injury lawyer
,
powered by mybb wisconsin personal injury lawyers
,
printable gunbuster sign
,

template no guns

,

walmart firearm sign

,
walmart gun buster sign
,

wi gun forum

,

wisconsin gun forum

,
wisconsin gun poster
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors