Mall Parking Lot posting (WI)

This is a discussion on Mall Parking Lot posting (WI) within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Gary Slider This is the part of WI law I am waiting for someone to use if a place is posted and ...

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 51 of 51
Like Tree12Likes

Thread: Mall Parking Lot posting (WI)

  1. #46
    Senior Member Array acepilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    NW WI
    Posts
    556
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary Slider View Post
    This is the part of WI law I am waiting for someone to use if a place is posted and someone comes in with a firearm like in the CO theater. If they don’t post they are immune from liability. But what happens if they post? I think they are stating they are 100% responsible for your safety then. It will make an interesting case if or when it happens.

    Wisconsin Statute 175.60 Concealed Carry Law
    (21) Immunity.
    (a) The department of justice, the department of transportation, and the employees of each department; clerks, as defined in sub. (11) (a) 1. a., and their staff; and court automated information systems, as defined under sub. (11) (a) 1. b., and their employees are immune from liability arising from any act or omission under this section, if done so in good faith.
    (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.
    (c) An employer that does not prohibit one or more employees from carrying a concealed weapon under sub. (15m) is immune from any liability arising from its decision.
    (d) A person providing a firearms training course in good faith is immune from liability arising from any act or omission related to the course if the course is one described in sub. (4) (a).
    History: 2011 a. 35; s. 13.92 (1) (bm) 2.
    Wisconsin's Concealed Carry Law. Hinkston. Wis. Law. July 2012.
    That's exactly how I feel about it too. I have instructed my wife to sue the pants off my company if someone ever comes in and kills me at work since my employer has prohibited me carrying while at work. I expect a great lawyer will make that case for her since, by my way of thinking, the company did not do enough to keep me safe at work by NOT providing a security guard of any sort. I work at a company outpost with no guard(s) or security doors that need a badge to open, yet they DO have a security guard and badged doors at corporate HQ in another city, therefore, I am not protected like other employees who work at HQ. Unfortunately, I won't be around to revel in the satisfaction of it all when she's drinking Mai Tais on the beach of her own private island in the Caribbean. :)

    Ace
    Ace
    Gotta Fly or Gonna Die

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    Senior Member Array Gary Slider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    731
    tacman605, First I am not an attorney. I have also seen some crazy court cases.

    Wisconsin has a law that I have not seen any other state have. That if they do not forbid employees/patrons from carrying they are immune from any action of those people. Not saying they can't be sued under other laws. Some states have laws that say they can't be sued like Florida unless you are arrested and tried. But this new wording will take the courts to figure out and it will be interesting to watch. But this WI law just states if they don't forbid anyone from carrying. If they meant to grant immunity in all cases they would have worded it that way. Intent of the legislature comes into play when enforcing a law. I just think this could get very interesting if the right case comes along.
    tacman605 likes this.
    Stay Safe,
    Gary Slider

    Co-Owner Handgunlaw.us

    Member Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network

  4. #48
    Distinguished Member Array ArmyCop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Chickasaw, AL
    Posts
    1,729
    For God, Family and Country!

  5. #49
    Member Array Hruk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    31
    Also you should, Madison Metro has posted the bus and tells you if you write in that they will tell you they are in the law. Yet the law actually says that buses cannot be posted. So yea, best thing is to send a letter to the DOJ in Madison and ask them if this is within the law. As it seems places are finding lawyers that will tell them what they want to hear.

  6. #50
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,031
    Gary this will be interesting to watch. I would hate to be the test case though.

    I wonder how that would be interpreted if that is the case and employees are allowed to carry and something major happens like in the spa or church? Would the victims have no legal recourse to hold the employer/business responsible? If it is in strict regards to an armed employee committing a criminal act this would also take out the premise that an employer restricts firearms on the basis of vicarious liability. I bet the insurance carrier would be puckered up in the event something happened.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  7. #51
    Senior Member Array Gary Slider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    731
    I wouldn't want to be the test case either but it will be interesting to see if something comes from it and how that decision is reached. Here is WI Law. You can go to their statutes and read the whole thing. Wisconsin Statutes Table of Contents

    175.60

    (21) Immunity.
    (a) The department of justice, the department of transportation, and the employees of each
    department; clerks, as defined in sub. (11) (a) 1. a., and their staff; and court automated information systems, as defined under sub. (11) (a) 1. b., and their employees are immune from liability arising from any act or omission under this section, if done so in good faith.
    (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.
    (c) An employer that does not prohibit one or more employees from carrying a concealed weapon under sub.
    (15m) is immune from any liability arising from its decision.
    Stay Safe,
    Gary Slider

    Co-Owner Handgunlaw.us

    Member Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

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

are ccw allowed in wisconsin malls
,
are weapons allowed in fox river mall?
,
bay park square concealed
,

bay park square mall gun free

,

concealed carry wisconsin

,

effects of building a mall

,

fox river mall concealed carry

,
fox river mall gun policy
,
fox valley mall appleton concealed weapons
,
negative of a mall parking lot
,
where is concealed carry allowed in green bay
,

wisconsin concealed carry

Click on a term to search for related topics.