Called local mall about gun free zone - Page 4
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: Called local mall about gun free zone

  1. #31

    Wolfchase, Oak Court

    No, the incident I was thinking of was the fireman who was killed by his co-worker and the car dumped at Wolfchase in 2000. No matter though. Did they own Oak Court when that other shooting happened?

    Good point on the reverse implication of their prohibition and claim that this is to make them safe, secure and comfortable. I did notice that several of their malls do in fact contain sporting goods stores which, I am pretty sure, sell firearms. Maybe they are required to have an external door for these items to be immediately removed from the premises? But then, doesn't their policy prohibit their tenants from having them on hand to sell as well as the customers? Or is it you can buy it there, but not have it there? IANAL but this sounds like an interesting discussion topic.

    Below is the letter I sent on Monday to Simon Properties' RCesare, DSimon (CEO) and RSolotov (COO). Unanswered for a full day and part of Monday as well. They had responded quickly to the previous letter (I think HK sent it) so I was hoping for a fast response back.


    ******************************************

    Dear Sir:

    I was a bit surprised and, frankly, concerned, to read an excerpt
    from a letter you sent recently (December 10th, 2007) reaffirming
    Simon Properties' position prohibiting possession of firearms on your
    premises. While this is certainly your right as a property owner in
    most, if not all states, it is equally my right to wonder whether
    your policy stems from a different source than a desire "...to
    maintain a safe, secure and comfortable environment...and to avoid
    any situation that could potentially place at risk the safety of our
    shoppers and employees."

    I would be curious as to whether your company actually has any
    factual studies or even any sort of rational indication that
    prohibiting lawful carrying of weapons on your properties has any
    effect whatsoever in reducing gun fatalities in your facilities.
    Please feel free to cite any instances where policies similar to
    yours have in any way inhibited firearms-related violence. I can only
    recall incidents such as have occurred at Virginia Tech University,
    Appalachian School of Law, Trolley Square (a former Simon Property),
    Tacoma Mall (Simon Property), the recent Westroad Mall shooting
    (Simon Property) and several other gun-free zone locations such as
    public schools. Are there per capita customer numbers somewhere
    which indicate that similar policies have, in fact, slowed or reduced
    these types of occurrences?

    Your letter went on to state the following: "We recognize that
    everyone does not endorse such a policy. However, it is the one our
    company embraces and enforces at each of our properties and which we
    believe is in the best interest of those who work and visit there."
    At some point you might want to provide some proof that your
    rationale has any substance and justify your claim as to a "safe,
    secure and comfortable environment" because I would not feel any of
    those three emotions given your lack of success in meeting this
    objective.

    Sincerely,

    Edward Cocks
    Reality, DEAL with IT!

  2.   
  3. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Columbia, MO, USA
    Posts
    49

  4. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by JC40 View Post
    I would have to agree with the statement concerning the rent a cops.The guys at our mall would have a hard time running anywheres without a tank of oxygen strapped to their backs.It`s a feel good tactic used by the mall to make the sheeple feel at ease. Some people see the uniform and assume they are safe.others live in the real world and realize that when TSHTF,these rent a cops will be invisible.
    I think even this could be too generous. The security guards I see tend to be there to protect the stores from shoplifters not you personally.

    Or maybe they are protecting you from high prices due to excessive shoplifting? :D
    Moderator

  5. #34

    security

    Quote Originally Posted by amddude View Post
    I think even this could be too generous. The security guards I see tend to be there to protect the stores from shoplifters not you personally.

    Or maybe they are protecting you from high prices due to excessive shoplifting? :D

    Most places that have security only want an "appearence" of security. They are not willing to pay the price to have "real" security. I have always felt that the term unarmed security is a contridiction in terms.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  6. #35

    Wink

    [QUOTE=ecocks;8770] Many would say, "Oh NO! Don't call the business and ask or they will post and then what will you do?" QUOTE]...

    Not sure what you're getting at here... this is exactly what should should not be done IF the business is not posted or not legally posted IAW the laws in your state. Bringing this to the attention of the owner/manager/whom ever could result in it becoming legally posted. Know the laws in your state... and remember - silence can work on our behalf.
    NRA Life Member, NRA Firearms Instructor, Range Safety Officer
    SC CWP Instructor
    GrassRoots GunRights SC - the only choice for SC

  7. What are excepted loses . How much will the litagation cost. How much to replace lost resourceres. Lost sheep to a fight are ok as long as it is not to many. If your guards were to shoot and kill a by stander the cost would sky rocket. + you might have to train them.more $ it's all the bottom line .

  8. #37

    What I am saying

    [QUOTE=hpj3;9611]
    Quote Originally Posted by ecocks View Post
    Many would say, "Oh NO! Don't call the business and ask or they will post and then what will you do?" QUOTE]...

    Not sure what you're getting at here... this is exactly what should should not be done IF the business is not posted or not legally posted IAW the laws in your state. Bringing this to the attention of the owner/manager/whom ever could result in it becoming legally posted. Know the laws in your state... and remember - silence can work on our behalf.
    While I respect your right to be silent, it is my opinion that being silent while our rights are eroded has gotten us to the place we are now. One business that sees another posted, even improperly, can assume it doesn't cost anything and adopt a similar policy. When I see a place improperly or ambiguously posted or am told by an employee that it is not allowed, I ask the management to clarify and then verify with the corporate office. This is particularly appropriate at Wal-Marts where there are so many situations where the employees haven't got a clue about their corporate policy. At least one Best Buy has also had this occur. I also make it very clear that they have decided they do not want my business.

    If there is neither attempted signage nor any employee comments, then I don't inquire as there would be no need to verify that they are NOT posted. Also note that in at least one state you have to notify the homeowner before entering their residence that you are carrying a firearm and obtain their specific acknowledgement/permission.
    Reality, DEAL with IT!

  9. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    northern Wisc.
    Posts
    11

    posted malls

    I live in a state(Wisc.) that does not allow any ccw,i am in the process of selling my house to move to Fla,as i have a CCW permit there,but on pondering all the comments on this subject,i think the shortest way to corp enlightenment is to inform them via registered letter that in the future you are assuming by banning your right to self defense even though you have a legal right to carry,they are assuming responsebility for your safety and that you are holding them and their officers legally reponsible for any and all injuries incured on the premises and you are filling a notorised copy of the letter w/your attorney,Scott

  10. #39

    It would be interesting

    to see the results of the litigation if a CCW permit holder was one of the ones (God-forbid) injured or killed. Has this ever been tried in the US Court system?

    My suspicion is that since you entered the facility without coercion, the court would find you accepted the risk. You were not forced to shop there and had other options for shopping for similar merchandise.

    I really think we can only vote with our dollars and make our position known to owners that we are not shopping where we are not welcome. Until enough of us cast those votes, businesses just believe there is no cost to posting their property.

    Now, I would like to see some folks sue these places who have failed so miserably to provide "safe" shopping environments. Hopefully a factor in the case (one of many) would be the denial of 2A rights.
    Reality, DEAL with IT!

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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