, , , , ,

Rep.-elect Nick Schroer (R-107) has filed a bill, HB 96, that would allow “law abiding” gun owners to sue businesses that ban guns. It “would apply when a person who is authorized to carry a firearm, is prohibited from doing so by a business and is then injured by another person or an animal.”

Recently an employee at a Sunset Hills Home Depot was accidentally shot by a gun carrying customer. The store has a hybrid approach to guns:

… our policy is that we do allow customers to carry firearms into our stores as long as it is in accordance with local law. We do not allow associates (employees) to carry firearms.

Since turn and turn about is fair play, under the logic of Schroer’s HB 96, shouldn’t that injured employee be able to sue the Missouri legislature that made it legal for any Tom, Butterfingered Dick and Idiot Harry to carry a gun without a permit, evidence of training or basic common sense?

Shouldn’t he also be able to sue his employer – the one who permitted said Butterfingered Dick or Idiot Harry to bring a lethal weapon into the employee’s place of work?

Would a special law even be necessary to enable such lawsuits? Isn’t criminal negligence grounds enough?

Of course, if Home Depot were to drop that pesky ban on employees carrying guns, the employee in question might have been able to blast our butterfingered gun-owner to Kingdom Come before anyone knew what going on, thus taking care of the whole issue of who litigates whom, when.


HB 96: gun humpers in the General Assembly want to hold everyone else hostage (December 8, 2016)