And if the workplace clearly posts that they are a "Gun Free Zone" anyone with any common sense should be able to recognize the risk associated with being there.  I clearly recognize that the chances of getting snake bitten are greater if I work at a rattlesnake ranch than in a data center.





 

In that case, when the rubber actually meets the road in court, (if it got that far... unlikely, as the woman's estate/heirs/dependents would still have to find the lawyer willing to take the case on contingency) the business owner would get off. What is "normal and customary" for a business to have in terms of it's windows and structures would come into play, and if the CCW weilder could have reasonably defended herself against a scoped rifle from 200 yards. And the answer being "no".

 

Property rights vs Individual Right to self preservation...It's like someone divided arfcom by zero.  

It's always been my opinion that what ever is under my clothing is no-one's business but my own, and that I will ignore policy that prevents CCW.  Some poeple think that makes me a dishonorable person, but I don't give a fuck.  Most businesses and workplaces ban guns because simply because they want to appear PC and want to cover their asses from lawsuits.  If we don't stick up for concealed carry, the only legal place left to carry will be from your home to the sidewalk.  This law is a nice change, and I hope it becomes a national trend.  

Since both property and gun rights overlap, and are both are heavily infringed, so the state is going to have to come down on one side or another.  I personally prefer that hey come down on the side of gun owners.  Until the property rights crowd throws off the oppressive government shackles of:

lets not get too bent out of shape about the government protecting the individual right of self defense.  It's hardly the most oppressive thing the government has done.  In this case it actually favors one right over an other, as opposed to some of the other goofy laws out there.

I've been wondering about this issue, in the odd chance that IL passes a CCW bill.

I've been considering both sides of the issue in case management should happen to even consider allowing CCW in a medical facility.

It does sound good at first, until I began to think of patients coming in for exams and check-ups while carrying. How would that work for security and safety should they need to disrobe for an exam?

How would the issue be handled of a CCW-ing patient were to experience a heart-attack on-premises, and need transport to the ER? Who would be entrusted with custody of a firearm in case of a medical emergency?

Honestly, some of the folks I see at work can't follow basic instructions written on a pill-bottle or information sheet. Let alone the 4 rules of firearm safety and manufacturer's operating instructions.....

I do wonder how a patient would react seeing a nurse, physician, or medical tech who ,in the course of their duties, accidentally allowed their firearm to become visible. I worry about the same issue with an untrained, inexperienced medical worker walking in on a patient removing their firearm for an exam.

I do like the idea of carrying at work since I work nights, especially as the pill-seekers and addicts become more brazen over time. I personally see medical facilities as a very soft-target down the road for robberies, burglaries, and hold-ups.

Anyone have any insight on how these issues play-out in other states?



ETA: Seems like the prevailing wisdom is to use state-laws and liability-shields to gently encourage allowing CCW in businesses.

Why do you keep asking if a person carrying a gun for their own defense is suddenly responsible for the security of the store?  A person carrying a gun is doing so for them and theirs.

They're already hitting pharmacies all over the country. I wouldn't work in one without a piece. A job is a job and it shouldn't be a death sentence.