Subject: Re: Mesa Borders now posted no guns
J.C. Penney attempted the same in Texas a few years ago. I called their risk management at corporate and was told that they felt it made the stores safer. After identifying myself and my qualifications to address this issue with them, I informed them that when they post no guns (to the exclusion of all other weapons) and do not add armed guards and metal detectors and all the ancillary security systems that are required to provide a WEAPON free environment, (not just gun free) that when some thing does happen, and it will, they will be liable for not having "known, could have known, or SHOULD have known" that they had not exercised due diligence in protecting customers in every possible (and EXPENSIVE way). I added that if they did nothing, and relied instead on the tax supported police and protection services that everyone else in the US accepts, that they would not add the huge liability they were by posting no guns. They were encouraged to take it up with their corporate lawyers, and they did. The lawyers agreed that such a policy INCREASED their liability and the policy was scrapped. Risk management and litigation are bottom line issues and politics pale before huge judgements or the risk of same.
Joe Horn