BREAKING: This State Just SHUT DOWN “Gun-Free Zones” In A MAJOR Way… Obama Is LIVID


Those of us on the RIGHT know that GUN-FREE ZONES are where criminals will go to commit their crimes. No guns? Perfect. It’s a no brainer for anyone with braincells, which liberals have been proven to show that they DON’T have.

Now, lawmakers in one state have taken a stand against these gun-free zones and are allowing anyone that is injured on the property of one of these zones to SUE THE HELL OUT OF THEM!

I love this. In California we are prohibited from carrying protection, which is my Constitutional right but I will tell you, deciding whether to be unprotected or choose to break the ‘law’ by carrying is an every day decision I have been forced to make.

Well, according to The Tennessean, Senate Bill 1736 — sponsored by Republican state Sen. Dolores Gresham — has a very specific purpose: to balance property rights with the constitutional rights of concealed carry permit holders.


The bill allows Tennessee residents who were injured on the property of an establishment that was a “gun-free” zone to sue the proprietor for their injuries.

If a Tennessee grocery store bans guns on its property and a black bear or wild hog kills or injures a person who otherwise would be carrying his or her gun, the gun owner would be allowed to sue the property owner if a newly introduced bill became law.

Sponsored by Sen. Dolores Gresham, R-Somerville,Senate Bill 1736 has a very specific purpose.

“It is the intent of this section to balance the right of a handgun carry permit holder to carry a firearm in order to exercise the right of self-defense and the ability of a property owner or entity in charge of the property to exercise control over governmental or private property,” the bill states.


To accomplish that goal, the legislation allows any Tennessean with a valid gun permit to sue a property owner in the event of injury or death provided the incident occurred while in a gun-free zone.

A handgun carry permit holder who is injured by any of the aforementioned would be able to file a lawsuit within two years of when the event occurred, provided they meet the following requirements:

  • the plaintiff had to be authorized to carry a gun at the time of the incident
  • the plaintiff was prohibited from carrying a firearm because of the gun-free sign
  • the property owner was not required to be posted by state or federal law but was posted by choice of the defendant

Now THIS makes sense- for now at least. Gun-free zones need to be abolished. They are dangerous areas that put Americans at risk.

If a criminal wants to commit a crime or commit a terrorist act they will certainly choose a place where EVERYONE else is prohibited by law to have a firearm in their possession. It’s not rocket science. It’s common sense.

God bless you my patriot friends and please stay safe and always be locked and loaded.


Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter!

Facebook Has Banned Us!

The leftists at Facebook decided they didn’t like our message, so they removed our page and are censoring us. Help us fight back and subscribe to our newsletter so that you can stay up-to-date with everything Facebook doesn’t want you to see!


Disqus Comments