MyWifeSaidYes wrote:While it sounds good, how do you prove that having a gun would have changed the outcome of the crime?
We know that a gun is not a magic wand... so does the judge.
I asked a Tenn resident that question once, and his answer was that it was a question for a jury to decide, that the legislation didn't make a business automatically liable. I haven't seen the actual wording, nor am I a lawyer, so I don't know if that's true. (but then neither was the guy that said this)