Like the vast majority of Second Amendment activists, I think "gun-free zones" do more harm than good. But as a lover of individual freedom, I also think that folks have the right to ban guns from their property, no matter how misguided they might be in their thinking.

One Texas lawmaker, however, believes that if business owners choose to post signage banning the carrying of firearms on their property, they should be held liable for damages if a crime takes place. 

State Sen. Bob Hall (R-Edgewood) has filed a bill that would hold businesses that do not allow guns on their property liable for damages that happen because of a crime.

The proposed law, which has been referred to the Senate Committee on State Affairs, would not hold business owners liable for the opposite scenario, where damages occur because guns are allowed.

“By not allowing them to carry the gun in their facility,” Hall said, “they’re forcing them to either leave it at home or leave it in their car, and that exposes them for a time period to a threat that they have every right to be able to defend themselves.”

“This is a bill that will bring greater safety to the people of Texas,” Hall added.

Hall's bill might very well make people safer if it were to become law, but if that safety comes at the expense of our rights as property owners is it worth it? In some ways, Hall's argument is more akin to what we hear from gun control activists: that we should give up some of our rights in the name of public safety. At least one business owner who does allow customers to carry in his store thinks Hall's bill is a bad idea. 

“I don’t see it as being a very rational move,” said owner of Blakeney Hardware, Jason Blakeney. “It’s just the wrong thing to hold business owners accountable for bad people’s actions.”

Blakeney allows customers to carry guns inside his Tyler store. He said the government should not require all owners to follow suit.

“If you’re a business that is okay with people having firearms in your business, that’s great,” Blakeney said. “If you’re a business that believes the opposite, that’s your right, too. But we don’t need the state of Texas or the government or anybody else telling us what we have to do as business owners other than following the Constitution.”

I tend to agree with Blakeney. At the very least, if his intent really is to bring greater safety to the people of Texas Hall should modify his bill. As currently written, SB 2 only holds businesses liable for damages when a crime occurs in their "gun-free zone". Why shouldn't that apply to property owned or controlled by governmental entities too? 

As Hall says, these "gun-free zones" force gun owners to either leave their firearms at home or leave them in their car, exposing them to potential threats without the ability to defend themselves. That's true whether we're talking about a restaurant, a craft store, or City Hall, so why should business owners be singled out? Shouldn't Hall's argument apply  to government facilities as well?

Again, I'm no fan of "gun-free zones." I think they do more harm than good. But property owners also have the right to make bad decisions, and if they choose to prohibit guns from their business then we can choose to spend our dollars elsewhere. If Hall wants to take aim at "gun-free zones", great, but business owners shouldn't be singled out for liability when state and local governments in the Lone Star State are in charge of many "gun-free zones" of their own.