Proposed Missouri Bill Would Impose Civil Liability in Gun-Free Zones

My view has always been to honor the business owner/manager's right to say who he will serve or refuse service to. If he chooses to establish a "gun free zone" on his premises, he must bear the burden of safety from criminal violence for all those his policy has disarmed as a condition of spending their money on those premises.
Since such "gun free zones" can only serve to disarm the law-abiding, and perversely attract armed criminals to a place where they can reasonably expect to have the ONLY gun in the area, regulation of such "gun free" policies is required. The law should not permit the mere posting of a "No guns allowed" sign. That sign should only be lawful if the individual responsible for that policy provides for armed guards on his premises, to protect his customers, and establishes a controlled access with X-ray machines, searches, etc. to assure that the "gun free zone" he desires will be a reality, not an idealist's foolish dream.

interesting