I'm not sure it will withstand a court challenge, but it is interesting.
If I understand it correctly, a property owner (such as a business) may prohibit the carry of firearms by those who can lawfully carry. However, that business owner is legally responsible for the safety of the patron who is forced to leave the gun behind when entering the business. If the patron is injured or killed as a result of being disarmed, the business owner can be held responsible in civil court.
https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2024/02/27/georgia-bill-makes-property-owners-liable-for-injuries-in-gun-free-zones/
You can read the Archbishop's letter here:
https://firstchurchontheright.org/open-letter-to-american-catholics-on-the-eve-of-the-2024-presidential-election/
GunGuyTV on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/GunGuyTV
Practical Defense Systems: https://rumble.com/c/PDSclasses
GunGuyTV on X: https://x.com/gunguytv
In the first half, attorney Sean Maloney from Second Call Defense joins me to explain the lessons gun owners can learn from what happened to Kyle Rittenhouse.
In the second half, I discuss a home invasion case from Oceanside California in which the homeowner successfully defended himself.
AG Pam Bondi says ATF targeting gun owner is "not gonna happen under this administration"
D-Day in Normandy: The 101st Airborne’s Path to Victory
https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/peopleandplaces/d-day-in-normandy-the-101st-airborne-s-path-to-victory/vi-AA1y6IfI?ocid=socialshare
