Yesterday, I spoke about my problem with presumptive “no carry” in businesses. Here is one way I could accept it: acknowledge that choices have consequences.
Adopt a legal path for showing that prohibiting patrons from being armed contributed to the crime that followed. Disarm me through policy, and a business is then legally responsible for providing reasonable protection from crime on that property. That includes lockers for securing my weapon, and some means of protection from armed wolves looking to feed on disarmed sheep.
The legal system of no carry (posted or presumptive) allows a business owner to use the force of law to disarm its patrons while at the same time giving them a pass on legal liability when their policy allowed an armed criminal to prey on the unarmed patrons.
The effect of this allows an end run around my constitutional rights.