Screen Shot 2015-09-28 at 11.08.10 AM

“Gun free zones” have been a hot topic for many people—especially those involved in the gun industry. There are arguments about whether or not these zones actually help protect the visitors to those areas. Some people believe they could actually work in reverse.


At Magnum Shooting Center—we are all about individuals’ rights. And private businesses have the right to make their own requests of those who want to use their establishments. But is it possible that advertising a facility as a “gun free zone” could make it a target to people who are less inclined to follow those rules?


The Washington State Fair banned firearms (and anything else that could be considered a weapon) on their premises, and yet firearms still appeared—and they weren’t in the hands of law-abiding citizens.


Unarmed workers were robbed at gunpoint after the fair closed and the workers were paid in cash. Could the criminals have assumed that the workers were unarmed, given the Fair’s policy? We don’t think this assumption is a stretch. Criminals don’t exactly want a fair fight. If this policy wasn’t in place… would these criminals have been so brazen?


All in all, you should know your rights. Stand up for them. Your safety, and the safety of others, is of the utmost importance. And in the name of “safety”, sometimes, people could actually be counterintuitive.


But let’s hear your thoughts on the matter. How do you feel about gun free zones? And, if an individual is no longer permitted to his right of personal protection… who then does the responsibility fall on? Does the business need to provide the protection? Is law enforcement, off site, sufficient? Is the business protecting visitors simply by requesting that firearms remain off the premises? We’d love to hear what you think!