[Glenn E. Meyer]

We have discussed this before and Frank and Spats are the experts.

I will summarize and perhaps incorrectly. Please fix it, guys.

1. The entity you would sue is not responsible for the actions of a criminal actor. They are responsible for their own actions.

2. There is the doctrine of foreseeability - an entity might be responsible if they could reasonably predict an outcome they could prevent. This has not been the case with crime in general. A store or the state cannot reasonably foresee that you will be attacked anymore than it can foresee you will be in a general car accident. If an employee said specifically they would kill another employee, that's very predictable. Someone walking into the business at random is not.

3. Since this would be a difficult case to win and you would be opposed by very powerful legal resources, you would have to be rich to sue or find someone to take a tough case on contingency.