Question about "No Guns Allowed"

Chest beating and wishful thinking sounds about right to me. If you rely on a handgun as your only means of self defense, your not doing a very good job of defending yourself. Self defense is more than just having a gun. Some people are so militant about gun ownership for all the wrong reasons.

Now, I could see an issue where you go to court or something along those lines and go through the metal detectors and all that related security stuff and then get shot or stabbed by someone who got something by security, you may have a law suit on your hands. In general though, you can usually go somewhere else. If you can't go into a convenience store without a gun (sign or not) then go to a different part of town.

There was a good thread about this not too long ago. The chances of a successful suit is slim to none.

As odd as it may seem, the party that you'd sue would argue that they did in fact protect you with their prohibition of firearms policy and the violation of that policy was the reason you were injured, not the policy itself. You would have a hard time proving that you wouldn't have been shot if the policy hadn't been in place.

Not a lawyer or anything close, of course.

As odd as it may seem, the party that you'd sue would argue that they did in fact protect you with their prohibition of firearms policy and the violation of that policy was the reason you were injured, not the policy itself. You would have a hard time proving that you wouldn't have been shot if the policy hadn't been in place.

Click to expand...

That's assuming you get shot. What if it is a knife wound? Then their prohibition wouldnt have done anything. While you might be able to argue that they disarmed you, I doubt many courts would be on your side. The store can likely argue that you knew the risks, on their private property, you could have gone elsewhere, and so on. :/
Of course, if the sign doesnt have legal force (Here in Texas it only applies if it follows a certain design) then you can carry anyways and it wouldn't really matter

Strictly wishful thinking.

Even the cops have no duty or obligation to protect you, what makes you think anybody else does.

As someone who believes in free enterprise and capitalism, I would have to ask why you would go into an individual business that you dissaprove of?

As far as government prohibitions I am in agreement. You do have 2nd Amendment rights that the government should be forced to allow you to exercise barring it is not a threat to the safety of their employees, others, or yourself. However in the case of the business posting a sign, well the truth is that nobody is forcing you to go there. You are free to go into another restaurant, hardware store, gun store, or any other type of shop that you were going to who has posted a no-weapons sign. This even goes with employers and no-weapons policies.

Once you have entered the store you assumed the risk of being there unarmed. If something goes wrong and somebody does attack the place you still have no legal grounds to sue them. I don't believe they can be liable for the actions of someone who has broken their rules.

I also believe that CoRoMo is correct as well. They have their no weapons policies as a safeguard against them. They should not be responsible for the actions of another.

It is all wishful thinking and chest thumping. You will have no case against the people who posted the no-weapons signs. I am sorry but that is the case as I see it.

It is all wishful thinking and chest thumping. You will have no case against the people who posted the no-weapons signs.

Click to expand...

Which is exactly why I carry anyway, sign or no sign, if it is legal, I have a weapon on me somewhere.

+1...if they are not legally posted, I carry...the key being concealed...and all they can do if they spot me or guess is to ask me to leave...and the law says I must...at that point, they've lost a customer...many put up signs to satisfy their "legal" depts...knowing they don't have force of law...speaking only for Tx...

But what about the rights and wishes of the property owner? Is it not taking the low road to simply carry just because it is legal? Why even go there? I am only talking about non-government buildings as I think the government should let people carry on their property.

Either way it is disrespectful to openly ignore the wishes of the property owner simply because their is no legal repercussion for doing so. It is things like this that make me think that all signs should be given force of law since people are not willing to respect others rights.

...by carrying properly concealed, I am NOT openly ignoring their wishes...I am saying that carrying properly concealed...I am insuring my safety, much the same as that owner might carry a pocketknife or a pack of cigarettes, which I might not approve of, into MY store...and not pull the knife and play with it or light up in front of me...
...law expresses the will of the majority of the people, and if it gives him the right to forbid that I carry in his public access business, it also dictates to him the method by which he must notify me of that...and I must abide with his wishes only when he follows that legally prescribed method of notifying me...
...when I go about my business in his business within the law...that's all I owe him....legally or morally...just like if I were to write a construction contract and then demand lunch free...he'd say "it's not on the contract"...that's why we have laws, to make things work fairly when we are in disagreement....

...as far as respecting his rights...I do(and am bound by law to) respect his rights WHEN he does as HE is bound by law to do by notifying me properly...that's fair...legal...and the American way...and that respects my rights, too...

Well if someone accidentally sees your pack of cigarettes, do you think there exists the possiblity that tehy might call the police or complain? Sometimes the mere presence of the gun is what offends people and may cause them to lose business because others are afraid of the person carrying in the store. This is a headache that you can possibly cause the store owner.

And the owner has notified you of their wishes by posting the sign. To ignore it, even it does not meet the 30.06 requirements is ignoring their wishes. So the majority of the people have their will reflected in the law, then surely you must agree that the majority of the people are happy with the status quo in regards to gun control as well as other social issues.

So if the owner of a store can legally get away with selling you something that he knows will be useless or outdated or expired within a very small time frame, is it morally right?

You are not respecting their rights by ignoring a sign even if it is improperly posted. It is legal but that does not make something right.

So let me ask you plainly these two questions:

1) What does a No Guns sign mean?

2) Do you feel that the owner would be OK with you carrying a firearm into their establishment even though the sign on the door said not to?

...first paragraph continues your assumption that he's going to(or a customer will) spot my weapon...in 45 years of carrying, I 've never been spotted...it is a non-issue...store owners and their employees have caused me many problems by things they do or don't that don't honor my wishes as a customer...yet they expect me to come back and trade with them...
...last part of second paragraph doesn't pertain to this subject and uses an extrapolation to try to strengthen your disagreement with the way things ARE expressed in the law...
...third paragraph...there are laws covering that, too...
...question 1...NO GUNS
...question 2...NO BUT the law was written to give fair treatment both to his rights and mine...when we both follow the law...it IS fair to both...I give some by not carrying when he notifies me properly...he gives some when he notifies me properly...when there is disagreement...that's how it is resolved...and this is fair to all...

Going back to the OP...

...I've strayed well off topic in my comments...
...I've never seen a report of a suit, but WalMart began posting the required signage(30.06) in Texas...then took them down...rumors had it that they were concerned about being sued....after that, a murder of a police officer took place on one of their parking lots here, and cops shot to death a felon who pulled a gun on them and opened fire IN a store here...and the signs didn't go back up...I'm curious as to why but not enough to rattle their cage and bring the subject up...there ought to be caselaw websights that can be researched to find the answer....

Either way it is disrespectful to openly ignore the wishes of the property owner simply because their is no legal repercussion for doing so.

Click to expand...

The differentiation between public and private starts to apply - what I have on my person is my right to have, and what they allow on their property is their right as well.

In the event those two clash, I respectfully leave - once asked.

The reasonable right of the business to know what is in my pocket or under my shirt ends at plain view. If I am not offending the clientele, being disruptive, or otherwise being a problem...not an issue.

When a property is opened to egress to the public, even on limited terms, I do not give up my rights. If I walk into a no-smoking establishment with a cigarette, they'll ask me to leave, put it out/away/etc. If I walk into one with a pack in my pocket, nobody cares.

Similarly, if I'm open carrying and asked to leave, I will. If I'm seen with a gun, and asked to leave, I will. If they don't like my kind, same. It's not that difficult.

It is things like this that make me think that all signs should be given force of law since people are not willing to respect others rights.

Click to expand...

Right to refuse service to any person for any reason remains with force of law - trespassing being one example after being asked to leave and failing to do so. Any further force of law is ludicrous. Criminalizing the 'what does it have in its pocketses' game is downright laughable.

That said, I choose to not patronize businesses that post these types of signs, not that there are many here who do.

Either way it is disrespectful to openly ignore the wishes of the property owner simply because their is no legal repercussion for doing so. It is things like this that make me think that all signs should be given force of law since people are not willing to respect others rights.

Click to expand...

I always laugh that people think the property owner has the power to dictate that I not carry a weapon, but then advocate for exempting that owner for not ensuring that his property is safe for his invitees from any liability.

The power to make decisions (no guns) that are binding on others MUST come with being held responsible for those decisions, yet the first thing people say is that, "The property owner can't be held responsible if a bad guy shoots you while you are defenseless, even though it was his policy that enabled the bad guy, because the property owner took steps to ensure your safety by putting up a sign."

Of course, to take the "property owner's wishes should be law" to its logical conclusion, a property owner can then put up a sign requiring all women to perform a sexual favor upon the manager upon demand, and if your wife enters that store and refuses to do so, she should be arrested for not upholding the property owner's wishes. After all, the property owner reigns supreme, and there is a sign...

If you disagree with that, then there are only two possibilities:

1 you really don't think a property owner's wishes are absolute, or;
2 you don't think bearing arms is as important as the right to refuse sex

We have had this discussion so many times, I am tired of the worn out libertarian Utopian ideal. Until there IS a law giving the owners an opportunity to put me in jail for disobeying a sign, I will carry where the law says I may carry. Period.

Which is exactly why I carry anyway, sign or no sign, if it is legal, I have a weapon on me somewhere.

Click to expand...

In AZ, if you carry where a sign is posted, you can be asked to leave. If you do not, police can be called and your CCW revoked for carrying where it's posted not to. By carrying in places that prohibit it, you are no better than street thugs that carry when prohibited.

Didn't we just do this?
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=496035
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=493075
None of those ended well, don't see this one doing much better.

IIRC, it was in Pennsylvania that a motel was held responsible for the harm done to singer Connie Francis while she was a guest on the premises.

deadin said:

OK, I’m seeing more and more statements in various gun boards along the line of:
“If “they” (Federal, State, City or individual business) take away my right to defend myself (IOW “No Firearms Allowed” signs or such) then “they” are responsible for my safety. If I am injured/robbed/mugged/etc. while on their property I will sue them for everything they’ve got.”
Does anybody have any cites where this situation has actually been brought to court and what was the outcome?
Or is all this just chest beating or wishful thinking?

Click to expand...

I do remember a case between a woman & Wendy's. There was a shooting that killed several people inside. One of the survivors had a concealed carry permit & her gun was in her car because Wendy's had a sign posted at there door. Her dad, mom, & son was all killed (I think). She sued & won. Her case was that is was a lawfully carrying person that because she was respecting the wishes of the owner she was not able to protect herself & family, the owner should have had protection for them.

That was over 5 years ago & as soon as the case was won all Wendy's & Walmart's took there signs down.

I was at a Walmart last summer open carrying & the girl at the door tried to tell me I couldn't bring my gun in the store. After a quick lesson in local law, some history on the story I just told, & a recommendation that she call her manger to in form him she wanted to infringe on my rights, she changed her mind.

I was at another Walmart a few years ago & seen a hand written sign by the door. I decided to go home & call Walmart Corporation & they informed me several times this isn't there policy & that some kids must have put it up (I see that one) & they would contact the store immediately. The sign wasn't there the next day.

ETA: I think the case was in Texas.

Oldskoolfan said:

But what about the rights and wishes of the property owner?

Click to expand...

His wishes and desires END at the point where the BG's knife or bullet enters my chest.

His wishes and desires END at the point where the BG's knife or bullet enters my chest.

Click to expand...

How about his wishes end when you choose not to enter his establishment? Why do you have to enter his property, especially if the property owner is not a friend of the RKBA? JUST DON'T ENTER THE PREMISES IF YOU ARE "SO WORRIED ABOUT YOUR LIFE".

When I took my CCW class, the presenters gave us their website with a nice little card for unfriendly businesses :

http://www.equalizerllc.com/documents/nogunnomoney_nostate.pdf

I have handed these out several times. I keep several in my wallet. While I've only handed out a couple, I know of others who have had real luck in getting people to take their signs down.

I have on more than one occasion walked into a store while carrying and not notice the sign until after I walk out. I make an honest attempt to locate the legal signage before entering. I feel I've done nothing wrong if their "we don't like your kind" window sticker isn't conspicuously located.

The thing about the rights and wishes of the property owner is that they are not really as broad when they open their property up to the public. While the wal-mart might be privately owned, it is public-use.

As to the 'no guns' signs, while I can understand the questions of whether or not it is right to carry into those if the state doesn't have specifications, in a place like TX, where they have no legal force, most business owners know that they don't. The only those signs are posted is to placate the people who are scared of a piece of metal.