No Guns Allowed Signs

[AKElroy]

Clearly this is not a 2A issue; private property owners have the right to condition access to their property as they see fit. Still, I will weigh their wishes against my need to be on their property, and to get to and from it safely; all the while being willing to face the consequences either way.

 

[knockonit]

signs everywhere a sign

Az. has the same requirement, certain size, and height etc and as for location there is rule for that.
I neither look for them or see them, usually,
I rarely open carry so its not an issue,
Those that do, usually are asked to leave and comply, if they do not, then they may be arrested for trespassing etc.
At our OC dinners one of the members passes out business cards with a little note.
Stating:

Another Lost Sale
Due to your "no Guns " sign, we have to spend our money ELSEWHERE.
Please allow honest citizens their 2nd. Amendment rights.
Criminals prefer us unarmed.


It is on a glossy business size card with a picture of the Statue of Liberty with a ghost US flag is visible.
I've handed many out, and plan on handing out more.
RJ

 

[Right Wing Wacko]

For the past three weeks I have had to frequently visit a hospital (in Seattle) posted with a small sign at the entrance saying "No Weapons Allowed for Your Safety and the Safety of Others".

You may have a problem there. If the hospital provides mental health services, state law prohibits firearms.

NorthWest Hospital is one that does this, however if you look carefully, the entire hospital is not posted. The ER and most of the external clinics are not posted. The main hospital is. In fact there is a sign at the entrance to the main hospital from the ER but not for the ER itself.

 

[30mag]

I don't carry because I'm 18, however, I would strap on a big ol' knife if I had one.

 

[clemsonu0219]

clemsonu0219, can you provide more information. This thread got me looking at the NC statutes and I saw this:

Sure. Tomorrow i'll find the statute.

 

[rainbowbob]

You may have a problem there. If the hospital provides mental health services, state law prohibits firearms.

That is an important bit of info I somehow missed. I'll have to re-read the statutes. You're right, that could be a problem more onerous than merely being asked to leave. This was at the UW psych ward.

NorthWest Hospital is one that does this, however if you look carefully, the entire hospital is not posted. The ER and most of the external clinics are not posted.

Funny you should mention that. I just now came home from picking up my wife at the emergency entrance of NW Hospital (hyperglycemia). I looked and didn't see a sign.

Unfortunately, I spend quite a lot of time coming and going from various hospitals. Some of them are in pretty intense urban settings. Most of them have poorly lit, unguarded parking garages.

As others have said in so many words: I'll provide for my own defense, and be prepared to suffer the consequences in the unlikely event it should become a legal issue.

 

[chuckusaret]

I have a CCW permit and I carry 99.9% of the time but do not carry where it is forbidden by state or federal laws. In Florida the "No Guns"/ "No Loaded Guns" signs are a request by the property owner and if he knows you are carrying he has the right to have you leave. I don't frequent stores that have "No Guns" or "No Loaded Guns" signs posted, I do my business elsewhere.

 

[christcorp]

And Chuck; that's exactly how it should be. It shouldn't matter if a state law backs up the business owner putting up a sign or not. I don't even consider the law. I don't think it's important. What I care about is what the property owner wants. It's his/her property. We all have a lot of rights; but I believe that as soon as I enter another person's property; residential or business; the ONLY Right I have is the Right to Leave. All other activities are Privileges. And the only difference between a residential property owner and a business property owner is that the residential CAN discriminate and make different rules for different people. Whereby the business property owner simply needs to have the same rules for everyone. (That's why they can't get away with racism, religion, or other prejudices.) The rules need to apply to everyone. And if they do, then I respect that and will follow it. The ONLY reason I care if a LAW also covers the business owner placing a sign, is in case I DIDN'T see the sign. I don't want to get arrested, lose my permit, etc... If it's not a legal issue, and the owner had a sigh I didn't see, they would simply ask me to leave if some how they found out.

 

[rtroha]

In Ohio you can lose your CC permit if found guilty of CCing in a posted establishment.

Assuming you are talking about private businesses, that would be incorrect. A fourth degree criminal trespassing charge is not sufficient grounds to get your Ohio CHL yanked.

 

[bigione]

So if someone is injured or killed on said posted property and that someone normally carried and could have defended himself, can him or his kin sue the establishment for failure to protect?

 

[kanook]

you can find a lawyer for anything.

 

[christcorp]

So if someone is injured or killed on said posted property and that someone normally carried and could have defended himself, can him or his kin sue the establishment for failure to protect?

I don't think they should be able to sue. But as said, there are definitely ambulance chasers and other scum on the earth that will defend such a case. (And I walk a fine line on this and have had numerous Tort Reform type discussions with my wife and her law firm partners). But my opinion is that everyone has the right to make a choice; and those choices automatically have risks associated with them. There are LEGALLY restricted places you can't carry a weapon, and yet could also get injured or killed. E.g. schools, government buildings, etc... Yet you can't sue them for the same situation. And those places are such that you HAVE TO enter from time to time. I.e. My son's teacher wants to have a parent-teacher conference; I can't ask her to come to my house. I MUST go to the school. Yet, it's quite feasible to be involved with an altercation that could lead to a violent shooting.

However; there is not one PRIVATE business in your state that you MUST ENTER. You ALWAYS have other choices and options. So; if you CHOOSE to enter, then you ACCEPT such risk. It's your choice. If you CHOOSE to go boating, you accept the risk of falling overboard and drowning. Yet, you can't sue the state park or boat manufacturer because you drowned. You can't sue the ski resort because you broke your leg. You have a choice with ANY private business whether to enter or not. If you are so scared that you might run into a situation where you might get hurt or killed; then don't go to that business. And while you're at it; DON'T drive your car any place. The odds of being injured/killed in your car are MUCH GREATER than someone shooting you.

Don't be like most of the social liberals who want to BLAME everyone else; their parents; and society for all their misfortunes. Be responsible for yourself. Guns are simply a TOOL. If that is your ONLY TOOL for protecting yourself; then choose appropriately WHERE you go and where you DON'T go.

Remember: Guns don't Kill people. PEOPLE kill People
Remember: Guns don't SAVE people. PEOPLE save People

The gun is simply a tool. I happen to have a LOT of TOOLS at my disposal to protect me and my family. Guns, self defense training, being aware of my surroundings and environment, taser/pepper spray, alarms, etc...

 

[catspa]

christcorp: However; there is not one PRIVATE business in your state that you MUST ENTER. You ALWAYS have other choices and options. So; if you CHOOSE to enter, then you ACCEPT such risk. It's your choice.

Does it work the other direction as well? When a store owner decides to open their doors to the public, doesn't he or she accept the risk that somebody will enter whose standards differ from his/her own? They certainly accept the risk that some criminal will enter and vandalize/shoplift/rob/murder. But they are apparently unwilling to accept the risk of doing business with a law-abiding CCW citizen. That's goofy.

Don't get me wrong here, they have a right to believe goofy stuff. We all do. But their property rights do not extend to making an act that is legal everywhere else illegal in their store unless the authority having jurisdiction has so stated.

The reason why you don't see "no murdering" signs in stores, IMHO, is because murder is already a crime. It's a crime in the street, it's a crime in a store, it's a crime in a private residence. Nobody, with the possible exception of a state penitentiary, has enough property rights to say, "murder is legal on this property". In a similar way, signs in a store that say "no guns", "no pocket athsma inhalers", "no coins smaller than a quarter", or "no key fobs with silly animal figures on them" don't carry the force of law. Why is that? Because property rights do not entitle a person to make laws. For better or worse in our society, governments claim that power to themselves.

A store owner can put up a sign that says, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". In fact, they can set any conditions they want on their own participation in commercial exchange. But they can't make laws.

So if we're going to emphasize that choices carry risks, let's apply it to everyone, shall we?

Parker

 

[DammitBoy]

Why would you spend your hard earned dollars in a business that has a no guns allowed sign?

 

[catspa]

Who's talking about spending dollars? I'm just going in there to handle their widgets in person to see which widget to buy online. Purely recon.

Parker

 

[christcorp]

Cat; it DOESN'T work the other way. Why? Because no business is FORCING you to come into their establishment. The business owner doesn't have to assume any responsibility over you other than what's dictated by law; such as building codes, emergency exits, fire code, handicap access, etc... These are codes set up for all Non-Residential bldgs. Other than that, they aren't responsible for you or assume any responsibilities for your safety. And remember; there is no RIGHT for you to be there. And other than the RIGHT to LEAVE; I.e. they can't FORCE YOU to stay there; you have NO RIGHTS on someone else's PRIVATE PROPERTY. Every action and exercise you perform on THEIR property; is totally a PRIVILEGE that the property owner GIVES YOU. Your RIGHTS do NOT exist on someone else's Private property. The property owner has the RIGHT to tell you to leave; how you will dress; how you will speak (E.g. go to a casino; it says SPECIFICALLY at the table type games that ENGLISH is the ONLY language that can be spoken.) And so on. It is their property. And if you refuse to abide by their rules, they can ask you to leave. And if you don't, they can get you arrested. But they don't ASSUME any RESPONSIBILITIES for you or your safety outside of building/fire/safety codes that are mandated by law.

Now; if a municipality wanted to abuse their POWER and micro-manage the RIGHTS of a property owner and make them responsible for other people's welfare; I guess they could do that. Sort of like trying to hold Winchester responsible for the death of a person because they were shot with a Winchester bullet. The ONLY exception I have EVER seen with this, has been in a Bar/Tavern environment. Because a patron WILL be affected by alcohol; it is possible that the patron's judgment can be impaired to the point where they can't make a responsible decision. As such, a bartender CAN be held responsible if a patron has been provided "Too Much" alcohol. But this is a very difficult charge to prove. But it is possible. Other than that; the only thing a business property owner can be held responsible for; when concerning their patrons; is anything that is based on the product or service that they provide. E.g. an amusement park can be held responsible if a patron gets hurt on a roller coaster if the ride was out of specs or unsafe. But the amusement park isn't held responsible if a patron is robbed.

 

[deadin]

But their property rights do not extend to making an act that is legal everywhere else illegal in their store unless the authority having jurisdiction has so stated.

You have this backward. They can do whatever they want unless the authority having jurisdiction has stated they can not..

 

[catspa]

CC, I'm not arguing for holding the business owner responsible for the actions of a third party. I'm saying that by opening his doors to the public, he accepts the risk that some members of the public possessing some attribute he doesn't like will enter. His property is no longer "private" in the strictest sense (according to the laws of my state), because he has opened it to commercial activity.

True story: acquaintance of mine owns a store with 4 parking spaces out front, he parks in back. He has a big sign that says, "customer parking only". He sees a dude pull into one of his spaces, get out and head for the store across the street (that has no parking), and he runs out and says to the guy, "Hey, you're not supposed to park here!" Guy flips him off and keeps going. So he goes back inside and calls a deputy.

Deputy gets there, looks things over, and says, "I can't ticket him, because he's on your private property. I can only enforce the laws of this state and this county. BUT. Call Midway Towing, and if they get down here in a hurry and post their sign, they can tow him". So he does and they do, and the guy comes back madder than h*ll and starts yelling and cussing at the store owner. Now the deputy can ticket or arrest the guy for public disturbance, etc. because THAT is actually a crime.

I say again: The police do not enforce corporate policy unless in matters addressed by law.

Your RIGHTS do NOT exist on someone else's Private property.

I disagree with that, and I invite you to show me statute or case law that backs it up. If it were true, how could racial or sexual discrimination laws be enforced, or sexual harassment, or labor regulations?

Parker

edit to add: Okay, Deadin. In this case, the state has preempted the field of firearms law, which includes CCW, and issued me a license to do so - the store owner would have to overcome that in court. Have you any case law?

 

[Owen Sparks]

There seems to be a great deal of confusion. Here is something I found on Strike-the-root, a libertarian blog, that might help clear things up.
http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/scarmig/scarmig1.html

Rights are not privileges.
A privilege is something that someone else grants to you. They retain final control and decision over what kind of access, the duration, and the nature of the privilege. Importantly, the grantor of the privilege must also be the owner of what the privilege gives access to. I cannot grant you the privilege of entering someone else's home. It is not mine to grant. I don't own the home. But for my own home, I have the right to choose who to allow in my home, and what behavior they will engage while there. If they fail to abide by the terms of the privilege, the privilege is revoked, and I toss them out on their butt. Many people seem to believe that privileges are rights, that a right means someone else dictates who, what, when, where, and why of access. Privileges are not rights, because they are an invitation, voluntarily offered, and voluntarily agreed to, rescindable at any time by both parties. If you accept the privilege of entering my home on my terms, and come in only to find you despise me and my house, you leave. You decline the privilege at any time.

You see, if a private business owner allows you to bring anything into his business be it a pistol, a pet or a tank top shirt he has granted you a privilege. He may also revoke that privilege anytime by posting a sign to that effect. The only absolute right you have on private property is the right to leave.

 

[catspa]

That's neat, Owen, but it carries about as much weight as my own opinion (which in your eyes, doesn't carry much). It's becoming clear to me that we're just going around in circles here, with me repeating what I've stated before and other members doing the same. I've already posted my view of how a business open to the public differs from a home, and I've already stated how I insist on retaining certain rights wherever I might be. A man my age grows weary sooner than some of you.

As it turns out, I don't even know any local stores I could apply my beliefs to, because the store owners here don't put up signs. As far as I can tell, CCW by customers never crosses their minds, or they're packing themselves, and I conceal well enough that I've never brought it to their attention. I guess I'll be sorry when they start strip-searching customers, but for now they're staying out of my pants, and I think it's just as well.

Parker

 

[Rockwell1]

christcorp: However; there is not one PRIVATE business in your state that you MUST ENTER. You ALWAYS have other choices and options. So; if you CHOOSE to enter, then you ACCEPT such risk. It's your choice.

If I want jerky and a Sham-Wow I have no choice but to enter the gunshow

 

[61chalk]

First, I'm not an expert on my state laws, but I'm learning...I'm told that in Indiana, if a business doesn't want guns on their property, they have to go to the State Police an fill out paperwork an put up a "correct" sign, then the law is you must comply. At my job they have no "sign", so you can't be arrested, but you will be fired because its in their policy. Any private business, can ask you to leave if they see you are carring, my friend has his concealed, but he likes big handguns..ha..an they asked him to leave, an he did from a local grocery store...like others, I need to look up more laws concerning my state, anybody else from Indiana please post...

 

[christcorp]

Actually; I just saw Sham-Wow at Target a couple days ago. They have a section; over by automotive; that is dedicated to "AS SEEN ON TV".

And FWIW; there isn't anything; even jerkey and sham-wow that you can't get online. OR ANOTHER STORE that doesn't post restrictive signs.

Again; let me reiterate that I am NOT defending the business/property owner's rational for making such a decision as to post a certain sign. I am defending their RIGHT to post such a sign on their private property, and their expectation that you respect their RIGHT to do so; either by complying when on their property, or by not entering their property.

FWIW; I think that there are NO LOGICAL REASONS for having such a sign. The only reason I can think of is to take a MORAL stand against ALL WEAPONS for ALL REASONS. In which case, they should be also protesting the police and military. But any other reason for posting such a sign is not rational. It doesn't matter WHAT the sign says; a criminal will disobey it if they want to. So, rules, laws, policies, ordinances, etc... strictly ONLY apply to law abiding citizens. And if the city police, the county police, sheriffs department, state criminal investigation department, and FBI can all do background checks and TRUST the individual by issuing them a concealed carry permit; then why in the world could a business justify such a sign and basically say that they don't trust this individual that the various governments do. I can understand a sign that says "NO VISIBLE FIREARMS ALLOWED ON THE PREMISES". This makes sense. There are MANY citizens who are intimidated by the sight of a gun. They will be scared. They shouldn't be scared. Therefor, an exposed weapon does AFFECT another person. However; a CONCEALED weapon DOESN'T affect another person. So such a rule is ridiculous. But when I swore the oath; many times; that includes the Rights of an individual to be ridiculous (ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY)

 

[TAB]

there is a very logical reason, liabilty. While yes the chance of something bad happening is very small, but it will cost you big time.


I don't know about you, but as a small biz owner, I spend alot of time trying to limit my liabilty as much as I can.

If some one comes into my shop and robs me at gun point, my ins will cover it. if they shoot one of my employees in the process, my ins will cover it.
Will your insurance cover it if you have a ND and injury on of my employees?

 

[Rockwell1]

And FWIW; there isn't anything; even jerkey and sham-wow that you can't get online. OR ANOTHER STORE that doesn't post restrictive signs.

But can you get them both at the same place at once?