Movie Theather CCW [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Movie Theather CCW


kcolg30
02-23-2007, 08:28
In Florida can I carry a gun (I have my CCW) into a movie theather?

thanks,
Mike

Notrega
02-23-2007, 08:50
Yes

Gmountain
02-23-2007, 09:13
Of course. Why would you think otherwise?

The CCW law is clear. It lists places you cannot carry. If it is not onthat list, it is okay.

Dandapani
02-23-2007, 10:15
Originally posted by Gmountain
Of course. Why would you think otherwise?

The CCW law is clear. It lists places you cannot carry. If it is not onthat list, it is okay.

Scary isn't it, that a licensed CCW holder doesn't know the law and where and where not a concealed firearm can be carried...

chad10mm
02-24-2007, 05:38
Regal Cinemas, for one, has a small 'no weapons' sign posted at the ticket counter.
Like all such signs it has no legal weight...only places prohibited by Fl statute are legally off-limits.

Of course the 'if made and asked to leave' scenario applies...if you don't you can be charged with criminal trespass.

Whether you choose to carry in such a place or refuse to give them your money and tell them why is up to you.

Dandapani
02-24-2007, 07:52
Originally posted by chad10mm
Regal Cinemas, for one, has a small 'no weapons' sign posted at the ticket counter.
Like all such signs it has no legal weight...only places prohibited by Fl statute are legally off-limits.

Of course the 'if made and asked to leave' scenario applies...if you don't you can be charged with criminal trespass.

Whether you choose to carry in such a place or refuse to give them your money and tell them why is up to you.

At my Regal, the "sign" is a little transparent sticky on the door listing all the rules and regulations. I had been going there for over a year and a half before I even noticed it. I still go there. They are the only movie theatre in the area.

Norman
02-24-2007, 08:15
Unless it's an official statute sign, then it means nothing.

Rules:

1. No bringing in your own water or food
2. No bringing in your own guns
3. No refunds if the service we provide is worse than the sub-par service you expect.


Those unwritten rules don't exactly warm my heart. I only go see a movie once in a great while (maybe once every 4 or 5 months) and only when I'm too impatient to wait for that movie to go to DVD.

chad10mm
02-24-2007, 09:09
Originally posted by dmobrien2001
At my Regal, the "sign" is a little transparent sticky on the door listing all the rules and regulations. I had been going there for over a year and a half before I even noticed it. I still go there. They are the only movie theatre in the area.
Yeah...the one I saw was the same sticker.

I ignored it a couple times in the past, but don't go there anymore.
The manager is an aquaintance and I told him my reason...he had no significant comment.

chad10mm
02-24-2007, 09:12
Originally posted by Norman
3. No refunds if the service we provide is worse than the sub-par service you expect.
:rofl:
Ain't that the truth!!!

DVD and home theater are much better.

Gmountain
02-24-2007, 09:42
Originally posted by Norman
Unless it's an official statute sign,

There is no such thing.

Norman
02-24-2007, 09:59
Originally posted by Gmountain
There is no such thing.

Perhaps not in Florida, but I know Texas has the 30.06 CHL trespassing statute.

Gmountain
02-24-2007, 10:37
Originally posted by Norman
Perhaps not in Florida, but I know Texas has the 30.06 CHL trespassing statute.

No offense, but this thread is about carrying in movie theaters in Florida. Why muddy the waters with language about what may or may not be legal in other states?

Norman
02-24-2007, 10:50
You're right, I didn't even notice what forum this was in. I just check all the new posts from the GT main page, often not even looking at the forum location itself.

But, it could help a Floridian who visits or travels into Texas. Thanks for the heads up.

Droanx
02-26-2007, 21:10
There's a sign at Regal? Never noticed.... never cared to notice...

Dandapani
02-27-2007, 07:27
Originally posted by Droanx
There's a sign at Regal? Never noticed.... never cared to notice...

Ya, don't look too closely at the signage on the entry door... :rofl:

steve028
03-04-2007, 17:59
Originally posted by Gmountain
There is no such thing.




of course there is, it's on every entrance door to every hosbital you walk into.

steve028
03-04-2007, 18:00
Originally posted by steve028
of course there is, it's on every entrance door to every hosbital you walk into.



sorry , Hospital

Droanx
03-04-2007, 18:21
Originally posted by dmobrien2001
Ya, don't look too closely at the signage on the entry door... :rofl:

In FL, why would I do that? :supergrin: :thumbsup:

True story, I went into a Greyhound station to drop someone off. They had a security guard with a wand :shocked: I turned right around. There was a HUGE sign on their door that I didn't even notice. I will never travel Greyhound.

Dandapani
03-04-2007, 19:39
Originally posted by steve028
of course there is, it's on every entrance door to every hosbital you walk into.

I've been to probably 8 hospitals in the past 18 months and only 2 had some kind of signage, and one was wimpy worded ("for the safety of our staff and patients, we request that firearms not be brought into our hospital..."). It's not general thing here in the Central Gulf Coast.

Gmountain
03-05-2007, 06:16
Signs in Florida have no legal meaning. Carry is prohibited in places by statute, not signs. There is no statute that says"if a place posts a sign you cannot carry there."

Rusty Shackleford
03-05-2007, 06:55
Originally posted by steve028
of course there is, it's on every entrance door to every hospital you walk into.


You're misinformed.

Notrega
03-05-2007, 19:20
From this thread - http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=602653

Originally posted by najaboy
McLaughlin is indeed being charged with carrying in the hospital in violation of FS 394.458, even though Holmes does not generally provide mental health services. He is also being charged with armed trespass.

Technically speaking however, the charge of 394.458 is legal via a loophole. Although HRMC is not a psych hospital and does not have a psych ward, they (like pretty much every FL hospital) provide for Baker Act evaluations.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=394.458&URL=CH0394/Sec458.HTM

394.458 Introduction or removal of certain articles unlawful; penalty.--

(1)(a) Except as authorized by law or as specifically authorized by the person in charge of each hospital providing mental health services under this part, it is unlawful to introduce into or upon the grounds of such hospital, or to take or attempt to take or send therefrom, any of the following articles, which are hereby declared to be contraband for the purposes of this section:

1. Any intoxicating beverage or beverage which causes or may cause an intoxicating effect;

2. Any controlled substance as defined in chapter 893; or

3. Any firearms or deadly weapon.

(b) It is unlawful to transmit to, or attempt to transmit to, or cause or attempt to cause to be transmitted to, or received by, any patient of any hospital providing mental health services under this part any article or thing declared by this section to be contraband, at any place which is outside of the grounds of such hospital, except as authorized by law or as specifically authorized by the person in charge of such hospital.

(2) A person who violates any provision of this section commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

History.--s. 1, ch. 75-253; s. 201, ch. 77-147; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 6, ch. 96-169.


Felony of 3rd degree = Max 5 years and/or Max $5,000

Gmountain
03-05-2007, 20:33
Originally posted by Notrega
From this thread - http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=602653



http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=394.458&URL=CH0394/Sec458.HTM

394.458 Introduction or removal of certain articles unlawful; penalty.--

(1)(a) Except as authorized by law or as specifically authorized by the person in charge of each hospital providing mental health services under this part, it is unlawful to introduce into or upon the grounds of such hospital, or to take or attempt to take or send therefrom, any of the following articles, which are hereby declared to be contraband for the purposes of this section:

1. Any intoxicating beverage or beverage which causes or may cause an intoxicating effect;

2. Any controlled substance as defined in chapter 893; or

3. Any firearms or deadly weapon.

(b) It is unlawful to transmit to, or attempt to transmit to, or cause or attempt to cause to be transmitted to, or received by, any patient of any hospital providing mental health services under this part any article or thing declared by this section to be contraband, at any place which is outside of the grounds of such hospital, except as authorized by law or as specifically authorized by the person in charge of such hospital.

(2) A person who violates any provision of this section commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

History.--s. 1, ch. 75-253; s. 201, ch. 77-147; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 6, ch. 96-169.


Felony of 3rd degree = Max 5 years and/or Max $5,000

But here is the legislative intent of that FS 394:
it is the intent of the Legislature that treatment programs for such disorders shall include, but not be limited to, comprehensive health, social, educational, and rehabilitative services to persons requiring intensive short-term and continued treatment in order to encourage them to assume responsibility for their treatment and recovery. It is intended that such persons be provided with emergency service and temporary detention for evaluation when required; that they be admitted to treatment facilities on a voluntary basis when extended or continuing care is needed and unavailable in the community; that involuntary placement be provided only when expert evaluation determines that it is necessary; that any involuntary treatment or examination be accomplished in a setting which is clinically appropriate and most likely to facilitate the person's return to the community as soon as possible; and that individual dignity and human rights be guaranteed to all persons who are admitted to mental health facilities or who are being held under s. 394.463.

I believe the law applies to mental hospital facilities and not you average medical hospital.

Medical hospitals fall under FS section 395, not 394.

Medical hospitals are not mental facilities.

Usingmyrights
03-05-2007, 21:28
My understanding on the hospital/mental ward, is that hospitals with mentalward departments are OK. You just can't carry into the mental ward part, even if your a LEO. Person that told me this said there will usually be gun lockers somewhere just outside the mental ward enterance to lock up any "weapons".

najaboy
03-05-2007, 22:18
Originally posted by Gmountain
But here is the legislative intent of that FS 394:
it is the intent of the Legislature that treatment programs for such disorders shall include, but not be limited to, comprehensive health, social, educational, and rehabilitative services to persons requiring intensive short-term and continued treatment in order to encourage them to assume responsibility for their treatment and recovery. It is intended that such persons be provided with emergency service and temporary detention for evaluation when required; that they be admitted to treatment facilities on a voluntary basis when extended or continuing care is needed and unavailable in the community; that involuntary placement be provided only when expert evaluation determines that it is necessary; that any involuntary treatment or examination be accomplished in a setting which is clinically appropriate and most likely to facilitate the person's return to the community as soon as possible; and that individual dignity and human rights be guaranteed to all persons who are admitted to mental health facilities or who are being held under s. 394.463.

I believe the law applies to mental hospital facilities and not you average medical hospital.

Medical hospitals fall under FS section 395, not 394.

Medical hospitals are not mental facilities.
The statute is applicable to medical hospitals as well if they provide any type of mental health service. FS 394.455 provides definitions for purposes of the Mental Health Act. "Hospital" is defined as "a facility licensed under Chapter 395."

najaboy
03-05-2007, 22:25
Originally posted by Usingmyrights
My understanding on the hospital/mental ward, is that hospitals with mentalward departments are OK. You just can't carry into the mental ward part, even if your a LEO. Person that told me this said there will usually be gun lockers somewhere just outside the mental ward enterance to lock up any "weapons".
Rather than take someone's word for it and wind up a guest of the state as another GT member did, you might want to read the applicable statute, which uses the phrase, "...into or upon the grounds of..." The key problem with what you were told is that it is contradicted by the statute itself. Into or upon the grounds of a hospital is all-encompassing.

Gmountain
03-06-2007, 06:27
Originally posted by najaboy
Rather than take someone's word for it and wind up a guest of the state as another GT member did, you might want to read the applicable statute, which uses the phrase, "...into or upon the grounds of..." The key problem with what you were told is that it is contradicted by the statute itself. Into or upon the grounds of a hospital is all-encompassing.

I have to side with usingmyrights here.

Just because someone has been charged with a crime does not make it a crime. The paper never publishes when the charge is dropped, or when the SA or police make a mistake.

I've had people charged with CCW violations-carrying in a county park, etc, that clearly were not crimes. If we go by your interpretation, then people should not carry in county parks. Of course, the charges were dropped, because there was no violation.

Usingmyrights
03-06-2007, 23:00
Originally posted by najaboy
Rather than take someone's word for it and wind up a guest of the state as another GT member did, you might want to read the applicable statute, which uses the phrase, "...into or upon the grounds of..." The key problem with what you were told is that it is contradicted by the statute itself. Into or upon the grounds of a hospital is all-encompassing.

But the hospital as a whole isn't a mental institute. It primary purpose is for fixing people physical aliments. Its like tha bar area of a restraunt. Longhorn isn't off limits altogether just because it has a bar.

najaboy
03-07-2007, 16:28
Originally posted by Usingmyrights
But the hospital as a whole isn't a mental institute. It primary purpose is for fixing people physical aliments. Its like tha bar area of a restraunt. Longhorn isn't off limits altogether just because it has a bar.
You're comparing apples and oranges. The restaurant prohibition specifically states that it is only the area devoted primarily to the consumption of alcohol for consumption on premises. The hospital prohibition, on the other hand, specifically states "into or upon the grounds of."

It also does not matter that the hospital itself is not a mental institution, as the term "hospital" is defined in the Baker Act as a facility licensed under Chapter 395. That chapter of the Florida statutes governs medical hospitals. As such, so long as any type of mental health service covered by the Baker Act is provided, the entire hospital is covered.

That being said, it seems that both sides of this discussion correct and incorrect at the same time. If we were to base our interpretation of the statute merely of the definition of hospital and the subsequent language of the statute, then it would be a moot point as even the parking lot would be off-limits. However, we all seem to be barking up the wrong tree, as we failed to address the first five words of FS 394.458. "Except as authorized by law" could be interpreted as exempting lawful ccw or even the storage of a securely encased firearm in a vehicle by an unlicensed individual. Unfortunately, there is, as of yet, no case law to support this.

That being said, it seems that none of us can give a definitive answer to the question of hospital carry, as it is not something that's cut & dry- but instead hinges on interpretation of just five words. It's going to be a gray area of the law until we have a test case that results in an appellate decision.

Usingmyrights
03-07-2007, 22:41
Originally posted by najaboy
You're comparing apples and oranges. The restaurant prohibition specifically states that it is only the area devoted primarily to the consumption of alcohol for consumption on premises. The hospital prohibition, on the other hand, specifically states "into or upon the grounds of."

It also does not matter that the hospital itself is not a mental institution, as the term "hospital" is defined in the Baker Act as a facility licensed under Chapter 395. That chapter of the Florida statutes governs medical hospitals. As such, so long as any type of mental health service covered by the Baker Act is provided, the entire hospital is covered.

That being said, it seems that both sides of this discussion correct and incorrect at the same time. If we were to base our interpretation of the statute merely of the definition of hospital and the subsequent language of the statute, then it would be a moot point as even the parking lot would be off-limits. However, we all seem to be barking up the wrong tree, as we failed to address the first five words of FS 394.458. "Except as authorized by law" could be interpreted as exempting lawful ccw or even the storage of a securely encased firearm in a vehicle by an unlicensed individual. Unfortunately, there is, as of yet, no case law to support this.

That being said, it seems that none of us can give a definitive answer to the question of hospital carry, as it is not something that's cut & dry- but instead hinges on interpretation of just five words. It's going to be a gray area of the law until we have a test case that results in an appellate decision.

The person that told me the information was an instructor for one of the police academys for whats one of, if not the best, agencies in the state.

najaboy
03-08-2007, 05:15
Originally posted by Usingmyrights
The person that told me the information was an instructor for one of the police academys for whats one of, if not the best, agencies in the state.
However, his word does not trump the language of the statute. There is absolutely nothing in the statutes that supports what he had told you. Once again, note that FS 394.458 says "into or on the grounds of," which is an all-inclusive qualifier. It contains no language whatsoever that would limit a prohibition to only a specific section. And, for the proposes of the Baker Act, hospitals have been defined by statute to include medical hospitals. What he told you is all well and good, but will lose out to the letter of the law seven days a week.

Again, that being said, we've been looking at FS 394.458 the wrong way. The statement, "Except as authorized by law..." is what we really need to be focusing on. There are some state attorneys on board that feel that this does include authorization under 790.06 and 790.25 even though there is not any binding case law yet.

Wickedone1982
03-10-2007, 10:01
ok i am sorry for the noob question , but i am new to GT and i have been reading over some of the topics since last night and this one caught my eye . Ok lets say your carrying and you get hurt or get into a accident but your not in a vehicle so you dont have a place to leave your gun . What then ? DO you keep it on you when they transport you to the hospital ? Sorry again for the noob question .


I have had guns for awhile but just finally had time to send away for my cwp .Only time i have had my gun on me was to gun shows and range time . I orignally had a springfield xd 40 but i didnt want that for a carry pc so i traded it in and got a Glock 19 fully loaded .

Droanx
03-11-2007, 00:21
Originally posted by Wickedone1982
ok i am sorry for the noob question , but i am new to GT and i have been reading over some of the topics since last night and this one caught my eye . Ok lets say your carrying and you get hurt or get into a accident but your not in a vehicle so you dont have a place to leave your gun . What then ? DO you keep it on you when they transport you to the hospital ? Sorry again for the noob question .



A gun is your property. It is no different then a watch or wallet. If you are injured and need an ambulance they will put it in a "personal belongings" bag. If you are not completely incompacitated you might be able to hand it off to someone you know. For example my soon to be wife could get any personal belongings.


EDITED TO ADD Welcome to GT :banana: :banana:

Teslaus
04-07-2007, 23:14
OK! Back to the original topic about CCW in a movie theater, NOT A HOSPITAL! I am about to get a job at the local COBB movie theater were they have big hit movies every weekend & rake in a lot of cash. I am not gonna carry to protect the cash, just myself & any others incase *knock on wood* there is an incident where someone tries to be slick & try to get some cash from us the unfriendly way. Now I asked one of the managers there what the policy was & they said NO! It's somewhere in their rule book that says no go for the theater!

NOW! I will investigate the rule book theory when I start there. Make it sound like I am just curious about company policy. I've even e-mailed the district manager & haven't gotten word one from him/her in nearly 3 weeks. But unless it's in the corporate rule book, it wouldn't stand just having the manager saying no to you while you carry right? Unless there is a Florida statue saying no carry in movie theaters then I'm all clear to carry? Even if it's my job? I'm not going to walk around brandishing the fire arm! I'll have an IWB holster with my jacket on ALL the time! Or even a Miami Classic shoulder Rig! & when those hot days come, I can use a Comp-TAC holster for my G17!

What do you gentlemen & ladies think? Anyone find anymore info about CCW in Cobb or Regal theaters? Thx for listening :thumbsup:

Dandapani
04-08-2007, 06:26
Originally posted by Teslaus
OK! Back to the original topic about CCW in a movie theater, NOT A HOSPITAL! I am about to get a job at the local COBB movie theater were they have big hit movies every weekend & rake in a lot of cash. I am not gonna carry to protect the cash, just myself & any others incase *knock on wood* there is an incident where someone tries to be slick & try to get some cash from us the unfriendly way. Now I asked one of the managers there what the policy was & they said NO! It's somewhere in their rule book that says no go for the theater!

NOW! I will investigate the rule book theory when I start there. Make it sound like I am just curious about company policy. I've even e-mailed the district manager & haven't gotten word one from him/her in nearly 3 weeks. But unless it's in the corporate rule book, it wouldn't stand just having the manager saying no to you while you carry right? Unless there is a Florida statue saying no carry in movie theaters then I'm all clear to carry? Even if it's my job? I'm not going to walk around brandishing the fire arm! I'll have an IWB holster with my jacket on ALL the time! Or even a Miami Classic shoulder Rig! & when those hot days come, I can use a Comp-TAC holster for my G17!

What do you gentlemen & ladies think? Anyone find anymore info about CCW in Cobb or Regal theaters? Thx for listening :thumbsup:

We just covered this in this thread. NO, it's not illegal. It is against company policy. You'll lose your job if found out, but you won't be arrested... Do you really need to keep your job if found out? Your choice.

Gmountain
04-08-2007, 10:25
You can be fired for any reason, by the way. Just combing your hair wrong. Policy or not.