GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-20-2011, 10:07   #21
Seraph
Senior Member
 
Seraph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TN, USA
Posts: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by hikerpaddler View Post
If you know they don't want permit holders carrying there, whether it's a tiny sign,
something you read on their website, or were told by management, don't carry there. It's simple. The point of prominent signage is so you can see it, not so you can't pretend not to.
You're absolutely right, but the point of this thread is that sometimes there's not-so-prominent signage, posted with the presumable intent that you cannot see it, or aren't likely to see it. The OP posited that the motivation for that not-so-prominent signage might be entrapment. I offered that I think it's more likely that they want to ban guns on the premises, without losing the business of gun toters, who might not notice the "hidden" signage. I don't think anyone doubts the point of prominent signage. If one carries correctly, one will never have any trouble with any of this.
__________________
Under the sword lifted high, there is Hell, making you tremble. But go ahead, and there is the land of Bliss. ~ Miyamoto Musashi
Seraph is offline  
Old 08-20-2011, 10:16   #22
SGT HATRED
Senior Member
 
SGT HATRED's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: PHX AZ
Posts: 3,209
Watch out for the Buffalo wild wings at university and rural in tempe... They have dark grey letters on black glass. The kicker is it's on the second set of doors after you're already in the building!
SGT HATRED is offline  
Old 08-20-2011, 10:46   #23
hikerpaddler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 5,455
Send a message via AIM to hikerpaddler
If one carries correctly, one will not be carrying a firearm onto posted property.
__________________
NRA Law Enforcement Firearms Instructor
hikerpaddler is offline  
Old 08-20-2011, 11:37   #24
Seraph
Senior Member
 
Seraph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TN, USA
Posts: 458
You're so right.
__________________
Under the sword lifted high, there is Hell, making you tremble. But go ahead, and there is the land of Bliss. ~ Miyamoto Musashi

Last edited by Seraph; 08-20-2011 at 11:38..
Seraph is offline  
Old 08-20-2011, 14:03   #25
harrygunner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 461
'Sam Spade' I understand your point and agree that property owners have rights.

However, we scary gun carriers have been placed into a special class.

All the other types of sign postings you presented are not supported by law in and of themselves.

For example, If I walked into the "Employees Only" area, or onto someones property posted "No Trespass" I did not immediately break a state law.

I am not interested in walking onto posted property. But I truly believe a CCW permit holder is not likely to have malicious intent while eating a burrito on posted property. Whereas someone going into back areas of a business likely may. Yet, some states reverse the appropriate severity of the act.
harrygunner is offline  
Old 08-20-2011, 14:42   #26
poodleplumber
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,087
Quote:
Yet, some states reverse the appropriate severity of the act.
Good point that I hadn't thought of. Thanks.
poodleplumber is offline  
Old 08-20-2011, 15:15   #27
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrygunner View Post
All the other types of sign postings you presented are not supported by law in and of themselves.

For example, If I walked into the "Employees Only" area, or onto someones property posted "No Trespass" I did not immediately break a state law.
Sorry, you're wrong. Everything I described is Criminal Trespass in the 3rd Degree.

"A person commits criminal trespass in the third degree by:

1. Knowingly entering or remaining unlawfully on any real property after a reasonable request to leave by the owner or any other person having lawful control over such property, or reasonable notice prohibiting entry."


See how "reasonable notice" is given in addition to the request from the owner? A sign telling you that employees are the only people allowed in an area, or any other example I gave you, means that you're disregarding a reasonable notice prohibiting your entry. And while I've only made one arrest on the "no guns" thing, I've lost count of the people I've hooked who didn't bother with the "No Trespassing" sign.

But if you've got a binding court case that limits or overturns 13-1502, I'm willing to read it.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle

Last edited by Sam Spade; 08-20-2011 at 15:19..
Sam Spade is offline  
Old 08-20-2011, 16:58   #28
harrygunner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 461
Interesting. It's how trespassing is defined by each state.

I read trespassing laws for California, Florida, Texas and Arizona.

Texas and Arizona statutes include sign posting that is feasible to implement on a building in their laws.

California and Florida either do not include signs on private buildings or do require mischievous acts, bad intent or refusal to leave in their definition. My Florida and California CCW paperwork clearly state exemption from posted "no firearms" signs.

I've ignored signs twice, once on each coast. South Beach in Miami Beach posted the sand area even though they are not allowed to preempt state law. The other time was in Newport Beach, CA where a joint camping equipment/gun store was posted on the gunshop door and not the camping store door. I did not see the sign until I left through the gunshop side. In both cases, no law was broken given the trespassing laws of those states.

So, it looks like Arizona needs to change its trespassing laws.

Just kidding. Thanks for the conversation.
harrygunner is offline  
Old 08-21-2011, 12:12   #29
ipscshooter
Mostly IDPA now
 
ipscshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Near Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 2,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Spade View Post
And while I've only made one arrest on the "no guns" thing, I've lost count of the people I've hooked who didn't bother with the "No Trespassing" sign.
I'm curious as to why this one arrest? If the person was carrying concealed no one should have know.

I suspect it might have been someone attempting to open carry and tried to challenge the owners right to post, or maybe just an idiot. I'm guessing that "constitutional carry" may have brought out more than the usual number.
__________________
Shoot Safe
ipscshooter
_______________
NRA Life,USPSA Life,IDPA Member
ipscshooter is offline  
Old 08-21-2011, 12:28   #30
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ipscshooter View Post
I'm curious as to why this one arrest? If the person was carrying concealed no one should have know.

I suspect it might have been someone attempting to open carry and tried to challenge the owners right to post, or maybe just an idiot. I'm guessing that "constitutional carry" may have brought out more than the usual number.
It was actually a guy who was being a pain at a hospital triage/waiting area. My eyes were better than his cover, and I used what I had to solve the problem. This pre-dated permitless carry, though it would be equally appropriate today's laws.

My perception is that since the revamp we've had more people waving guns around in parking lots and in the street as taught by the Hollywood School of Conflict Resolution, but nothing exceptional inside businesses where actual taxpayers congregate. No, I don't have numbers, just what I see/hear transmitted/read on the "blotter".

ETA: "No one should have known" is inspiring a new thread...
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle

Last edited by Sam Spade; 08-21-2011 at 12:34..
Sam Spade is offline  
Old 08-21-2011, 12:49   #31
Teufelhunde
Senior Member
 
Teufelhunde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoAZ View Post
many restaurants I've been in have no sign on the front door, but do have one on the wall next to the liquor lic in the bar area.
.
That is where it is required to be to comply with the law, right next to the liquor license.

YMMV
__________________
<a href='http://militarysignatures.com'> <img src='http://militarysignatures.com/signatures/member8698.png' border='0' alt='militarysignatures.com'/></a>
Teufelhunde is offline  
Old 08-21-2011, 17:50   #32
ipscshooter
Mostly IDPA now
 
ipscshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Near Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 2,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Spade View Post
It was actually a guy who was being a pain at a hospital triage/waiting area.

My perception is that since the revamp we've had more people waving guns around in parking lots and in the street ...........No, I don't have numbers, just what I see/hear transmitted/read on the "blotter".

ETA: "No one should have known" is inspiring a new thread...
Thanks. Let me guess. He said "I didn't know it was illegal" or "I didn't see the sign". Not too smart in any case. If he did know, you sure don't draw attention to yourself.

At least, I sure wouldn't.

You're perceptions are probably valid. I suspect a certain element, in certain neighborhoods, hears "constitutional carry" and think they have permission to be bigger morons than they already are.

I haven't seen the other thread, but I'm sure the content is pretty familiar to anyone who's been around GT awhile.
__________________
Shoot Safe
ipscshooter
_______________
NRA Life,USPSA Life,IDPA Member
ipscshooter is offline  
Old 08-21-2011, 18:34   #33
ICARRY2
NRA Life Member
 
ICARRY2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,772
As Sam Spade stated, the notice given has to be reasonable.

This is why I don't look for signs that are not in a reasonable persons normal field of view.

If I am told to leave private property for any reason, I leave immediately.

I also don't cause problems in public.
ICARRY2 is offline  
Old 08-22-2011, 00:36   #34
RGbiker
Senior Member
 
RGbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,429
In Arizona I actively look for the "Gun Buster" sign and when I find it I seek out the manager to hand him/her a "NO Gun = No $$$" card. Doesn't matter to me where the sign is posted - by the door or next to liquor license. I will not spend any money there.

We have an extensive listing of restaurants in Tucson area who will accept CC with AZCCW permit or even OC (No booze).
__________________
If Obama is the answer, then how stupid was the question?
RGbiker is offline  
Old 08-22-2011, 11:09   #35
mhunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 764
Um, you all do realize there is only ONE legal sign in AZ, right? The rest can be ignored in a "no shoes, no shirt, no service" type fashion. If the sign isn't legal, you're just violating a store policy and can be asked to leave.

In order for the sign to be legal, it must say, "NO FIREARMS" at the top, have the red circle/slash "gun buster" picture and then say "Pursuant to A.R.S. XYZ". I don't remember the exact Arizona Revised Statute number.

That's IT. This is the only sign and it was implemented under the recent change in laws allowing permitless concealed carry. It must also be posted on every entrance. If an establishment serves alcohol on-site for consumption, they must also have the same sign next to their liquor license.

Another fairly unknown component of the law is, if the business is properly posted, then they MUST provide for secure storage of firearms. This was a concession for CCW'ers to the complaint of having their guns stolen because they had to be left in the car. However, this is not enforced as business do not seems to be complying with having secure storage. Every single posted business said they do not have (or are even required to have) secure storage, yet they are posted. This needs to change.
mhunter is offline  
Old 08-22-2011, 11:44   #36
NAC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhunter View Post
Um, you all do realize there is only ONE legal sign in AZ, right? The rest can be ignored in a "no shoes, no shirt, no service" type fashion. If the sign isn't legal, you're just violating a store policy and can be asked to leave.

In order for the sign to be legal, it must say, "NO FIREARMS" at the top, have the red circle/slash "gun buster" picture and then say "Pursuant to A.R.S. XYZ". I don't remember the exact Arizona Revised Statute number.

That's IT. This is the only sign and it was implemented under the recent change in laws allowing permitless concealed carry. It must also be posted on every entrance. If an establishment serves alcohol on-site for consumption, they must also have the same sign next to their liquor license.

Another fairly unknown component of the law is, if the business is properly posted, then they MUST provide for secure storage of firearms. This was a concession for CCW'ers to the complaint of having their guns stolen because they had to be left in the car. However, this is not enforced as business do not seems to be complying with having secure storage. Every single posted business said they do not have (or are even required to have) secure storage, yet they are posted. This needs to change.
You're mostly correct. There is only one legal sign for establishments that serve alcohol on their premises. If one violates that signage then it is a violation of ARS 4-229. If that exact sign isn't posted then it simply is a trespassing violation 13-1502. Those 4-229 signs only apply to places that serve alcohol. Other businesses can use any signage they see fit.

No guns, no weapons signs can be considered a reasonable request under 13-1502 but the problem is with the signage not being seen sometimes. Business sometimes place signage at places that a reasonable person couldn't be expected to see them. They are really not enforceable as a "reasonable request" for this specific reason. Of course the instant one is verbally told, then there's no doubt a reasonable request has been made.

You are very correct about the storage issue, again the problem lies in that a business can still ask you to leave for any reason they want and the instant one doesn't, it becomes a trespassing issue.

Of course the old adage holds true.. you may beat the rap but you won't beat the ride.
NAC is offline  
Old 08-22-2011, 12:41   #37
RGbiker
Senior Member
 
RGbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhunter View Post
Um, you all do realize there is only ONE legal sign in AZ, right? The rest can be ignored in a "no shoes, no shirt, no service" type fashion. If the sign isn't legal, you're just violating a store policy and can be asked to leave.

In order for the sign to be legal, it must say, "NO FIREARMS" at the top, have the red circle/slash "gun buster" picture and then say "Pursuant to A.R.S. XYZ". I don't remember the exact Arizona Revised Statute number.

That's IT. This is the only sign and it was implemented under the recent change in laws allowing permitless concealed carry. It must also be posted on every entrance. If an establishment serves alcohol on-site for consumption, they must also have the same sign next to their liquor license.

Another fairly unknown component of the law is, if the business is properly posted, then they MUST provide for secure storage of firearms. This was a concession for CCW'ers to the complaint of having their guns stolen because they had to be left in the car. However, this is not enforced as business do not seems to be complying with having secure storage. Every single posted business said they do not have (or are even required to have) secure storage, yet they are posted. This needs to change.
I don't know what direction you're, but this is the sign I'm talking about...
__________________
If Obama is the answer, then how stupid was the question?

Last edited by RGbiker; 10-07-2011 at 20:26..
RGbiker is offline  
Old 08-22-2011, 12:43   #38
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhunter View Post
Um, you all do realize there is only ONE legal sign in AZ, right? The rest can be ignored in a "no shoes, no shirt, no service" type fashion. If the sign isn't legal, you're just violating a store policy and can be asked to leave.
Please post the case law that supports this. I have already posted the statute that says otherwise.

Quote:
Another fairly unknown component of the law is, if the business is properly posted, then they MUST provide for secure storage of firearms. This was a concession for CCW'ers to the complaint of having their guns stolen because they had to be left in the car. However, this is not enforced as business do not seems to be complying with having secure storage. Every single posted business said they do not have (or are even required to have) secure storage, yet they are posted. This needs to change.
No, you're wrong. You've mixed the requirements for public establishments with private ones. See ARS 13-3102.01 for the storage requirements and 13-3102 for the definitions. There is no requirement whatsoever for private businesses to provide secure storage.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline  
Old 08-22-2011, 12:54   #39
Cheytac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 1,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGbiker View Post
If I see a "NO Guns/weapons" sign I'll refuse to do any business with the store.
I'll ask for store manager and hand him/her a "No Guns=No $$$" card.

Then I usually get a wimpy "It's Corporate Policy" excuse.

My wife demands Jared's...
Cheytac is offline  
Old 08-22-2011, 12:56   #40
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,250
13-3102.01. Storage of deadly weapons; definitions

A. If an operator of a public establishment or a sponsor of a public event requests that a person carrying a deadly weapon remove the weapon, the operator or sponsor shall provide temporary and secure storage. The storage shall be readily accessible on entry into the establishment or event and allow for the immediate retrieval of the weapon on exit from the establishment or event.

B. This section does not apply to the licensed premises of any public establishment or public event with a license issued pursuant to title 4.

C. The operator of the establishment or the sponsor of the event or the employee of the operator or sponsor or the agent of the sponsor, including a public entity or public employee, is not liable for acts or omissions pursuant to this section unless the operator, sponsor, employee or agent intended to cause injury or was grossly negligent.

D. For the purposes of this section, "public establishment" and "public event" have the same meanings prescribed in section 13-3102.

13-3102. Misconduct involving weapons; defenses; classification; definitions
M. For the purposes of this section:
2. "Public establishment" means a structure, vehicle or craft that is owned, leased or operated by this state or a political subdivision of this state.

3. "Public event" means a specifically named or sponsored event of limited duration that is either conducted by a public entity or conducted by a private entity with a permit or license granted by a public entity. Public event does not include an unsponsored gathering of people in a public place.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:48.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 591
142 Members
449 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31