[poodleplumber]

Yet, some states reverse the appropriate severity of the act.

Good point that I hadn't thought of. Thanks.

[Sam Spade]

Originally Posted by harrygunner

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.

[harrygunner]

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.

[ipscshooter]

Originally Posted by Sam Spade

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.

[Sam Spade]

Originally Posted by ipscshooter

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...

[Teufelhunde]

Originally Posted by BroncoAZ

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

[ipscshooter]

Originally Posted by Sam Spade

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.

[ICARRY2]

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.

[RGbiker]

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).

[mhunter]

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.

[NAC]

Originally Posted by mhunter

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.

[RGbiker]

Originally Posted by mhunter

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...

[Sam Spade]

Originally Posted by mhunter

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.

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.

[Cheytac]

Originally Posted by RGbiker

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...

[Sam Spade]

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.

[NAC]

Originally Posted by Sam Spade

Please post the case law that supports this. I have already posted the statute that says otherwise.



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.

Sam, there is in one instance under the "Parking Lot" law ARS 12-781. Sorry couldn't change the color.


3. The property owner, tenant, public or private employer or business entity provides a parking lot, parking garage or other area designated for parking motor vehicles, that:
(a) Is secured by a fence or other physical barrier.
(b) Limits access by a guard or other security measure.
(c) Provides temporary and secure firearm storage. The storage shall be monitored and readily ACCESSIBLE on entry into the premises and allow for the immediate retrieval of the firearm on exit from the premises.

[Sam Spade]

Originally Posted by NAC

Sam, there is in one instance under the "Parking Lot" law ARS 12-781. Sorry couldn't change the color.


3. The property owner, tenant, public or private employer or business entity provides a parking lot, parking garage or other area designated for parking motor vehicles, that:
(a) Is secured by a fence or other physical barrier.
(b) Limits access by a guard or other security measure.
(c) Provides temporary and secure firearm storage. The storage shall be monitored and readily ACCESSIBLE on entry into the premises and allow for the immediate retrieval of the firearm on exit from the premises.

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. Your cite refers to storing your weapon in your car while it's parked. I'm talking about carry into a business.

[NAC]

Originally Posted by Sam Spade

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. Your cite refers to storing your weapon in your car while it's parked. I'm talking about carry into a business.

Don't disagree with you. I was simply pointing out that there is one instance that a private entity must secure a weapon for a citizen. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Toorop]

Originally Posted by 3.slow

Out of sight, out of mind. That's the reason you carried concealed, so nobody else knows.

Isn't that against the law?

Either way as Arizona has no standards needed for a permit and has constitutional carry, they also should not need standards for a sign. My advice to those who are worried about signs would be to call ahead and ask if guns are allowed.

[FL2NV]

But, but, I thought that AZ was such a gun friendly state and one of the best in the country. What happened? Ahh, once again glad to be in the free state of NV where if I see a no guns sign, I can just smile, fart in it's general direction, and walk right in. Ahhhh freedom, let it ring.

[Toorop]

Originally Posted by Sam Spade

Please post the case law that supports this. I have already posted the statute that says otherwise.



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.

Glad you pointed that out about the storage laws. If the law forced businesses to provide storage for guns the law would have been draconian. Either way i was curious as to whether colleges are off limits or if they have to be posted? And by public buildings I assume you mean courthouses and publically owned buildings.

[Toorop]

Originally Posted by FL2NV

But, but, I thought that AZ was such a gun friendly state and one of the best in the country. What happened? Ahh, once again glad to be in the free state of NV where if I see a no guns sign, I can just smile, fart in it's general direction, and walk right in. Ahhhh freedom, let it ring.

And what of the freedom of the business owner to regulate their property?

[mhunter]

Originally Posted by Toorop

And by public buildings I assume you mean courthouses and publically owned buildings.

So far, the only public place I've seen with secure storage was the Prescott library. Right as you go in the second set of doors, there are three lock boxes immediately to the right. You drop your gun in one and take the key. I've seen people coming out of the library with books AND guns in their hands because they hadn't stowed the guns yet.

[kensteele]

Originally Posted by Toorop

And what of the freedom of the business owner to regulate their property?

You're impossible. Ok, the property owner can chain his front door permanently and not allow anyone to come thru and that will include the gun owners that he so deperately wants out. Personally I think this perception that property owners against guns is way blown out of proportion. You get to regulate 95% of your business, how's that?

[mhunter]

Originally Posted by FL2NV

But, but, I thought that AZ was such a gun friendly state and one of the best in the country. What happened? Ahh, once again glad to be in the free state of NV where if I see a no guns sign, I can just smile, fart in it's general direction, and walk right in. Ahhhh freedom, let it ring.

It IS one of the best in the nation for gun laws. Can you carry concealed in NV without a permit? Nope. Do you have to qualify for both revolver and semi-auto AND have it listed on your permit to be able to legally carry both? Yup.