The Current CCW Environment

[Lost Lake]

I also don't see the signs that say 'no weapons allowed'.

It's kind of hard to miss them when they post them right smack on the front door at eye level, but somehow I don't see them. Maybe someone else held the door for me so it was open, and I didn't see it....

 

[cshoff]

I arm up as part of my morning clothing ritual. I don't think about where I am going for the day, or even if I'm going anywhere. When I am awake, I am either armed on my person, or armed within arms reach. When I sleep, I am armed within arms reach.

Preparedness is a way of life, and for me, part of that preparedness is being armed. Short of having to appear in a court of visit a federal facility, it's not a "situationally dependent" option.

 

[JeepLvr]

Private property residential rights are not the same as a business. That is legal fact, not personal opinion. If your business is in your home, then you might have an argument. Otherwise, the correct term is business property, there is a reason the law makes distinction between the two, your "rights" are different on each of those types of property.

I don't know what State you're in, but where I'm at that's not true. You're view on that would not hold up in court here.

A business owner's business property is his 'private' property, and he makes the rules. That is a legal fact as you say. If he doesn't want you there, then you have to go. As long as the business owner doesn't violate the Civil Rights Act, he can pretty much tell anyone to leave for any reason.

In our State, a LEO can ignore the "no guns" signs on and off duty. On-duty of course provides for some special privileges. However, off duty, if a business owner says no guns and tells you to leave...you have to leave. It's their property. Otherwise, you are guilty of trespassing. Even though the law says the sign doesn't apply to you. The owner can still kick you out. It's no different than saying "get out of my house."

Granted, if that happened to me, I'd tell everyone I know to never go there and do business.

 

[rod442]

Too many different laws from state to state as to where you can, and cant carry legally. They really should make it standardized, and valid in all 50.

On the theater issue... Unfortunately, here in MI you cant carry in: An entertainment facility that the individual knows or should know has a seating capacity of 2,500 or more. Which has been extrapolated to mean multiple theaters (in the same facility) amounting to that many, or more seating. From what I have read. and almost all the theater's around here are large, chain multiplex's.

The full list from MI. MSP - Pistol Free Areas

 

[Neumann]

How about I have talked with my attorney and he tells me that since your sign deprives me of the right of self defense that your establishment has assumed that responsability.

Before you take this to Kinko's for printing, the spelling is "responsibility."

That said, nothing you say imparts responsibility to the business owner. There must be a finding of negligence. Furthermore, your presence is voluntary, and it is nearly impossible to prove that certain consequences would not have occurred had you been armed. No competent attorney would attest to such drivel.

 

[TexasArmed]

I don't know what State you're in, but where I'm at that's not true. You're view on that would not hold up in court here.

A business owner's business property is his 'private' property, and he makes the rules. That is a legal fact as you say. If he doesn't want you there, then you have to go. As long as the business owner doesn't violate the Civil Rights Act, he can pretty much tell anyone to leave for any reason.

In our State, a LEO can ignore the "no guns" signs on and off duty. On-duty of course provides for some special privileges. However, off duty, if a business owner says no guns and tells you to leave...you have to leave. It's their property. Otherwise, you are guilty of trespassing. Even though the law says the sign doesn't apply to you. The owner can still kick you out. It's no different than saying "get out of my house."

Granted, if that happened to me, I'd tell everyone I know to never go there and do business.

In my State (glad I live here), I can ignore that sign. Of course the owner can tell one to leave. And if I were latino, I could say I don't read english. Thats why the "Business Sign" in Texas that IS enforceable must be a specified height, and written in English & Spainish and on every entrance. At someone's home no such sign is necessary. The owner can kick you out in either case.

I respect and observe the legal sign in Texas. But if the sign is not legal, unless the business owner posts another sign that says they are responsible for my security, while on their property, they will neither get my business, nor any of my visitor's business, and I will seek actively to encourage people I know not to patronize them, and spread the word about how unsafe their parking lots are. If I should sit on a jury when suit is brought against a business for negligence, I would vote to award damages for lack of security once the legal sign goes up.

If I lived in one of those "Any Old Sign will Do States", I would move to another state. Since I never stray very far from Texas I don't have to worry much about it. Not many businesses in Texas put up legal signs, because they know they will lose business by doing it.

And if I put up "NO GUNS ON MY PROPERTY" on my residence, it would probably get broken into by one of the dope heads or other local criminals. I think businesses who put up legal signs ought to have to also put one up that says "Attention Criminals" our law abiding patrons have been
disarmed for your convenience".

 

[Chuck1217]

"After the Colorado movie theater shooting, the local chain decided to make their theaters a "gun free zone."

I live in Memphis and all of the Malco theaters have posted sign."
Wouldn't you like to ask their boss that one question:
Can you promise me the BAD guys will read that sign and leave THEIR guns at home?
Re: suing the theatres/etc for disallowing guns- there are a whole lot of stupid-er lawsuits that get won- and how many would it take before merchants start thinking twive before posting those signs? Right now the loser doesn't pay legal fees- so those merchants would have to pay their own costs f we sued them. Just having to pay a lawyer to defend themselves- make em think twice?

 

[venomballistics]

"After the Colorado movie theater shooting, the local chain decided to make their theaters a "gun free zone."

I live in Memphis and all of the Malco theaters have posted sign."
Wouldn't you like to ask their boss that one question:
Can you promise me the BAD guys will read that sign and leave THEIR guns at home?
Re: suing the theatres/etc for disallowing guns- there are a whole lot of stupid-er lawsuits that get won- and how many would it take before merchants start thinking twive before posting those signs? Right now the loser doesn't pay legal fees- so those merchants would have to pay their own costs f we sued them. Just having to pay a lawyer to defend themselves- make em think twice?

in order to think twice, one must think a first time ... still waiting for that to happen

 

[Poodle Soup]

My dog knows when I pick a gun up and put it on (or in my pocket) were going somewhere and off for his leash he goes. I have to remind my self NOT to carry where I cant, not to carry where I can.

 

[Chuck1217]

I live in SC 20 miles from the border with NC. I printed a list of 'do not carry to..' for both states, laminated it, and keep it in my car. I pretty much know the places, but figure better safe than sorry.
And venom- excellent point partner.

 

[accessbob]

Thats why i even carry at home, doing the dishes, wacthing a movie or whatever i might be doing i carry. I hate to be downstairs have someone smash in the house and my guns all be upstairs.

Me too. And my wife has hers within arm's reach at home.

 

[MaximumLawman]

Why bother getting a permit if you're not going to carry all the time?

so you can carry when you want?

 

[tops]

Been that way since I got my carry permit.
What is it about getting a carry permit that determined you need to carry a gun. Does not having a permit mean that bad people won't hurt you but once you get a permit they will start preying on you? Just curious. Larry

 

[glocknug]

I find it strange that gun owners always fight for their right to own/carry guns, but won't acknowledge the rights of a private property owner who doesn't want guns on their property.

Gun rights do not overpower personal property rights.

I also find it strange how often the argument regarding the Constitution is brought up in this argument. The Constitution says what the Government can/cannot do. It has nothing to do with the rights of private citizens vs. private citizens.

If we want the public to respect gun rights, we need to respect private property rights as well. It shouldn't be about whether or not the sign has the power of law. We shouldn't think that just because we cannot get arrested, it is okay. This is about respect for other peoples rights and wishes on their own property.

In summery, if somebody doesn't want guns on their property go somewhere else, or leave your gun somewhere else when you go in. If you want people to respect your rights to own/carry, respect other peoples rights as well. It's not about whether or not you can be arrested for ignoring the sign. It's about respecting other people rights, just like we expect them to respect our rights.

 

[venomballistics]

Been that way since I got my carry permit.
What is it about getting a carry permit that determined you need to carry a gun. Does not having a permit mean that bad people won't hurt you but once you get a permit they will start preying on you? Just curious. Larry

his kind don't carry as a rule, he carries for the exception.
no one knows where or when bad things will happen, if we did, we wouldn't need guns.

 

[jtpur]

After the Colorado movie theater shooting, the local chain decided to make their theaters a "gun free zone."

I live in Memphis and all of the Malco theaters have posted sign. Needless to say, I am not going to the movies anytime soon.

Andrew

Does that sign apply to the holder of a concealed permit?

 

[venomballistics]

I find it strange that gun owners always fight for their right to own/carry guns, but won't acknowledge the rights of a private property owner who doesn't want guns on their property.

Gun rights do not overpower personal property rights.

I also find it strange how often the argument regarding the Constitution is brought up in this argument. The Constitution says what the Government can/cannot do. It has nothing to do with the rights of private citizens vs. private citizens.

If we want the public to respect gun rights, we need to respect private property rights as well. It shouldn't be about whether or not the sign has the power of law. We shouldn't think that just because we cannot get arrested, it is okay. This is about respect for other peoples rights and wishes on their own property.

In summery, if somebody doesn't want guns on their property go somewhere else, or leave your gun somewhere else when you go in. If you want people to respect your rights to own/carry, respect other peoples rights as well. It's not about whether or not you can be arrested for ignoring the sign. It's about respecting other people rights, just like we expect them to respect our rights.

you do make a few points here but your "Gun rights do not overpower personal property rights." statement is likely to be hottly contested by the fact that most all who impose restrictions in the name of property rights DO NOT provide any security to compensate for your denied right to defend yourself which arguably trumps everything.

I for one try to respect property rights, and I believe most here do as well. we as CCW's are constantly learning where we are and are not welcomed. This is especially true when we travel. It often becomes necessary to violate their property rights once, prior to adding them to our individual "do not return" lists. there's really no elegant solution to this issue

 

[glocknug]

"you do make a few points here but your "Gun rights do not overpower personal property rights." statement is likely to be hottly contested by the fact that most all who impose restrictions in the name of property rights DO NOT provide any security to compensate for your denied right to defend yourself which arguably trumps everything."

I do see what you are saying, but hear me out.

First off... I don't think we can say any right is more impotant than another. Just because I believe stongly in one, somebody else may believe strongly in another. I learned a long time ago that just because I believe one thing, does't make somebody elses beliefs less important. We need to respect other peoples beliefs as well.

This connects to your comment about being able to defend yourself trumps everything. I agree. But, as free people, we can avoid this place and go somewhere else. By doing this, we are able to continue defnding ourselves while respecting other peoples rights.

I again say, and I cannot express it enough, if we want others to respect our rights to carry/own firearm, we need to respect other peoples rights as well.

And just so you know, I do carry all the time. I have encountered one sign saying "no guns" in the past several years. I turned around, went somewhere else, and have never gone back. I respect that persons opinion/right, even though I disagree with it.

 

[bp231986]

Me too. And my wife has hers within arm's reach at home.

Good for you and your wife. The best way to prepare for the worst is to think like the bad guys. If i was a BG i would attack when least expected, family wacthing a movie or having dinner. i think the only time i would get caught of guard would be when in the shower. Ive been thinking about getting a cheap kel Tec P11 and having it hid under the extra towels rack under some towels( no i dont have any children and all stupid persons are prohibited in my home).

 

[StatesRightist]

I get so tired of the Constitution does not apply to anyone but the Federal Government mantra. I'm guessing that "fact" was started by the same people who say the 2nd Amendment does not apply to individuals and the Founding Fathers were not Christians.

There have been thousands, if not hundred of thousands, of lawsuits based on violations of individuals Constitutionally guaranteed Civil Rights that have been won. These lawsuits were against companies and individuals, not the Feds. Quit buying leftist propaganda. The Constitution states what Civil Rights the Federal Government is bound to honor AND the rights they are bound to uphold/guarantee US citizens. How/Why do you think they get involved in so much employee law, election law, civil rights violations etc? It's all an extension of your rights that they are bound to uphold.

Additionally, State Constitutions mirror the US Constitution for the most part, granting the same basic rights.

Where is our resident Constitutional expert, Col Jagdog, when we need him?