Not an unreasonable personal opinion, since nobody has yet cited where it has happened, ever.OK- I'll preface this by saying again, that in my personal non-legal advice opinion- this kind of thing is highly unlikely to be prosecuted.
Sure. If you claim that you didn't see the sign, it would be counter-productive to post images of said sign on social media.That being said, if the defense is "I didn't see the sign", the prosecution can present pictures of the sign and the entrance and a jury can decide whether to believe your testimony that you did not see the sign. Of course, that would involve testifying and cross examination.....and if the sign was obvious enough, cross would be fun and what answer is given to the questions would be irrelevant. My argument is made with my questions.
[ETA] Social media posts about how ridiculous the sign is would be a bonus.
To me, this is the bigger issue. I think trying to apply the specific denial under (c)(1) to a general denial under (c)(2) would be problematic.What a sign would have to say to allow for a case to be brought is a different matter altogether.
My only stance on this point is that, if I'm asked to leave somewhere, I'm going to leave. Unless/until that happens, I intend to carry on with my lawful activities in whatever manner I see fit. And if I'm asked to leave, I will leave - and likely never return.[ETA 2]
Anyhoo, this is absolutely the right place to have a conversation about what would constitute a criminal trespass for carriers...but whenever this comes up, I have thoughts about the private property rights of others and whether denying these businesses our $$ when they exercise their private property rights to exclude carriers and using the market may be the better way to go.
ETA:
Property rights of others do not extend to my person. They are within their rights to deny the physical presence of my person on their property, but that is where their property rights end. Their property rights do not extend to give them control over what I do, say, carry, etc.