Kids planet "no firearms" ic

[Kirk Freeman]

IANAL

No. Signs (edit: "No Firearms" and similar) do not have force of law in Indiana.

There are some INGO lawyers (actual lawyers) who have posited an interesting interpretation by which they claim that signs could be considered to carry the force of law, but to my knowledge, that interpretation has yet to be attempted/challenged in court. I'd also defer to them (and better yet, to your own lawyer) in any actual, real-world scenarios.

Correct such as "if you are carrying a firearm, entry is denied." Have seen that at an shoe modeling entertainment complex near the Indianapolis Airport as a younger man.

This handsome, brilliant righteous citizen clarifies this legal point further:

 

[firecadet613]

Yes it is. He was referring to Zurok's description of somebody physically telling you to GTFO. Not the signs.

OK, yes, that is. I must have missed that and thought he was referring to the posted sign.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Correct such as "if you are carrying a firearm, entry is denied." Have seen that at an shoe modeling entertainment complex near the Indianapolis Airport as a younger man.

This handsome, brilliant righteous citizen clarifies this legal point further:

Wait, I was supposed to be looking at her shoes? Maaaaan. I was doing it all wrong!

 

[WebSnyper]

Correct such as "if you are carrying a firearm, entry is denied." Have seen that at an shoe modeling entertainment complex near the Indianapolis Airport as a younger man.

This handsome, brilliant righteous citizen clarifies this legal point further:

I especially like the "pfft" section (best I can describe it), then of course the flowing locks of hair also always impress.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I especially like the "pfft" section (best I can describe it), then of course the flowing locks of hair also always impress.

I am the Robert Plant of men's lawyer hair.

 

[2tonic]

I am the Robert Plant of men's lawyer hair.

View attachment 322883

How odd.....the video I got linked to must have been shot on the day you sent the golden locks out for dry cleaning.

 

[chipbennett]

That's not "personal communication".

Signs do not have the force of law in Indiana! See my snippet above from handgunlaw.us

If they ask you to leave, for ANY reason, and you refuse to leave, then they can call the police and have you removed/trespassed.

Concealed is concealed though...carry on.

Um, are you responding to the right post? Because what I was responding to was, literally, and explicitly, the owner asking someone to leave:

"They can escort you off their property for trespassing if they tell you to go."

 

[firecadet613]

Um, are you responding to the right post? Because what I was responding to was, literally, and explicitly, the owner asking someone to leave:

"They can escort you off their property for trespassing if they tell you to go."

Yep, wrong post. Cameramonkey pointed that out

 

[chipbennett]

Correct such as "if you are carrying a firearm, entry is denied." Have seen that at an shoe modeling entertainment complex near the Indianapolis Airport as a younger man.

This handsome, brilliant righteous citizen clarifies this legal point further:

"Because if it says, 'If you've got a pistol on you, you can't enter into our establishment,' that's probably going to be enough notice to prosecute under Indiana's criminal trespass statute."

Has anyone yet been arrested/prosecuted accordingly? And if so, has anyone yet been successfully convicted under that theory? Or is it still entirely hypothetical?

(That was one fine looking, well-spoken man, though!)

 

[Kirk Freeman]

"Because if it says, 'If you've got a pistol on you, you can't enter into our establishment,' that's probably going to be enough notice to prosecute under Indiana's criminal trespass statute."

Has anyone yet been arrested/prosecuted accordingly? And if so, has anyone yet been successfully convicted under that theory? Or is it still entirely hypothetical?

(That was one fine looking, well-spoken man, though!)

The latter.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

How odd.....the video I got linked to must have been shot on the day you sent the golden locks out for dry cleaning.

You are all on double secret probation.

 

[Quiet Observer]

A sign isn't "personal communication."


That "notice" is, explicitly, "No Trespassing" - signage that does, in fact, have force of law. "No guns" and "no trespassing" are not the same thing, under these statutes.

Further, you need to refer back to (b)(1), which states: "(b) A person who: (1) not having a contractual interest in the property, knowingly or intentionally enters the real property of another person after having been denied entry by the other person or that person's agent;"

A person entering a place of business for the purpose of conducting business has a "contractual interest in the property" - by definition.

So, no: that's not how that works.

A retail establishment has a right to determine who, and under what conditions they may enter. Granted the state can put some limitations on the establishment's power i regards to race, color, etc., but that is not part of this discussion.
From the referenced law:
"(c) A person has been denied entry under subsection (b)(1) when the person has been denied entry by means of:
(1) personal communication, oral or written;
(2) posting or exhibiting a notice at the main entrance in a manner that is either prescribed by law or likely to come to the attention of the public;
(3) a hearing authority or court order under IC 32-30-6, IC 32-30-7, IC 32-30-8, IC 36-7-9, or IC 36-7-36; or
(4) posting the property by placing identifying purple marks on trees or posts around the area where entry is denied."

The law requires only one method of denial, not all four. It does not require personal interaction between the trespasser and the owner or agent.

I cannot find where the law states that the words "No Trespassing" must be on the notice.

There is no contractual interest. Both parties must agree for a contract to exist. In this case the owner or agent has refused to agree to the presence of a gun. What contract was assumed to have existed with that person is void.

Contractual Interest Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

In the context of criminal trespass,

definitions.uslegal.com

 

[bobzilla]

oH nOeS i'S gUnNa gEt ReStED!

 

[Lpherr]

I wish we had a lawyer to help explain this.

(Purple) ?

 

[BugI02]

And states where signs DO hold force of law ALSO list exactly how the signs must be displayed in the legislation. Where, how big, etc. And it typically has to be a specific sign. Ours does not do that. And that is a BIG show stopper.

THIS ^^^ It is exactly that way here in Ohio, where unfortunately signs do have the force of law; but as you say the sign has to have specific language and be of a specific template and size

The signs also have to be posted at the outermost entrances. For years you could have made the argument that one could carry in the Columbus casino because the main entrance is double automatic doors about 15 feet apart and the sign was posted on a glass panel beside the innermost pair of doors

 

[BugI02]

I am the Robert Plant of men's lawyer hair.

Do you or have you ever known someone nicknamed Plaster Caster

 

[firecadet613]

A retail establishment has a right to determine who, and under what conditions they may enter. Granted the state can put some limitations on the establishment's power i regards to race, color, etc., but that is not part of this discussion.
From the referenced law:
"(c) A person has been denied entry under subsection (b)(1) when the person has been denied entry by means of:
(1) personal communication, oral or written;
(2) posting or exhibiting a notice at the main entrance in a manner that is either prescribed by law or likely to come to the attention of the public;
(3) a hearing authority or court order under IC 32-30-6, IC 32-30-7, IC 32-30-8, IC 36-7-9, or IC 36-7-36; or
(4) posting the property by placing identifying purple marks on trees or posts around the area where entry is denied."

The law requires only one method of denial, not all four. It does not require personal interaction between the trespasser and the owner or agent.

I cannot find where the law states that the words "No Trespassing" must be on the notice.

There is no contractual interest. Both parties must agree for a contract to exist. In this case the owner or agent has refused to agree to the presence of a gun. What contract was assumed to have existed with that person is void.

Contractual Interest Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

In the context of criminal trespass,

definitions.uslegal.com

That's all fine and dandy, but "no gun signs" do not hold the force of law in Indiana.

 

[ditcherman]

That's all fine and dandy, but "no gun signs" do not hold the force of law in Indiana.

I bet he still thinks he’s right though.

 

[bobzilla]

I bet he still thinks he’s right though.

I wouldn’t bet against you. I’m not really sure how “you must be asked to leave” is so hard to understand. But then again many think “shall not be infringed” is merely a suggestion to be ignored

 

[ditcherman]

I wouldn’t bet against you. I’m not really sure how “you must be asked to leave” is so hard to understand. But then again many think “shall not be infringed” is merely a suggestion to be ignored

I smell 2A but…