"No weapons" sign at Ale Emporium?

[actaeon277]

Antigunners are sometimes veterans too. So are some.murderers and rapists.
Their opinion matters to me as much as the last crap I took

This.
Veterans are just like society.
Sinners and Saints.
Those that run towards gunfire, those that run away.
Right and left.
Democrat and Republican (and others).
Heroes and Zeros.
Even those that claim medals they don't have, or worked in a job they didn't.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Liberty at the expense of others? No
If you want to stop people from exercising their rights when they cross through your door then create a club with memberships. But a public business should not be able to stop people from exercising their rights to self defense even of they have a choice to visit or not. No one intelligent would obey that sign anyways

I gotta take you to task on this one TT. Doc is right. No one's rights are infringed if a private property owner bans guns on his private property. The patron has the liberty to either enter, exit, or avoid a business. The owner of the business should be allowed, in all cases (without exception) to refuse or provide service to whomever they wish. In our relatively forward thinking society, this would br best reconciled by free market.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I gotta take you to task on this one TT. Doc is right. No one's rights are infringed if a private property owner bans guns on his private property. The patron has the liberty to either enter, exit, or avoid a business. The owner of the business should be allowed, in all cases (without exception) to refuse or provide service to whomever they wish. In our relatively forward thinking society, this would br best reconciled by free market.

Dang Kut, I have to agree. And that doesn't happen too often. There are a few businesses I will not patronize because of the owner's beliefs, free market at work.

 

[rhino]

Here is the most important point in this entire issue: Union Jack's pizza is better than Ale Emporium's.

As an aside, I've open carried in Union Jack several times over the years with no issues, but not recently.

 

[jagee]

Here is the most important point in this entire issue: Union Jack's pizza is better than Ale Emporium's.

As an aside, I've open carried in Union Jack several times over the years with no issues, but not recently.

Pizza is not in question. Hermanaki wings on the other hand...well...

 

[Trigger Time]

So a law should be passed stopping business owners from exercising their constitutionally protected rights?



I can agree with this, but I also think a property owner/renter should be able to ban whoever they wish for any or no reason. Business or not.



Why do you think your rights supersede theirs? Do you have the right to allow or disallow what you want on your property? If so why shouldn't they? Do you think you should be forced to allow mommies demanding action/blm/kkk/wbc/you name it to set up shop on your front lawn? If not, why not? They are simply exercising their Constitutional rights...





Really? The Constitution thinks that? Can you show me where? The Constitution is a grant of limited powers and some restrictions on the govt. Not private individuals.



I agree.



They are not disarming you, they are making rules for you to come onto their property. And no, there is a very big difference between private property and public property.



Actually per most of the lawyers on here a properly worded sign could have force of law, trespassing. Trespassing law in Indiana allows for a sign to deny entry, the standard gun with a circle and a slash does not do so. A properly worded sign just might. Something along the lines of this "Firearms prohibited on this property, anyone carrying a firearm is denied entry".

And they are inviting you in under certain conditions, same as a dress code. Should dress codes be made illegal?

Wrong. No trespassing Signs in Indiana do not hold up in court. At least that's what the ingo Leo's have said.many times.

 

[Trigger Time]

I gotta take you to task on this one TT. Doc is right. No one's rights are infringed if a private property owner bans guns on his private property. The patron has the liberty to either enter, exit, or avoid a business. The owner of the business should be allowed, in all cases (without exception) to refuse or provide service to whomever they wish. In our relatively forward thinking society, this would br best reconciled by free market.

Maybe so. If that's the courts interpretation on it then so be it as it should be.
However I won't be obeying any signs. Like I said, no one will be the wiser

 

[peterock]

Pizza is not in question. Hermanaki wings on the other hand...well...

This is my issue^^^^


it was mentioned that a well written sign could hold law? Would you consider this one of those examples?

 

[Denny347]

I hope the state passes a law banning businesses from stopping people from exercising their constitutionaly protected rights

I sure hope the State doesn't start telling people what they can do on their private property...nope. It's private property and they can manage it as they see fit, as it should be.

 

[IndyTom]

This is my issue^^^^


it was mentioned that a well written sign could hold law? Would you consider this one of those examples?

Not in Indiana. In some other states, if the properly worded/formatted/posted/whatever sign is in place, it does carry the weight of law meaning that you are breaking a law by ignoring it.

 

[lonehoosier]

Here's a great thread. https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/carry-issues-self-defense/58317-you-going-jail.html

I've had a few requests, here's my next "legal scenario."

You're entering a local tavern when you see a large sign on the front door that says the following:

"ABSOLUTELY NO FIREARMS!!
ANYONE CARRYING A FIREARM IS EXPRESSLY DENIED ENTRY TO THESE PREMISES.
IF YOU CARRY A GUN INTO THIS BUILDING YOU ARE SUBJECT TO IMMEDIATE ARREST AND PROSECUTION."​

You have your License to Carry Handgun, so you ignore the sign and enter the tavern. You have several beers at the bar.

As you stand up to go to the bathroom, your untucked shirt rides up on your hip and a waitress notices your Glock M30 .45 in your IWB holster.

She reports you to the owner.

No one says anything to you - the owner just call the cops.

A police officer arrives, waits for back-up, then enters the bar and confronts you. He takes possession of your Glock. He asks to see your LTCH.

Then he asks you if you've been drinking.

You show him your LTCH, and tell him the truth - you've had several beers.

Are you going to jail?

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Wrong. No trespassing Signs in Indiana do not hold up in court. At least that's what the ingo Leo's have said.many times.

Care to make a little wager on that? I do know several LEOs that have stated the prosecutor in their jurisdiction wouldn't press charges, but I never heard them say that a no trespassing sign wouldn't hold up in court. Try reading this IN court of appeals case and tell me that no trespassing signs do not hold up in court in IN. The guy was standing on a gate with a no trespassing sign on it. He was found guilty and his conviction was upheld. The court of appeals found that even if he didn't actually set foot on the property it was likely that he violated the airspace.
ALVES v. STATE | FindLaw

Not in Indiana. In some other states, if the properly worded/formatted/posted/whatever sign is in place, it does carry the weight of law meaning that you are breaking a law by ignoring it.

In some other states it is specifically unlawful to carry past a no firearms sign, I'm not discussing a "no firearms" sign I'm talking about a "denial of entry" sign. Here is the relevant section of the IC.

IC 35-43-2-2
Criminal trespass; denial of entry; permission to enter; exceptions
Sec. 2.
(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;
commits criminal trespass, a Class A misdemeanor.

(c) A person has been denied entry under subsection (b)(1) when
the person has been denied entry by means of:
(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;

Now tell me does this sign specifically deny entry?

Firearms prohibited on this property.
Anyone in possession of firearm(s) is hereby denied entry.
Anyone entering beyond this point while in possession of a firearm
will be trespassing pursuant to IC 35-43-2-2

As I stated in my OP quite a few attorneys on INGO have stated that a properly worded sign would meet the requirements of the law, including one of the foremost if not the foremost firearm law attorney on IN law, a criminal defense/former prosecutor, and I believe a current prosecutor. Heck I don't know of any attorney on INGO that has stated differently.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Here's a great thread. https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/carry-issues-self-defense/58317-you-going-jail.html

Thanks for posting that. I was too lazy to try looking it up.

 

[brotherbill3]

Well - this is "Dis-Concert-ing" - as I (in my normal state of being on a Weekend "Date Night") will be there Friday to see of a friend leaving the band ("The best band in Indy": Stella Luna) playing this Friday night.

Its a good thing I don't, can't, or won't read, and don't look for, signs on or around doors.

As I've been there in the same normal state of being, when the same band comes and plays, often over the last several years.

 

[chipbennett]

Sure. You have the right to defend yourself. BUT, you don't have the right to have a gun on someone else's private property IMO.

my property rights supersede your second amendment rights when you are on my property.

of course .gov has screwed that whole concept up. Me telling you no guns has nothing to do with "shall not be infringed" by government. Constitution sets limits on government, not citizens.

No, they don't.

You can welcome a person on your property, or you can trespass that person from your property. But so long as you welcome that person on your property, you do not have any special authority over that person's liberty or lawful exercise of rights.

In other words: you are fully entitled to ask me to leave (and I am beholden to do so), but you are not entitled to demand that I disarm (nor am I beholden to do so, if you so demand).

 

[Trigger Time]

Care to make a little wager on that? I do know several LEOs that have stated the prosecutor in their jurisdiction wouldn't press charges, but I never heard them say that a no trespassing sign wouldn't hold up in court. Try reading this IN court of appeals case and tell me that no trespassing signs do not hold up in court in IN. The guy was standing on a gate with a no trespassing sign on it. He was found guilty and his conviction was upheld. The court of appeals found that even if he didn't actually set foot on the property it was likely that he violated the airspace.
ALVES v. STATE | FindLaw



In some other states it is specifically unlawful to carry past a no firearms sign, I'm not discussing a "no firearms" sign I'm talking about a "denial of entry" sign. Here is the relevant section of the IC.


Now tell me does this sign specifically deny entry?



As I stated in my OP quite a few attorneys on INGO have stated that a properly worded sign would meet the requirements of the law, including one of the foremost if not the foremost firearm law attorney on IN law, a criminal defense/former prosecutor, and I believe a current prosecutor. Heck I don't know of any attorney on INGO that has stated differently.

Well like you Even said, probably wouldn't be pursued. I don't trespass anyways but if I want to carry a gun I'm gonna do it. Even cities like Chicago that bam rdiggt to carry are in violation of the law. Each person has to decide what they stand for or dont. It's a personal choice. Actually for me there's no choice to it.

 

[Kutnupe14]

No, they don't.

You can welcome a person on your property, or you can trespass that person from your property. But so long as you welcome that person on your property, you do not have any special authority over that person's liberty or lawful exercise of rights.

In other words: you are fully entitled to ask me to leave (and I am beholden to do so), but you are not entitled to demand that I disarm (nor am I beholden to do so, if you so demand).

Yes, they most certainly do.... the caveat being, that a sign stating "No firearms" plainly doesn't welcome you if you are carrying a firearm.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

No, they don't.

You can welcome a person on your property, or you can trespass that person from your property. But so long as you welcome that person on your property, you do not have any special authority over that person's liberty or lawful exercise of rights.

In other words: you are fully entitled to ask me to leave (and I am beholden to do so), but you are not entitled to demand that I disarm (nor am I beholden to do so, if you so demand).

Yes they do. For instance I can restrict your free speech on my property. Now if you do not follow the rules of my welcome I my only legal option may be to revoke your welcome, but that does not mean that my property rights do not override your rights while on my property.

Well - this is "Dis-Concert-ing" - as I (in my normal state of being on a Weekend "Date Night") will be there Friday to see of a friend leaving the band ("The best band in Indy": Stella Luna) playing this Friday night.

Its a good thing I don't, can't, or won't read, and don't look for, signs on or around doors.

As I've been there in the same normal state of being, when the same band comes and plays, often over the last several years.

Well like you Even said, probably wouldn't be pursued. I don't trespass anyways but if I want to carry a gun I'm gonna do it. Even cities like Chicago that bam rdiggt to carry are in violation of the law. Each person has to decide what they stand for or dont. It's a personal choice. Actually for me there's no choice to it.

I didn't say it probably wouldn't be pursued, I stated some jurisdictions most likely wouldn't pursue. There is a large difference.

You state you don't trespass, what do you call it when you go on someone else property when they don't want you there? Or if you ignore a sign like I described?

Yes, they most certainly do.... the caveat being, that a sign stating "No firearms" plainly doesn't welcome you if you are carrying a firearm.

Agreed.

 

[chipbennett]

Yes, they most certainly do.... the caveat being, that a sign stating "No firearms" plainly doesn't welcome you if you are carrying a firearm.

A sign has no agency. A sign can neither welcome nor revoke that welcome.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

A sign has no agency. A sign can neither welcome nor revoke that welcome.

The sign conveys the owners wishes. As such the owner can welcome or revoke that welcome by means of writing.