"No weapons" signs and stores

[Hoosierbuck]

Reality makes the gun a target as opposed to the banana. Logically it should not be any different, and in law school there are lots of lawyers that come up with neat thinking exercises like this. They are called professors, and most of them are theoretical lawyers, not walk into court and prove a case lawyers.
I am not saying that I agree with the line of reasoning that I am discussing, but it does nobody any good for everyone to say that things are the way we think they should be, if they are not, in fact. I think there is a very real possibility that some prosecutors file on the facts we have discussed. I really would like to do some research on this, and maybe I will one of these days. My point is that there is a logical line of thought that leads to the conclusion that PC exists for an arrest under these circumstances. I have fleshed that out for your consideration. You folks can really do what you want, but it's just not as clear cut as some have stated or implied that you can carry in contravention of a "no guns" sign with impunity. I am reluctant to get involved in all of these discussions, but sometimes I just feel damn near obligated to at least say that what some are posting as fact may not be, or may not be in all jurisdictions or under all circumstances.
I have said my part, thanks to those that would consider it.

 

[jeremy]

A No Gun Allowed Sign falls into the same realm as the No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service Signs...

 

[ATM]

YouTube - Fast Times at Ridgemont High - Spicoli No Shirt No Shoes No Dice

 

[Hammerhead]

IANAL, and you're right, some Wile E. Prosecutor could attempt to prosecute in any way they wish. It may not stick, but it'd be annoying.

I'd still ignore stupid signage because it's "company policy" and not "the law", at least in IN. Since they hold no weight under the law, screw 'em. Ask me to leave and I'll be happy to take my money elsewhere.

 

[Al B]

I just give them a No Firearm=No Money card.

 

[indytechnerd]

This type of thing shows up pretty regularly here. I'll reiterate what I posted then...

IC 35-43-2-2
Criminal trespass; denial of entry; permission to enter; exceptions
Sec. 2. (a) 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;
(2) not having a contractual interest in the property, knowingly or intentionally refuses to leave the real property of another person after having been asked to leave by the other person or that person's agent;
...
commits criminal trespass, a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if it is committed on a scientific research facility, on a key facility, on a facility belonging to a public utility (as defined in IC 32-24-1-5.9(a)), on school property, or on a school bus or the person has a prior unrelated conviction for an offense under this section concerning the same property.

Being asked to leave and saying 'no' or not leaving makes it illegal for me to be there, regardless of why I was asked to leave. Whether I've got a gun on my hip, a small army of monkey following me around, or a swastika tattooed on my head while being there is irrelevant.

 

[schafe]

Whatever, I was just throwing out there for consideration this particular deputy prosecutor's thoughts on the topic. Some folks might be interested, some just want to argue. Do with it what you will. Arguing that you weren't actually on notice isn't usually a big seller to juries in my experience, but you can try it if you have to.


...

Of course, my observation was intended to get a logical response from someone who might have some expertise in the area (ie,you),not to irritate, (as I percieve from your response).
Seems to a layman like me, that court cases are arguments of law. My posts are from my personal observations. One of those observations was that in more common tresspass prosecutions, that the "on notice" aspect whereof you speak has been so important that property owners increase and relocate signage immediately after losing a case.
From where I sit, that means it might be validly arguable that signage might not be sufficient to put the firearm carrier on notice, or maybe decided upon certain specific criteria.
I truly hope that you do research the issue and post your findings.......(both pro and con), and help LTCH holders to make informed decisions in these situations. Isn't that why we're on here, anyway?

 

[silkpoet]

Anything can be used as a weapon. Martial artists are themselves weapons. I guess they don't want anyone in the store. Interesting business model...

 

[CampingJosh]

If I have a reasonable alternative, I choose the alternative.

If there isn't an alternative within a reasonable distance, I just ignore the sign. Worst that can happen is that I'll have to use the weapon to defend myself or someone else and the store is mad that I'm still alive. But I'm still alive.

 

[femurphy77]

Without reading all previous posts; What Sign?

 

[Gary Slider]

Handgunlaw.us seeking Information

indytechnerd post with the Trespass law is what I am seeking informaton about.
I am adding Gun Sign Laws to each states page at Handgunlaw.us and I have Indiana as the signs having the force of law because of that very law as quoted above. It didn't take long after I posted that change to the Indiana Page at Handgunlaw.us before I heard I was wrong.

Could I get a few answers from the members here.

In Indiana if a place has a sign that is not listed in IN law as being off limits the sign has no power of law? That is they have to ask you to leave and only by not leaving you can be charged?

Someone mentioned a legal sign in a post. Does Indiana have a sign defined in their law for No Gun Signs? If there is a law on signs can you give me the statute?

Any assistance you could give Handgunlaw.us in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you and

 

[Sylvain]

In Indiana if a place has a sign that is not listed in IN law as being off limits the sign has no power of law? That is they have to ask you to leave and only by not leaving you can be charged?

That is right, a sign is only a store policy just like a sign who says you must wear a shirt to enter the store.

 

[LawDog76]

indytechnerd post with the Trespass law is what I am seeking informaton about.
I am adding Gun Sign Laws to each states page at Handgunlaw.us and I have Indiana as the signs having the force of law because of that very law as quoted above. It didn't take long after I posted that change to the Indiana Page at Handgunlaw.us before I heard I was wrong.

Could I get a few answers from the members here.

In Indiana if a place has a sign that is not listed in IN law as being off limits the sign has no power of law? That is they have to ask you to leave and only by not leaving you can be charged?

Someone mentioned a legal sign in a post. Does Indiana have a sign defined in their law for No Gun Signs? If there is a law on signs can you give me the statute?

Any assistance you could give Handgunlaw.us in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you and

If you truly want a good answer, call a few Prosecutors' Offices. You're going to get mixed answers on here just like if you asked a group of Police officers. In the end, it's the Prosecutor that the gun owner has to face in court. A Criminal Trespass charge is what a person is most likely to face.

 

[Gary Slider]

Read most of the replies to this thread and they run the gambit from what sign to Oh My God a Sign! Actually asking a LEO or PA will get you the most incorrect answers. The more I hear the more I can make a decision on what the law is. Thanks for the reply

 

[LawDog76]

One other comment. If you come to forums like this one for legal advise instead of a Law Office, I really question the integrity of your site Handgunlaw.us.

 

[Gary Slider]

Like I said just looking for input. I read the post about Legal Signs and that is what got my attention as I have not seen that in Indiana Law. But I can't see everything.
As for asking on a forum it never hurts to ask. That is how you find things out. There is a law on trespass that I have listed on the Indiana Page at Handgunlaw.us and have Indiana listed as a state that No Gun Signs have the force of law just because of the way the trespass law reads. But No Gun Signs is a big question I see everywhere. I have thought about adding that info to every states page for the last two years. The reason I didn't do it for so long is because of the lack of laws in some states and that Trespass laws would most likely apply in states that don't have a sign law like Texas etc. No Gun Signs are going to be the hardest thing to confirm of all the info on Handgunlaw.us. But to find out you have to ask. Might just find something out.

 

[Sylvain]

The more I hear the more I can make a decision on what the law is.

You dont "make a decision" on what the law is.You know the law or you dont.
Then you can make a decision about fallowing the law or not but you dont make decisions about the law.The law is the law and there is nothing to decide about it unless you are the person making the law.Which you are not.

 

[finity]

Come on guys.

He's just trying to get the best information he can for his website. I'd say overall it's a VERY useful & informative site. Could there be mistakes? sure. There's mistakes on even the governments own websites sometimes. We definitely know that LEO's & Prosecutors aren't the infallible fount of information that we should would expect.

Until you read some court decision in black & white, all you can do is read the law for yourself &, yes, then DECIDE what you think the law means. I don't think Gary is saying his website is the ultimate arbiter of gunlaws in IN. I think he's saying that with more information he can at least make a reasoned decision to suggest (or not) that carrying into a "no guns" posted business is probably tresspassing (or not).

Gary,

I think the general consensus is that:

- a generic "no guns" sign is not an automatically enforceable tresspass. IOW, they hold no weight of law.

- There could be some signs that are worded specifically enough (though the wording is NOT statutorily mandated) to consitute specific denial of entry (per one lawyer on here a while back).

- At least one prosecutor WILL charge you with trespassing for taking a gun onto a property that has a "no guns" sign (read upthread for his reasoning).

- This specific facet of the trespassing law has not been tested by any court in IN as far as anybody here has pointed out so there has been no "official" declaration as to what the legal weight of a "no guns" sign really is.

Thanks for your efforts & website.

 

[Gary Slider]

That is what I was looking for. I Read most of the posts in this thread and someone mentioned a Legal Sign. That is what made me post. But no one has mentioned the signs again except for you and you said there was not specific law on what signs could look like.

As for making a decision. I do make decisions on what goes on Handgunlaw.us. I look for people who have some authority. In Michigan an attorney that gives time to MCGRO wrote that Michigan signs have the force of law. There are many in Michigan who say they don't. What the attorney wrote is on the Michigan page and Michigan is carried as signs having the force of law.

I can not find a well organized RKBA group in Indiana. You have MCGRO in MI, WVCDL in WV, VCDL in Virginia. Arizona and Georgia have strong RKBA Groups. California even has some very active groups that have attorneys as members. IN doesn't have such a group so you look where you can.

 

[revance]

Quote from the Indiana Handgun Law book by Bryan Lee Ciyou, Esq.

Retail Establishments With "No Handguns Allowed" Posted at Entry:

As a possessor with a real property interest, a retailer, has the right to limit, and qualify the right to enter the property, subject to not carrying a handgun. It would be improper to enter, and the Licensee would be subject to ejection for possession of a handgun thereat. Failure to leave once requested, would subject the Licensee to arrest for criminal trespass.