Business owners rights

A friend of mine sent me a text today, he had a question for me about business owners rights. Is question/experience was a bit odd so I thought I would put it in its own thread.

The conversation started with him asking me if a business could ask to see your OK handgun license.

I told him they could as there is nothing in state law preventing them from asking and they may have a policy to allow lawful carry after verifying a person had a permit. Not that I agree with this practice, but it is still private property and the business owners decision to make.

He told me he did not see a sign when he entered the store and he had no problem showing his permit. Now the odd part is the manager wrote down his name and his license number. He was told he was welcome to carry carry in the store and so he thanked the manager and went on about his business. I told him having my name and license number written down would have been a deal breaker for me and I would not have let it happen. Now it is possible that the manager could contact OSBI and file a complaint against him.

The store he was in was the Ross Dress for Less store located at I-240 and Penn in OKC. I told him to follow up with the corporate office on Monday and try to find out what their corporate policy is and to let them know what happened.

After he tells me what he finds out, I will add it to this thread.

File a complaint with OSBI ??

hrdware said:

Now it is possible that the manager could contact OSBI and file a complaint against him.

Click to expand...

First of all, as I understand OK law, the business owner is perfectly within their rights to bar OC'ers or CC'ers from their business. Many disagree, but I believe this right should be upheld. IMO, this falls within legitimate discretionary exercise of property rights by a business. I know there is much dispute about this - just one man's opinion.

Can the business owner ask for the carry permit ? I suppose; I don't know that it's prohibited by law. However, I'm not aware of anywhere in the Oklahoma Statutes that REQUIRES a permit holder to display it upon request from a private property owner (if I'm wrong, kindly send me to the section).

If the licensee refuses to show his license upon request, can the businessowner then eject him ? Again, I suppose; I don't know that it's prohibited by law.

But the part about OSBI ? A complaint ?? About what ?? Has to be a violation of a statute - what statute did he supposedly violate ?

Maybe you can expand on this a bit, if you know what his specific concerns are. If he's just generally concerned that he's going to "get in trouble", because of the interaction with the business owner, I'm not sure what would give rise to that trouble.

Assuming that the business owner is honest and ethical, I'd agree with you. But I would rather err on the side of caution and assume that if a business owner wants that information for no readily apparent reason, I would never show my card. I would rather err on the side that if someone asks for my card, they have a hidden agenda. Who knows? Maybe they don't like people with guns and want to make their lives miserable? Anyone can lie and file a false report. It happened to me except in my case, it was a false lawsuit for which I am suing for. I'll win. I was never served. The lawsuit was used to libel and slander me - aka defamation, so you see, I don't trust anyone's motives right off the bat. No one should show their card except to the police.

I cannot imagine any reason to show the card to any business owner for any reason. Either they allow or they don't allow guns. The card has nothing to do with it. If they suspect you're not legal, they can call the cops and let them check you out.

Just my humble opinion. :dude:

docachna said:

First of all, as I understand OK law, the business owner is perfectly within their rights to bar OC'ers or CC'ers from their business. Many disagree, but I believe this right should be upheld. IMO, this falls within legitimate discretionary exercise of property rights by a business. I know there is much dispute about this - just one man's opinion.

Can the business owner ask for the carry permit ? I suppose; I don't know that it's prohibited by law. However, I'm not aware of anywhere in the Oklahoma Statutes that REQUIRES a permit holder to display it upon request from a private property owner (if I'm wrong, kindly send me to the section).

If the licensee refuses to show his license upon request, can the businessowner then eject him ? Again, I suppose; I don't know that it's prohibited by law.

But the part about OSBI ? A complaint ?? About what ?? Has to be a violation of a statute - what statute did he supposedly violate ?

Maybe you can expand on this a bit, if you know what his specific concerns are. If he's just generally concerned that he's going to "get in trouble", because of the interaction with the business owner, I'm not sure what would give rise to that trouble.

Click to expand...

First off it seems very hypocritical that we supposedly care so much about business owners rights but lawful citizens rights mean nothing, aka the 2nd (shall not be infringed, yet there are laws on our books doing this very thing) as well as the 5A (Shall not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process and legislation is not due process). So if your not a business owner then your nobody! That's bull!!!

I understand maintaining a certain level of control of ones property as long as it does not infringe on someone else's right at the same time ( by that I'm talking about private property open to the public set up to do business with anyone, not private property for personal living or private property set up for doing business with a select or paid membership). As an example we have a right to free speech everyone knows that but you only have that right as long as you are not infringing on someone else(slander, defamation, abuse, etc). So how then is it ok for someone that has a place of business open to the general populous not a private club to deny someone else a right not only a natural right but a right affirmed by the constitution. So if that right means nothing then there right as a supposed land/business owner means nothing, in other words if the foundational law means nothing or carries no weight then anything built on top of it is a façade and cannot be solid and stand alone.

Secondly all these no gun signs should either say "No illegal weapons" or should say "No legal weapons here, we support the criminal element not the lawful element":banghead:
And these employers that have anti firearms policies are basically saying they don't trust there law abiding employees and if you don't trust them then they shouldn't be on staff. If you treat people like dogs they will act like dogs, if you don't care about them and theirs they will not care about you and yours and will only show if at all for a paycheck and not the betterment of the company.

Thirdly any and all politicians that write legislation that violates the constitution of the US should be labeled as domestic terrorist and should be treated as such them those ya who's would think twice about " just write laws that suit us and those donating money and don't worry about the morality or legality that's why we have courts" bs.

You analogy to free speech fails, since no one really believes that I should be able to walk into Home Depot and begin telling customers about better deals at Lowes, or that I couldn't be asked to leave if I started reciting the Declaration in the middle of Starbucks.

There are many reasons businesses do certain things they do, and fear is one of these.

As to the OP, I'm sure a business owner could ask for a drivers license if you were driving on his property. The regulation of carrying by licensure means that it is not a right. The constitutionally-recognized right is to own, possess, and use arms in the defense of the state, and based on SCOTUS rulings, defense of yourself and your property. I do not believe that this right is generally accepted as allowing carry anywhere at any time.

docachna said:

First of all, as I understand OK law, the business owner is perfectly within their rights to bar OC'ers or CC'ers from their business. Many disagree, but I believe this right should be upheld. IMO, this falls within legitimate discretionary exercise of property rights by a business. I know there is much dispute about this - just one man's opinion.

Can the business owner ask for the carry permit ? I suppose; I don't know that it's prohibited by law. However, I'm not aware of anywhere in the Oklahoma Statutes that REQUIRES a permit holder to display it upon request from a private property owner (if I'm wrong, kindly send me to the section).

If the licensee refuses to show his license upon request, can the businessowner then eject him ? Again, I suppose; I don't know that it's prohibited by law.

But the part about OSBI ? A complaint ?? About what ?? Has to be a violation of a statute - what statute did he supposedly violate ?

Maybe you can expand on this a bit, if you know what his specific concerns are. If he's just generally concerned that he's going to "get in trouble", because of the interaction with the business owner, I'm not sure what would give rise to that trouble.

Click to expand...

Your first point I agree with, it is up to the property owner.

Your second point, I agree with. Nothing prevents a business owner from asking to see it, and nothing requires the permit holder to display it up request of the business owner. Not displaying might get you asked to leave, but that's another rabbit hole.

A complaint does not have to be a statute violation. I can complain about anything, but legal action has to be a violation of statute. This manager could now call and complain and say my friend was acting suspicious, or was making others uncomfortable, or just about anything else short of a shooting.

I don't know that he has any specific concerns. I was just mentioning that I would have concerns had it been me and a business owner wanted to see my permit and write down my name and license number.

Robert318 said:

First off it seems very hypocritical that we supposedly care so much about business owners rights but lawful citizens rights mean nothing, aka the 2nd (shall not be infringed, yet there are laws on our books doing this very thing) as well as the 5A (Shall not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process and legislation is not due process). So if your not a business owner then your nobody! That's bull!!!

I understand maintaining a certain level of control of ones property as long as it does not infringe on someone else's right at the same time ( by that I'm talking about private property open to the public set up to do business with anyone, not private property for personal living or private property set up for doing business with a select or paid membership). As an example we have a right to free speech everyone knows that but you only have that right as long as you are not infringing on someone else(slander, defamation, abuse, etc). So how then is it ok for someone that has a place of business open to the general populous not a private club to deny someone else a right not only a natural right but a right affirmed by the constitution. So if that right means nothing then there right as a supposed land/business owner means nothing, in other words if the foundational law means nothing or carries no weight then anything built on top of it is a façade and cannot be solid and stand alone.

Secondly all these no gun signs should either say "No illegal weapons" or should say "No legal weapons here, we support the criminal element not the lawful element":banghead:
And these employers that have anti firearms policies are basically saying they don't trust there law abiding employees and if you don't trust them then they shouldn't be on staff. If you treat people like dogs they will act like dogs, if you don't care about them and theirs they will not care about you and yours and will only show if at all for a paycheck and not the betterment of the company.

Thirdly any and all politicians that write legislation that violates the constitution of the US should be labeled as domestic terrorist and should be treated as such them those ya who's would think twice about " just write laws that suit us and those donating money and don't worry about the morality or legality that's why we have courts" bs.

Click to expand...

The constitution and the bill of rights protects people from the government. It guarantees people certain protections from the government...not from private individuals. I have freedom of speech....unless the owner of the place where I am doesn't want me there....telling people where to get better deals. I have the right to bear arms....unless the owner of the location I'm at doesn't want me in possession of them while on their property. I have the right of protection against illegal search and seizure...until the loss prevention guy stops me and frisks me because he thinks I'm trying to steel something.

Again, the bill of rights is protection from the government.

nonameisgood said:

You analogy to free speech fails, since no one really believes that I should be able to walk into Home Depot and begin telling customers about better deals at Lowes, or that I couldn't be asked to leave if I started reciting the Declaration in the middle of Starbucks.

There are many reasons businesses do certain things they do, and fear is one of these.

As to the OP, I'm sure a business owner could ask for a drivers license if you were driving on his property. The regulation of carrying by licensure means that it is not a right. The constitutionally-recognized right is to own, possess, and use arms in the defense of the state, and based on SCOTUS rulings, defense of yourself and your property. I do not believe that this right is generally accepted as allowing carry anywhere at any time.

Click to expand...

As to the OP they could ask for your drivers license, your carry permit, and they could ask what color your underwear is since technically there is no laws saying they can't and if the color of your clothes didn't match what they decided to allow or not allow they could tell you to leave. But there also is no law saying you have to show them anything.

As to free speech who doesn't believe that if they want to advocate for a competing business that they can't do exactly what your saying except that as soon as the owner finds out that they wouldn't run you out!! But then there is peaceful protest that protects the right of people to tell others of an injustice.

My example is that if a business owner told people that they can't talk at all in their store (without people being slanderous or using profanity regardless of subject of which is a natural right affirmed by the constitution ) that people would not stand for it and that it would cause an uproar!! But since its the scary inanimate object called a gun that no one really needs anymore its ok to do that very thing:banghead:!!

And the many I know feel the same way but are scared to say it. The fact that we applied and got the permit shows that we respect the law but the scotus ruling in the case Heller vs DC that says that the 2A aside from the militia the only lawful use for protection is in the home is ludicrous in that no one stays home at all times and that the people's right to self defense is not only applicable at home but anywhere and everywhere one goes since the individual safety of ones self and ones loved ones is their own responsibility. No one will protect you save you alone and contrary to what many believe the police do NOT have to protect you. Again just because we may or may not agree with certain laws or rulings doesn't mean that we don't respect the law. Also there are provisions in the constitution that provide that unjust laws are not enforceable or laws that carry weight, which a similar version is about to be written in OK law reaffirming this that is called if I'm not mistaken the freedom firearms act, basically nullifying any federal gun ban on AR's and high capacity mags provided they are made in OK and they stay here.

Thou I do agree with certain business owners rights I disagree with the right to deny legal firearms from law abiding citizens they certainly don't deny police from carrying (police carry guns too and make bad decisions too some times but they are not the only good guys and the signs don't lay out that exception but is just an unspoken one). I would be more inclined to agree if they said no unlawful weapons even though criminals don't care about their signs or rules. At least they would be supporting lawful citizens instead of criminals.

OK so now we have agreed about the 2nd amendment. Now for a serious question.

If the purpose of the second amendment is to protect the people against a government overpowering, overstepping it's boundries, then why are we just sitting here taking what they've been dishing out for the past 4 and a half years vastly eroding our freedoms and our rights, instead of using our 2nd amendment rights to stop that cold in its tracks?

Simple question. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

hrdware said:

The constitution and the bill of rights protects people from the government. It guarantees people certain protections from the government...not from private individuals. I have freedom of speech....unless the owner of the place where I am doesn't want me there....telling people where to get better deals. I have the right to bear arms....unless the owner of the location I'm at doesn't want me in possession of them while on their property. I have the right of protection against illegal search and seizure...until the loss prevention guy stops me and frisks me because he thinks I'm trying to steel something.

Again, the bill of rights is protection from the government.

Click to expand...

Yes it is supposed to be about protection from government but as we can all see that's not working out to well, they are still writing laws that contradict the bill of rights and or rewording with clever verbiage to achieves their ends.

Though the laws say they can deny lawful firearms carried by lawful citizens I don't agree that should be allowed unless they provide for their protection. But regardless of whether I agree or not it is what it is, and I would never do that in any business of mine (past,present,or future). Also since I disagree, that is exactly why I refuse to give them any money or even enter unarmed and will only do so when I'm forced to because of availability or some laws (as with state buildings, schools, etc) or because my employer.

Seeing I am pressed for time I did not read everything so my apologies if I cover something twice. In regards to the law.

I as a private business can ask to see anyones license if I chose. I can ask for anything. I can even ask for a social security card. The flip side is you as a citizen are not obligated to show me anything. You can tell me to go to hell if you chose as the law does not require you to show anything to anyone except a police officer when in an official investigation (Not just a walk up and ask to see your card scenario).

Businesses have alot of rights but if there is no posting of no firearms then they have to officially ask you to leave or there is no ground to stand on for any offense if you simply walked in wearing a legal firearm.

Now had this have been me I would have simply laughed and walked out of the store but thats just me.

And to the question of can he file a complaint with OSBI? On what grounds? No sign was posted and the carrier was compliant. No laws were broken and OSBI has more to worry about then teary eyed people who simply cant understand the 2nd ammendment.

Id write more but got to split!

It seems I may have not made clear the intent of this thread.

The intent was not to debate if the business was able or within it's rights to ask to see my friends license. They are entirely.

The intent was to bring notice to the fact that this is the first time I have heard of a business doing this since the law went into effect. It was also to bring notice to the fact that the business wrote down his personal information for untold reasons.

I myself would have left before allowing them to write down my information. Depending on what I was after, I may have left when they asked to see the permit initially.

hrdware said:

It seems I may have not made clear the intent of this thread.

The intent was not to debate if the business was able or within it's rights to ask to see my friends license. They are entirely.

The intent was to bring notice to the fact that this is the first time I have heard of a business doing this since the law went into effect. It was also to bring notice to the fact that the business wrote down his personal information for untold reasons.

I myself would have left before allowing them to write down my information. Depending on what I was after, I may have left when they asked to see the permit initially.

Click to expand...

My apologies for getting off topic, and yes you did bring to light what businesses have a right to do be it that we agree with those rights or not and whether or not we have to comply if we choose to patronize their business. And when you bring up that topic you know that there are a lot of people that really dislike the anti gun signs that are put up because of misinformation, emotions, and misplaced judgement.