• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Apache Junction McDonald's No Guns Policy

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
One of the most common excuses against either form of carry in establishments which sell alcohol for on-site consumption is the "guns and alcohol don't mix" argument
When I lived in Virginia, I could openly wear my gun, walk into a bar, or any place that served liquor (food service was not a requirement) sit down and have a drink. Several states are that way. Virginia had a blood alcohol level restriction like for driving.

Sadly too many gun owners have bought into passing laws telling others what they can or cannot do when carrying a firearm. That slippery slope started when gun owners accepted that certain guns should not be possessed by certain people and it was OK to beg the government for the "privilege" (that's what is says on the Arizona permit) to discreetly carry a gun.

The group who fought the hardest against Restaurant Carry in Arizona was the "hospitality" (restaurants and bars) lobby. They preferred to be able to shrug their shoulders and say the STATE won't allow you to wear a gun in my business.

Once you remove that excuse, they are faced with upsetting customers and must weigh which ones they care the least about losing as a source of income. Most choose to tell gun owners "we don't serve your kind here."

Fred
 

The Trickster

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
216
Location
Arizona
Since we got on the topic of consuming alcohol and carrying, is anyone aware of any laws concerning drinking a couple of beers while out fishing and carrying? I always carry when I'm fishing and I've never really given any thought to the subject.
 

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
Since we got on the topic of consuming alcohol and carrying, is anyone aware of any laws concerning drinking a couple of beers while out fishing and carrying? I always carry when I'm fishing and I've never really given any thought to the subject.

I couldn't find anything in ARS Title 13 (Criminal Code), Article 31 (Weapons and Explosives), Section 02 (Misconduct involving weapons; defenses; classification; definitions) about drinking and carrying.

Here's a link to ARS 13-3102:
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/03102.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS

The only applicable statute I found was in Title 4 (Alcoholic Beverages), Article 3 (Prohibitions):

"20. For a person to consume spirituous liquor in a public place, thoroughfare or gathering. The license of a licensee permitting a violation of this paragraph on the premises shall be subject to revocation. This paragraph does not apply to the sale of spirituous liquors on the premises of and by an on-sale retailer. This paragraph also does not apply to a person consuming beer from a broken package in a public recreation area or on private property with permission of the owner or lessor or on the walkways surrounding such private property or to a person consuming beer or wine from a broken package in a public recreation area as part of a special event or festival that is conducted under a license secured pursuant to section 4-203.02 or 4-203.03." - ARS 4-244

I don't drink, so I never gave it any thought. Not good for me to remain ignorant of the laws though. Thanks for giving me a reason to search! :)
 
Last edited:

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
Since we got on the topic of consuming alcohol and carrying, is anyone aware of any laws concerning drinking a couple of beers while out fishing and carrying? I always carry when I'm fishing and I've never really given any thought to the subject.
I'm pretty sure there are no laws about consuming alcohol while armed, except for the prohibition when in an establishment that serves booze.

If you are going to get blotto on your couch at home and have to defend yourself with or without a gun, you can bet everything you own (you will anyway with attorney fees) that the issue will come up regardless of the legality.

Fred
 

The Trickster

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
216
Location
Arizona
I'm pretty sure there are no laws about consuming alcohol while armed, except for the prohibition when in an establishment that serves booze.

If you are going to get blotto on your couch at home and have to defend yourself with or without a gun, you can bet everything you own (you will anyway with attorney fees) that the issue will come up regardless of the legality.

Fred

Indeed. The way I look at it is the first (and most important) step in a survival situation is to survive; all subsequent steps can be taken afterwards.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
It's obvious from the git-go that this particular Micky D's franchise owner doesn't want guns in his place of business. It's private property, subject to trespass. 'Simple solution. Go someplace else.
 

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,508
Location
Secret Bunker
It's obvious from the git-go that this particular Micky D's franchise owner doesn't want guns in his place of business. It's private property, subject to trespass. 'Simple solution. Go someplace else.

That is true...however, if they (most businesses in AZ) chose to post crime empowerment signs your solution is do nothing? That will yield zero results. The simply fact is these places are a private entity that chooses to prohibit the very people they should want as customers. To even purchase a firearm from a dealer, one is subjected to a NICS background check. Many of us also have CCW permits - meaning we passed background checks and took training. So in short - these places don't want law abiding citizens who have never been convicted of a crime? To boot - we are one of the safest demographics on the planet! Can they say that about the other customers they welcome with open arms? Doubt it!

IMHO - AZ law promotes this practice of selective discrimination against the lawful carriers of self defense sidearms. It's high time some of us started pushing back, or simply watch as these places grow in number.

Imagine if a place posted no gays allowed signs. Although technically legal ... the outcry would be heard for years to come and that chains business would suffer do to their irrational postings.

Yet gun carriers simply sit back and quietly take this crap? Why?

My point - the just go somewhere else plan has been a epic failure. At the current rate of posted places in AZ, there may be no other places to go in the not too distant future! :eek: In short, reward places that respect our constitutional rights, and make bloody sure those who don't - get their fair share of press!

Most of the public is completely oblivious to how unsafe these places really are. They may actually get involved once they do know. I wouldn't take my family into a place that I knew shunned the most law abiding citizens in favor for anyone else, but them. Would you?
 
Last edited:

OC Freedom

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2014
Messages
646
Location
ADA County, ID
That is true...however, if they (most businesses in AZ) chose to post crime empowerment signs your solution is do nothing? That will yield zero results. The simply fact is these places are a private entity that chooses to prohibit the very people they should want as customers. To even purchase a firearm from a dealer, one is subjected to a NICS background check. Many of us also have CCW permits - meaning we passed background checks and took training. So in short - these places don't want law abiding citizens who have never been convicted of a crime? To boot - we are one of the safest demographics on the planet! Can they say that about the other customers they welcome with open arms? Doubt it!

IMHO - AZ law promotes this practice of selective discrimination against the lawful carriers of self defense sidearms. It's high time some of us started pushing back, or simply watch as these places grow in number.

Imagine if a place posted no gays allowed signs. Although technically legal ... the outcry would be heard for years to come and that chains business would suffer do to their irrational postings.

Yet gun carriers simply sit back and quietly take this crap? Why?

My point - the just go somewhere else plan has been a epic failure. At the current rate of posted places in AZ, there may be no other places to go in the not too distant future! :eek: In short, reward places that respect our constitutional rights, and make bloody sure those who don't - get their fair share of press!

Most of the public is completely oblivious to how unsafe these places really are. They may actually get involved once they do know. I wouldn't take my family into a place that I knew shunned the most law abiding citizens in favor for anyone else, but them. Would you?

Excellent response. I agree with your view and it is discrimination to be ask to leave. All customers should be treated equally regardless of race, gender, age, homosexual, straight, republican, democrat, communist, open carrier, concealed carrier, handicap, or whatever you might be. Its time to say no I will not be a victim of discrimination.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
I don't share your 'victim' mentality. It's becoming endemic. Everybody's got their panties inna wad over everything. Rights work both ways... You're preachin' this stuff to me? Ha!

A.R.S. 4-229. Licenses; handguns; posting of notice

A. A person with a permit issued pursuant to section 13-3112 may carry a concealed handgun on the premises of a licensee who is an on-sale retailer unless the licensee posts a sign that clearly prohibits the possession of weapons on the licensed premises. The sign shall conform to the following requirements:

1. Be posted in a conspicuous location accessible to the general public and immediately adjacent to the liquor license posted on the licensed premises.

2. Contain a pictogram that shows a firearm within a red circle and a diagonal red line across the firearm.

3. Contain the words, "no firearms allowed pursuant to A.R.S. section 4-229".

B. A person shall not carry a firearm on the licensed premises of an on-sale retailer if the licensee has posted the notice prescribed in subsection A of this section.

C. It is an affirmative defense to a violation of subsection B of this section if:

1. The person was not informed of the notice prescribed in subsection A of this section before the violation.

2. Any one or more of the following apply:

(a) At the time of the violation the notice prescribed in subsection A of this section had fallen down.

(b) At the time of the violation the person was not a resident of this state.

(c) The licensee had posted the notice prescribed in subsection A of this section not more than thirty days before the violation.

D. The department of liquor licenses and control shall prepare the signs required by this section and make them available at no cost to licensees.

E. The signs required by this section shall be composed of block, capital letters printed in black on white laminated paper at a minimum weight of one hundred ten pound index. The lettering and pictogram shall consume a space at least six inches by nine inches. The letters comprising the words "no firearms allowed" shall be at least three-fourths of a vertical inch and all other letters shall be at least one-half of a vertical inch. Nothing shall prohibit a licensee from posting additional signs at one or more locations on the premises.

F. This section does not prohibit a person who possesses a handgun from entering the licensed premises for a limited time for the specific purpose of either:

1. Seeking emergency aid.

2. Determining whether a sign has been posted pursuant to subsection A of this section.


A.R.S. 13-1502
Criminal trespass in the third degree; classification
A. A person commits criminal trespass in the third degree by:
1. Knowingly entering or remaining unlawfully on any real property after a reasonable request to leave by a law enforcement officer, the owner or any other person having lawful control over such property, or reasonable notice prohibiting entry.
2. Knowingly entering or remaining unlawfully on the right-of-way for tracks, or the storage or switching yards or rolling stock of a railroad company.
B. Pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 1 of this section, a request to leave by a law enforcement officer acting at the request of the owner of the property or any other person having lawful control over the property has the same legal effect as a request made by the property owner or other person having lawful control of the property.
C. Criminal trespass in the third degree is a class 3 misdemeanor.

A.R.S. 13-3102. Misconduct involving weapons; defenses; classification; definitions (edited to include only trespass)

A. A person commits misconduct involving weapons by knowingly:


10. Unless specifically authorized by law, entering any public establishment or attending any public event and carrying a deadly weapon on his person after a reasonable request by the operator of the establishment or the sponsor of the event or the sponsor's agent to remove his weapon and place it in the custody of the operator of the establishment or the sponsor of the event for temporary and secure storage of the weapon pursuant to section 13-3102.01; or

11. Unless specifically authorized by law, entering an election polling place on the day of any election carrying a deadly weapon; or

12. Possessing a deadly weapon on school grounds; or

13. Unless specifically authorized by law, entering a nuclear or hydroelectric generating station carrying a deadly weapon on his person or within the immediate control of any person; or

B. Subsection A, paragraph 2 of this section shall not apply to:

1. A person in his dwelling, on his business premises or on real property owned or leased by that person or that person's parent, grandparent or legal guardian.

3. A firearm that is carried in:

(a) A manner where any portion of the firearm or holster in which the firearm is carried is visible.

(b) A holster that is wholly or partially visible.

(c) A scabbard or case designed for carrying weapons that is wholly or partially visible.

(d) Luggage.

(e) A case, holster, scabbard, pack or luggage that is carried within a means of transportation or within a storage compartment, map pocket, trunk or glove compartment of a means of transportation.

C. Subsection A, paragraphs 2, 3, 7, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of this section shall not apply to:

1. A peace officer or any person summoned by any peace officer to assist and while actually assisting in the performance of official duties; or

2. A member of the military forces of the United States or of any state of the United States in the performance of official duties; or

3. A warden, deputy warden, community correctional officer, detention officer, special investigator or correctional officer of the state department of corrections or the department of juvenile corrections; or

4. A person specifically licensed, authorized or permitted pursuant to a statute of this state or of the United States.


H. Subsection A, paragraph 12 of this section shall not apply to the possession of a:

2. Firearm for use on the school grounds in a program approved by a school.

3. Firearm by a person who possesses a certificate of firearms proficiency pursuant to section 13-3112, subsection T and who is authorized to carry a concealed firearm pursuant to the law enforcement officers safety act (LEOSA) of 2004 (P.L. 108-277; 118 Stat. 865; 18 United States Code sections 926B and 926C).

J. The operator of the establishment or the sponsor of the event or the employee of the operator or sponsor or the agent of the sponsor, including a public entity or public employee, is not liable for acts or omissions pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 10 of this section unless the operator, sponsor, employee or agent intended to cause injury or was grossly negligent.

K. If a law enforcement officer contacts a person who is in possession of a firearm, the law enforcement officer may take temporary custody of the firearm for the duration of that contact.

L. Misconduct involving weapons under subsection A, paragraph 15 of this section is a class 2 felony. Misconduct involving weapons under subsection A, paragraph 9, 14 or 16 of this section is a class 3 felony. Misconduct involving weapons under subsection A, paragraph 3, 4, 8 or 13 of this section is a class 4 felony. Misconduct involving weapons under subsection A, paragraph 12 of this section is a class 1 misdemeanor unless the violation occurs in connection with conduct that violates section 13-2308, subsection A, paragraph 5, section 13-2312, subsection C, section 13-3409 or section 13-3411, in which case the offense is a class 6 felony. Misconduct involving weapons under subsection A, paragraph 1, subdivision (a) of this section or subsection A, paragraph 5, 6 or 7 of this section is a class 6 felony. Misconduct involving weapons under subsection A, paragraph 1, subdivision (b) of this section or subsection A, paragraph 10 or 11 of this section is a class 1 misdemeanor. Misconduct involving weapons under subsection A, paragraph 2 of this section is a class 3 misdemeanor.

M. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Contacted by a law enforcement officer" means a lawful traffic or criminal investigation, arrest or detention or an investigatory stop by a law enforcement officer that is based on reasonable suspicion that an offense has been or is about to be committed.

2. "Public establishment" means a structure, vehicle or craft that is owned, leased or operated by this state or a political subdivision of this state.

3. "Public event" means a specifically named or sponsored event of limited duration that is either conducted by a public entity or conducted by a private entity with a permit or license granted by a public entity. Public event does not include an unsponsored gathering of people in a public place.

4. "School" means a public or nonpublic kindergarten program, common school or high school.

5. "School grounds" means in, or on the grounds of, a school.
 
Last edited:

The Trickster

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
216
Location
Arizona
It's obvious from the git-go that this particular Micky D's franchise owner doesn't want guns in his place of business. It's private property, subject to trespass. 'Simple solution. Go someplace else.

While my general rule is to take my business elsewhere, I also make a point to inform those who are in charge of such establishments of my displeasure with such a policy. Businesses ought to be made aware of the fact that their alienation of gun owners is indeed bad for business. They have a right to ban guns and I have a right to complain to them about it.
 

The Trickster

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
216
Location
Arizona
Several business owners I have contacted concerning posted signs were completely ignorant of the law and thought they were required to post signs regardless of their personal preferences; they were under the impression that if they failed to do so, they would be breaking the law.
 

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,508
Location
Secret Bunker
@ Rebel - aren't you a retired cop from back east? So of course you see someone standing up for their rights as having a " victim complex". :(

The OP has stated he has been able to get several signs taken down, simply by contacting the ownership. Not just going somewhere else... so your post, to me, was more waste of bandwidth per your norm on this forum. Carry on...
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
@ Rebel - aren't you a retired cop from back east? So of course you see someone standing up for their rights as having a " victim complex". :(

The OP has stated he has been able to get several signs taken down, simply by contacting the ownership. Not just going somewhere else... so your post, to me, was more waste of bandwidth per your norm on this forum. Carry on...

Sniveling is unbecoming of men. Grow a pair and suck it up cupcakes. I'm retired from the US Navy. The cop shop was an experience... I know you don't like cops or any sort of authority... much less a property owners right to say no. No amount of whining is going to trump that reality.
 

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,508
Location
Secret Bunker
Sniveling is unbecoming of men. Grow a pair and suck it up cupcakes. I'm retired from the US Navy. The cop shop was an experience... I know you don't like cops or any sort of authority... much less a property owners right to say no. No amount of whining is going to trump that reality.

Well since your memory is fading, we have briefly met & I assure you I'm no "cupcake". In fact, I'm even more scary looking than you are. I just don't play wanna be cowboy like you. Yip eee kiyay ....

Nice to see you have not given up trolling here yet. Carry on... :rolleyes:
 

The Trickster

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
216
Location
Arizona
Sniveling is unbecoming of men. Grow a pair and suck it up cupcakes. I'm retired from the US Navy. The cop shop was an experience... I know you don't like cops or any sort of authority... much less a property owners right to say no. No amount of whining is going to trump that reality.

I fail to understand how not patronizing a business while informing the owner of your displeasure with one of their policies (which is the entire reason why you are not doing any business with them) goes against their property rights. Concerning places of business, while they are indeed private property, they are inviting me onto their property to conduct business; it is not the same as someone's residence. I'm not saying I can do whatever I want while there, but it does give me ground (figuratively) on which to complain. It would make sense to me that any good business owner would want to receive feedback from their customers. In my case, I did not eat at this particular McDonald's, contacted both the corporate office and the individual location via e-mail and telephone, and shared my experience with OC.org. As this is a website dedicated to the forward movement of openly carrying pistols, my entire experience is relevant as I was open carrying at the time of my discovery of the sign. :)
 
Last edited:
Top