Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Visiting Arizona - Grand Canyon Railway - No Guns ?!?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    42

    Visiting Arizona - Grand Canyon Railway - No Guns ?!?

    Hello everyone in Arizona!

    We've been planning a trip for quite some time (6+ months) and one of our events is to take the train into the Grand Canyon. I had read here that the railway was very OC friendly but when we stopped by today to pick up our tickets they had the AZ required No Guns sign on the entrance. After my wife dropped her bag with me and I waited outside she inquired about it and they told her no guns in the depot and on the train. Does anyone know when that changed? We're going to go ahead with it tomorrow since it's already paid for but normally I wouldn't darken the doorstep of a place that disarms me. I was greatly disappointed to get stopped by a no gun sign in AZ when I never have that problem in (liberal) WA. Ok....I'm done venting...

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    42
    Ok...so, diving a bit deeper into AZ laws and I'm a little confused.

    AZ has ARS 1502, 03, and 04 along with ARS 4-229. The sign that was posted at the depot was the 4-229 sign as specified in the law. Now, it's entirely possible that they serve alcohol on the train in the dining car or even in the depot (have not seen inside yet) but wouldn't that require the liquor license to be displayed next to it to be valid? Besides that and assuming it is invalid because of this, does the gun with the slash on the invalid sign still meet the requirements for 13-1502, etc?

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by wczimmerman View Post
    Hello everyone in Arizona!

    We've been planning a trip for quite some time (6+ months) and one of our events is to take the train into the Grand Canyon. I had read here that the railway was very OC friendly but when we stopped by today to pick up our tickets they had the AZ required No Guns sign on the entrance. After my wife dropped her bag with me and I waited outside she inquired about it and they told her no guns in the depot and on the train. Does anyone know when that changed? We're going to go ahead with it tomorrow since it's already paid for but normally I wouldn't darken the doorstep of a place that disarms me. I was greatly disappointed to get stopped by a no gun sign in AZ when I never have that problem in (liberal) WA. Ok....I'm done venting...
    The RR is private property, not part of the park.

    "On September 21, 2006, it was announced that Xanterra Parks & Resorts of Denver, Colorado, submitted the winning bid (for an undisclosed sum) and was selected as the new owner for the Grand Canyon Railway. Xanterra is the corporate name and identity for what was originally known as the Fred Harvey Company, a legendary company with restaurant, hotel and service ties to the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway as far back as 1876."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canyon_Railway
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Kahlotus, WA
    Posts
    254
    Xanterra also operates all the lodging & concessions within the park.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    When you bought the tickets did they inform you at that time that your gun is prohibited? If not, then that's on them .. they agreed to allow you to enter w/o this prohibition. Simple contract law.

    You can either :

    a) go with your gun and argue the point; if they deny you passage sue them - breach of contract
    b) demand a refund
    c) go to your credit card company and dispute the charge
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 09-06-2016 at 01:12 AM.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    I firmly believe that Xanterra's policy is illegal. I would personally carry in violation of their policy. I'm not telling you what YOU should do. Having to defend yourself before ignorant, arrogant elitists is a pain in the ass.

    Xanterra may be a private company, but they are contracting with the government to service the public on public lands. They do not have same rights as private property owners.
    Last edited by MAC702; 09-06-2016 at 11:54 AM.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    [ ... ] Xanterra may be a private company, but they are contracting with the government to service the public on public lands. They do not have same rights as private property owners.
    By what principle may the government have a proprietary possessory interest in public land to contract at all?

    While the NPS enjoyed the government's benign neglect the concessionaire system flourished along with the parks. The Yosemite Park and Curry Company was a wonderful steward of the public property.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  8. #8
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Private concessions - been out of the barn for a long time:

    "This paper highlights a number of the historical events and circumstances influencing the role of recreation enterprises on public lands in the United States. From the earliest debates over national park designations through the current debate on the ethics of recreation fees, the influence of recreation service providers has been pervasive. This history is traced with particular attention to the balance between protecting public interests while offering opportunities for profit to the private sector. It is suggested that the former has frequently been sacrificed owing to political pressures or inadequate agency oversight."

    http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr556.pdf
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    I firmly believe that Xanterra's policy is illegal. I would personally carry in violation of their policy. I'm not telling you what YOU should do. Having to defend yourself before ignorant, arrogant elitists is a pain in the ass.

    Xanterra may be a private company, but they are contracting with the government to service the public on public lands. They do not have same rights as private property owners.
    There is precedent for calling a private company a quasi-governmental entity .... I don't know of any in respect to security outside of FOIA related stuff.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    42
    Update: We did the train ride today and everyone had a good time (minus being what our family calls "being naked" by being disarmed).

    For anyone looking for an update, carrying onto the train is actually quite easy as you can just walk around the train depot and board the train (no need to enter the train depot other than to pick up tickets). Once on board, there are no signs on or in the train. At the NP, other than one federal building I had to work to find any no gun signs. There were a couple: one in the hotel in the cocktail lounge (no liquor license posted with it, of course) and one in the other cocktail lounge in the center building where you can get ice cream, again with no liquor license. But, these were deep into the buildings NOT in obvious locations at the entrances.

    Tomorrow: Berizona and the Deer Farm, so hopefully nobody has any heartburn with me OC'ing. Around town in Williams it has been a non-issue.

    Hopefully, you AZ folks will get the "force of law" issue removed from the books so this silly sign problem goes away.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Did the signs cite any AZ law?
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Did the signs cite any AZ law?
    Yes: ARS 4-229 for all of them, even at the depot, except for one tiny sign on a side outer door which had only a gun with a slash through it. I don't know how anyone could see that one...

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    It is an affirmative defense to that law if you are not a resident of AZ, per 4-229-C-2-b. So even if you were caught concealing, and they were somehow able to convince the badges that they had the authority over members of the public on public land, your out-of-state ID is your legal out. There was no need to be naked.
    Last edited by MAC702; 09-07-2016 at 12:21 AM.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    It is an affirmative defense to that law if you are not a resident of AZ, per 4-229-C-2-b. So even if you were caught concealing, and they were somehow able to convince the badges that they had the authority over members of the public on public land, your out-of-state ID is your legal out. There was no need to be naked.
    Thanks for that...very true! That is an interesting element to 4-229 that I saw when diving deeper into this.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    42
    So, today was a visit to Berizona and The Deer Farm in Williams. Both venues went off without a hitch the whole day for me OC'ing. It was, frankly, a gloriously quiet day in that regard, at least at these locations. Earlier this morning we were out of the hotel a little earlier than necessary (neither location opened until 9AM) so we thought we would spend a little more time in Williams browsing the shops and take my son to the local park to play on the playground. Again, the shops were no problem but the park was. As we were walking up, my wife and I noticed a sign on the fence (see attached). I stayed outside the park while I looked up the ARS cited which, upon further review, seemed to not apply to me since I have a CCW recognized by AZ but it was disappointed nevertheless to see it, especially after our issues with the railroad.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  16. #16
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by wczimmerman View Post
    So, today was a visit to Berizona and The Deer Farm in Williams. Both venues went off without a hitch the whole day for me OC'ing. It was, frankly, a gloriously quiet day in that regard, at least at these locations. Earlier this morning we were out of the hotel a little earlier than necessary (neither location opened until 9AM) so we thought we would spend a little more time in Williams browsing the shops and take my son to the local park to play on the playground. Again, the shops were no problem but the park was. As we were walking up, my wife and I noticed a sign on the fence (see attached). I stayed outside the park while I looked up the ARS cited which, upon further review, seemed to not apply to me since I have a CCW recognized by AZ but it was disappointed nevertheless to see it, especially after our issues with the railroad.
    It would not seem to be an ATF free zone.
    sign.jpg
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  17. #17
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by wczimmerman View Post
    ...Again, the shops were no problem but the park was. As we were walking up, my wife and I noticed a sign on the fence (see attached). I stayed outside the park while I looked up the ARS cited which, upon further review, seemed to not apply to me since I have a CCW recognized by AZ but it was disappointed nevertheless to see it, especially after our issues with the railroad.
    I thought that AZ had better laws than that...?

    Well, I learned something new today!

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by wczimmerman View Post
    ... I looked up the ARS cited which, upon further review, seemed to not apply to me since I have a CCW recognized by AZ but it was disappointed nevertheless to see it, especially after our issues with the railroad.
    There were many exceptions that you met, as do most adults: openly carried, over 21, etc. The law is unfortunately complicated to read because of AZ's long history of dicking around with our rights before currently being, again, mostly a permitless* state. The sign is grossly misleading by using the word "absolutely," and some jurisdictions with statist nannies in charge are probably doing that on purpose.

    *the term Constitutional Carry is a misnomer.

    Once again, you were wrongly disarmed or stopped by incorrect signage, possibly illegally so. How strongly you wish to proceed with official inquiries after your trip is up to you.
    Last edited by MAC702; 09-09-2016 at 04:40 PM.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  19. #19
    Regular Member The Trickster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by wczimmerman View Post
    So, today was a visit to Berizona and The Deer Farm in Williams. Both venues went off without a hitch the whole day for me OC'ing. It was, frankly, a gloriously quiet day in that regard, at least at these locations. Earlier this morning we were out of the hotel a little earlier than necessary (neither location opened until 9AM) so we thought we would spend a little more time in Williams browsing the shops and take my son to the local park to play on the playground. Again, the shops were no problem but the park was. As we were walking up, my wife and I noticed a sign on the fence (see attached). I stayed outside the park while I looked up the ARS cited which, upon further review, seemed to not apply to me since I have a CCW recognized by AZ but it was disappointed nevertheless to see it, especially after our issues with the railroad.
    Appears to be an antiquated sign that nobody ever bothered to take down. It used to be legal for governments in AZ to prohibit guns in parks, but a few years back, that jurisdiction was removed. I believe it was the AZCDL that got that changed? Anyway, I've encountered archaic signs throughout this state with incorrect citations and such and with mixed results, I've contacted the folk(s) "in charge" to tell them their signage is incorrect and ought to be removed. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if these signs are often intentionally left up - despite their illegitimacy - in order to deceive and/or confuse those who don't know better.

  20. #20
    Regular Member The Trickster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by wczimmerman View Post
    Hopefully, you AZ folks will get the "force of law" issue removed from the books so this silly sign problem goes away.
    Most signs in AZ don't have the force of law behind them. Government buildings, school grounds, etc. and establishments that serve alcohol for on-site consumption with the proper ARS 4-229 statute signage requirements being met essentially do, but that's about it. And the 4-229 thing is mostly out of fear that "guns and alcohol don't mix," which is ridiculous because the law already makes it illegal to consume alcohol at these establishments if armed, ergo if someone is going to ignore the sign, they'll probably just ignore the law and drink while carrying anyway. Of course, there are some folks out there who seem to believe that having a gun anywhere in close proximity to a beer that you aren't even drinking will turn you into a lunatic.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pointy end and slightly to the left
    Posts
    1,539
    Here in Nevada a legal gun owner can carry OCing or CCing permit required for all to CC and have a beer. Just can not be over BAC of 0.1. I OC often with the wife having a beer with a dinner never an issue. Of course in business that do not have a no gun policy which is most non-casino business.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •