Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 59

Thread: Just kick out of Layton Hills Mall for OC.....

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    I just got back from a trip to the mall (a trip that I make at least weekly), but this time things ended a little differently. My brother and I had just sat down with our food when the "unarmed" mall security approached me and asked "excuse me sir, do you have identification proving that you are a police officer?" I responded, "I do not, and I am not a police officer" He then bounced back with, "we do not allow weapons of any type on the property, this is private property, and I am asking you to remove it from the property immediately!" I then very politely said, " is this a new policy? I have been a customer of this mall for 11 years and I have never been approached and informed of this policy?" They said it is in their code of conduct posted on all of the doors. I asked for them to show me where it was posted and then I would gladly leave.As we were heading toward the exit,2 Layton PD officer walked in the door andoneof the security guys said "dont worry, they aren't here for you" I responded "I don't worry, Itrain with most of them"The Layton officer then noticed me and waved. The looks onthe security guys faceswere priceless. After I was escorted past multiple entrances that were not marked with any type of "no weapons" signs, they stopped in from of a sign with very small print, mounted off to the side of one of the entrances. It was the type of sign that lists all of the rules similar to what you would see at a swimming pool, "no running, language, etc." and it did list no weapons. I informed them that they should have every entrance posted and that I would like to speak to the management regarding the policy. They said that they had a meeting with management later today and they would take care of it but I had to leave the property immediately. I then took the high road and walked out to my car and left. I am asuming that"if" this is "Private" property they have the right to restrict carry, but it should be noted of every door into the mall.

    Let me know what you think about the situation. B

  2. #2
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    Seems like you handled yourself very well. Be sure to follow up with management and let them know they are risking loosing a customer of 11 years if they insist on a "no weapons" policy.

    Also I got to thinking about the security guard's statement: "we do not allow weapons of any type on the property, this is private property, and I am asking you to remove it from the property immediately!" I wonder if he was reacting the same way to every person that carried a pocket knife into the store? I would venture to guess he was not.

    Keep us updated on what is happening with this!

  3. #3
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    I think you done good.

    They asked you to leave. You made a request about the signage. They acceded to your request. You gave them feedback/suggestion. And you left.

    Sounds pretty straightforward on everyone'spart. Just a business transaction, essentially. No muss and very little fuss.

    You may have to check the law on your guess that gun prohibition "should be noted of every door into the mall." Sounds to me like, from a legal requirement standpoint,you're guessing. Of course, youwouldbe correct that signs on all the doors wouldmake sensefrom logical and customer-informative perspectives.

  4. #4
    Regular Member sccrref's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
    Posts
    741

    Post imported post

    We have a local mall in Virginia Beach that has the same type sign as you discribed posted out of normal view when you enter the mall from entrances going directly to the parking lot. No fire arms. None of the store entrancesare posted at either the entrance into the store from the parking lots or to the entrance to the mall from the store. I have emailed the State Police website inquiring if this is posted sufficiently or if it should be posted at all entrances. Still have not received an answer from either my original email or the follow up one. So, I am unable to shed light on this issue at present. Will post the answer if VASP ever provide one.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    I tried to handle it a professional and from the sounds of your replies, I must have done farely well. I was debating following up with the mall management, but I think I will take it to the next level and see what respones I receive from them. I am searching right now for any info on the requirement to have private establishment posted at each door into the building. Any other advise on where to go from here? Thanks, B

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    Looks like you entered a gun-free zone (see clip posted yesterday haha)

    Honestly, sounds like you did well. Most of these rent a cops are just on a power trip, I wouldn't pee in their ear if their brain was on fire.



  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    You are absolutely right, but you have to admit, there is a little bit of courage (stupidity) to approach an armed citizen, confront them, and make them leave, knowing all you have on your "gun belt" is a pair of handcufs and a radio:?

    I just sent an email to the head of mall security and to the mall manager, we will see what happens. B

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    Just found the "behavioral code of conduct" for the mall. Check out # 20

    Then they follow it with this,

    "Violation of this code of conduct may result in expulsion from this property in addition to any other legal remedies that mall management may choose to exercise.

    This shopping center is private property and no rights shall accrue to the public by virtue of the public’s entry into this mall or on mall property. This “Behavioral Code of Conduct” is not intended to deprive any person of their applicable civil rights or liberties under the law. If you feel your rights are being violated, please notify the mall management office."

    I think they are a little confused. I am going forward with a denial of civil rights and we will see what happens. B
    Attached Files Attached Files

  9. #9
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    It asks you to refrain from carrying. It does not prohibit it. Maybe the security guard was not as well informed as he thought....

    Edit: it also says at the bottom it is not intended to deprive people of their rights, and I do believe that's what the security guard was trying to do!

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    Tacomatose wrote:
    You are absolutely right, but you have to admit, there is a little bit of courage (stupidity) to approach an armed citizen, confront them, and make them leave, knowing all you have on your "gun belt" is a pair of handcufs and a radio:?

    I just sent an email to the head of mall security and to the mall manager, we will see what happens. B
    I completely disagree. It does not take any courage for a unarmed security guard to approach a citizen carrying a fire arm, because he knows he is not a threat. A person carrying a firearm openly in a public area, not acting inappropriately is *not* a threat to anyone. This is just another example that proves that. Logically if the security guard really thought you were a threat to public safetly he would never have approached you, and would have straight away called the police.

  11. #11
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    +1 mkl

  12. #12
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    Tacomatose wrote:
    You are absolutely right, but you have to admit, there is a little bit of courage (stupidity) to approach an armed citizen, confront them, and make them leave, knowing all you have on your "gun belt" is a pair of handcufs and a radio:?

    I just sent an email to the head of mall security and to the mall manager, we will see what happens. B
    Yeah, I am not so sure I would want to be a guard where I could not carry a weapon. It makes your word harder to enforce, not that you would use the firearm to make people comply, but I think that the gun is attatched to authority in peoples minds.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    mkl wrote:

    I completely disagree. It does not take any courage for a unarmed security guard to approach a citizen carrying a fire arm, because he knows he is not a threat. A person carrying a firearm openly in a public area, not acting inappropriately is *not* a threat to anyone. This is just another example that proves that. Logically if the security guard really thought you were a threat to public safetly he would never have approached you, and would have straight away called the police.
    I have to agree, I was looking at it on the other side of the fence( the wrong side). I can't wait to see the response from mall management. B

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    Tacomatose wrote:
    I just got back from a trip to the mall (a trip that I make at least weekly), but this time things ended a little differently. My brother and I had just sat down with our food when the "unarmed" mall security approached me and asked "excuse me sir, do you have identification proving that you are a police officer?" I responded, "I do not, and I am not a police officer" He then bounced back with, "we do not allow weapons of any type on the property, this is private property, and I am asking you to remove it from the property immediately!" I then very politely said, " is this a new policy? I have been a customer of this mall for 11 years and I have never been approached and informed of this policy?" They said it is in their code of conduct posted on all of the doors. I asked for them to show me where it was posted and then I would gladly leave.As we were heading toward the exit,2 Layton PD officer walked in the door andoneof the security guys said "dont worry, they aren't here for you" I responded "I don't worry, Itrain with most of them"The Layton officer then noticed me and waved. The looks onthe security guys faceswere priceless. After I was escorted past multiple entrances that were not marked with any type of "no weapons" signs, they stopped in from of a sign with very small print, mounted off to the side of one of the entrances. It was the type of sign that lists all of the rules similar to what you would see at a swimming pool, "no running, language, etc." and it did list no weapons. I informed them that they should have every entrance posted and that I would like to speak to the management regarding the policy. They said that they had a meeting with management later today and they would take care of it but I had to leave the property immediately. I then took the high road and walked out to my car and left. I am asuming that"if" this is "Private" property they have the right to restrict carry, but it should be noted of every door into the mall.

    Let me know what you think about the situation. B
    I went to South Town Mall on 106th and they stated on their "signs" something to the same effect ason the signs @ Layton Mall but they did not have LEO excemption, meaning LEO's would not be able to walk in with their Shooterseither:celebrate.AndIF I would ever see an LEO I would refer him to the signage and that He/She is NOT exempt. This mall doe not have signage at EVERY enterance either.

    Fashion Place Mall fails to have signage at EVERY enterance as well

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    UTOC-45-44 wrote:
    I went to South Town Mall on 106th and they stated on their "signs" something to the same effect ason the signs @ Layton Mall but they did not have LEO excemption, meaning LEO's would not be able to walk in with their Shooterseither:celebrate.AndIF I would ever see an LEO I would refer him to the signage and that He/She is NOT exempt. This mall doe not have signage at EVERY enterance either.

    Fashion Place Mall fails to have signage at EVERY enterance as well
    This is the part the tops it all off:

    "This shopping center is private property and no rights shall accrue to the public by virtue of the public’s entry into this mall or on mall property. This “Behavioral Code of Conduct” is not intended to deprive any person of their applicable civil rights or liberties under the law. If you feel your rights are being violated, please notify the mall management office."

    I sent a nice email to the management and I will follow up with a phone call tomorrow. B



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    Tacomatose wrote:
    UTOC-45-44 wrote:
    I went to South Town Mall on 106th and they stated on their "signs" something to the same effect ason the signs @ Layton Mall but they did not have LEO excemption, meaning LEO's would not be able to walk in with their Shooterseither:celebrate.AndIF I would ever see an LEO I would refer him to the signage and that He/She is NOT exempt. This mall doe not have signage at EVERY enterance either.

    Fashion Place Mall fails to have signage at EVERY enterance as well
    This is the part the tops it all off:

    "This shopping center is private property and no rights shall accrue to the public by virtue of the public’s entry into this mall or on mall property. This “Behavioral Code of Conduct” is not intended to deprive any person of their applicable civil rights or liberties under the law. If you feel your rights are being violated, please notify the mall management office."

    I sent a nice email to the management and I will follow up with a phone call tomorrow. B

    "This “Behavioral Code of Conduct” is not intended to deprive any person of their applicable civil rights or liberties under the law"



    This IS a joke

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Moscow, ID
    Posts
    218

    Post imported post

    UTOC-45-44 wrote:
    Tacomatose wrote:
    I just got back from a trip to the mall (a trip that I make at least weekly), but this time things ended a little differently. My brother and I had just sat down with our food when the "unarmed" mall security approached me and asked "excuse me sir, do you have identification proving that you are a police officer?" I responded, "I do not, and I am not a police officer" He then bounced back with, "we do not allow weapons of any type on the property, this is private property, and I am asking you to remove it from the property immediately!" I then very politely said, " is this a new policy? I have been a customer of this mall for 11 years and I have never been approached and informed of this policy?" They said it is in their code of conduct posted on all of the doors. I asked for them to show me where it was posted and then I would gladly leave.As we were heading toward the exit,2 Layton PD officer walked in the door andoneof the security guys said "dont worry, they aren't here for you" I responded "I don't worry, Itrain with most of them"The Layton officer then noticed me and waved. The looks onthe security guys faceswere priceless. After I was escorted past multiple entrances that were not marked with any type of "no weapons" signs, they stopped in from of a sign with very small print, mounted off to the side of one of the entrances. It was the type of sign that lists all of the rules similar to what you would see at a swimming pool, "no running, language, etc." and it did list no weapons. I informed them that they should have every entrance posted and that I would like to speak to the management regarding the policy. They said that they had a meeting with management later today and they would take care of it but I had to leave the property immediately. I then took the high road and walked out to my car and left. I am asuming that"if" this is "Private" property they have the right to restrict carry, but it should be noted of every door into the mall.

    Let me know what you think about the situation. B
    I went to South Town Mall on 106th and they stated on their "signs" something to the same effect ason the signs @ Layton Mall but they did not have LEO excemption, meaning LEO's would not be able to walk in with their Shooterseither:celebrate.AndIF I would ever see an LEO I would refer him to the signage and that He/She is NOT exempt.
    Does that mean I can post a sign outside my house and keep out the LEOs?

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    Lew wrote:
    UTOC-45-44 wrote:
    Tacomatose wrote:
    I just got back from a trip to the mall (a trip that I make at least weekly), but this time things ended a little differently. My brother and I had just sat down with our food when the "unarmed" mall security approached me and asked "excuse me sir, do you have identification proving that you are a police officer?" I responded, "I do not, and I am not a police officer" He then bounced back with, "we do not allow weapons of any type on the property, this is private property, and I am asking you to remove it from the property immediately!" I then very politely said, " is this a new policy? I have been a customer of this mall for 11 years and I have never been approached and informed of this policy?" They said it is in their code of conduct posted on all of the doors. I asked for them to show me where it was posted and then I would gladly leave.As we were heading toward the exit,2 Layton PD officer walked in the door andoneof the security guys said "dont worry, they aren't here for you" I responded "I don't worry, Itrain with most of them"The Layton officer then noticed me and waved. The looks onthe security guys faceswere priceless. After I was escorted past multiple entrances that were not marked with any type of "no weapons" signs, they stopped in from of a sign with very small print, mounted off to the side of one of the entrances. It was the type of sign that lists all of the rules similar to what you would see at a swimming pool, "no running, language, etc." and it did list no weapons. I informed them that they should have every entrance posted and that I would like to speak to the management regarding the policy. They said that they had a meeting with management later today and they would take care of it but I had to leave the property immediately. I then took the high road and walked out to my car and left. I am asuming that"if" this is "Private" property they have the right to restrict carry, but it should be noted of every door into the mall.

    Let me know what you think about the situation. B
    I went to South Town Mall on 106th and they stated on their "signs" something to the same effect ason the signs @ Layton Mall but they did not have LEO excemption, meaning LEO's would not be able to walk in with their Shooterseither:celebrate.AndIF I would ever see an LEO I would refer him to the signage and that He/She is NOT exempt.
    Does that mean I can post a sign outside my house and keep out the LEOs?
    Sure...,It's PRIVATE property.

    Put that "NO Law enforcement Officer is allowed Armed on your Property; "Well Trained" Citizens Carrying Firearms Openly and/or Concealed are Welcomed ONLY" sign.

  19. #19
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    Tacomatose wrote:
    ... Let me know what you think about the situation. B
    Looks like the discussion has covered this well.

    I only wish to repeat kudos to how you handled it.



  20. #20
    Regular Member sccrref's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
    Posts
    741

    Post imported post

    Tacomatose wrote:
    UTOC-45-44 wrote:
    I went to South Town Mall on 106th and they stated on their "signs" something to the same effect ason the signs @ Layton Mall but they did not have LEO excemption, meaning LEO's would not be able to walk in with their Shooterseither:celebrate.AndIF I would ever see an LEO I would refer him to the signage and that He/She is NOT exempt. This mall doe not have signage at EVERY enterance either.

    Fashion Place Mall fails to have signage at EVERY enterance as well
    This is the part the tops it all off:

    "This shopping center is private property and no rights shall accrue to the public by virtue of the public’s entry into this mall or on mall property. This “Behavioral Code of Conduct” is not intended to deprive any person of their applicable civil rights or liberties under the law. If you feel your rights are being violated, please notify the mall management office."

    I sent a nice email to the management and I will follow up with a phone call tomorrow. B

    I personnaly do not agree with the mall's policy. Having said that, who's civil rights prevail? The owner of the mall as it is private property or those of us who frequent the mall? If it is our rights that prevail, we would not be able to post signs against LEOs carrying on our private property. Just some food for thought and something to liven up this thread.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Utah, USA
    Posts
    56

    Post imported post

    76-10-530. Trespass with a firearm in a house of worship or private residence -- Notice -- Penalty.

    (1) A person, including a person licensed to carry a concealed firearm pursuant to Title 53, Chapter 5, Part 7, Concealed Weapon Act, after notice has been given as provided in Subsection (2) that firearms are prohibited, may not knowingly and intentionally:
    (a) transport a firearm into:
    (i) a house of worship; or
    (ii) a private residence; or
    (b) while in possession of a firearm, enter or remain in:
    (i) a house of worship; or
    (ii) a private residence.
    (2) Notice that firearms are prohibited may be given by:
    (a) personal communication to the actor by:
    (i) the church or organization operating the house of worship;
    (ii) the owner, lessee, or person with lawful right of possession of the private residence; or
    (iii) a person with authority to act for the person or entity in Subsections (2)(a)(i) and (ii);
    (b) posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of persons entering the house of worship or private residence;
    (c) announcement, by a person with authority to act for the church or organization operating the house of worship, in a regular congregational meeting in the house of worship;
    (d) publication in a bulletin, newsletter, worship program, or similar document generally circulated or available to the members of the congregation regularly meeting in the house of worship; or
    (e) publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the house of worship is located or the church or organization operating the house of worship has its principal office in this state.
    (3) A church or organization operating a house of worship and giving notice that firearms are prohibited may:
    (a) revoke the notice, with or without supersedure, by giving further notice in any manner provided in Subsection (2); and
    (b) provide or allow exceptions to the prohibition as the church or organization considers advisable.
    (4) (a) (i) Within 30 days of giving or revoking any notice pursuant to Subsection (2)(c), (d), or (e), a church or organization operating a house of worship shall notify the division on a form and in a manner as the division shall prescribe.
    (ii) The division shall post on its website a list of the churches and organizations operating houses of worship who have given notice under Subsection (4)(a)(i).
    (b) Any notice given pursuant to Subsection (2)(c), (d), or (e) shall remain in effect until revoked or for a period of one year from the date the notice was originally given, whichever occurs first.
    (5) Nothing in this section permits an owner who has granted the lawful right of possession to a renter or lessee to restrict the renter or lessee from lawfully possessing a firearm in the residence.
    (6) A violation of this section is an infraction.


    Here is my question on the situation. When I took my Concealed Weapons course the instructor told us that businesses that allow the general public cannot ban concealed weapons. Looking through the weapons statutes there seems to be exceptions for private residences, houses of worship and secured areas. I don't know how this would apply to oc but does anyone know the specifics?


  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    I have read that same part of the code many times and I still fail to see where businesses are listed. It says over and over Private Residence, to Business. I have also heard that if they allow free access to the public then they don't have the right to restrict carry of a firearm, but if it is a "private Club" that you have to pay for a membership then they can restrict the members to their policy. I still have not received a reply from the Mall Management so I guess it is time for another trip to the mall

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    Tacomatose wrote:
    I have read that same part of the code many times and I still fail to see where businesses are listed. It says over and over Private Residence, to Business. I have also heard that if they allow free access to the public then they don't have the right to restrict carry of a firearm, but if it is a "private Club" that you have to pay for a membership then they can restrict the members to their policy. I still have not received a reply from the Mall Management so I guess it is time for another trip to the mall
    wait a minute..,wait a MINUTE..,WAIT A MINUTE.

    I WANNA GO, I WANNA GO.PLEEEEEEEEEEASE:celebrateI WANNA GOOOOOOOOOOO:celebrate

    WHEN are You planning this Rally so that I can Possibly be Part of this Posse



  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    I really never thought about having a few people all show up there together to dispute this regulation? That my have a bigger effect on the management when they realize that not only did they "wee" in one guys cheerios, they "weed" in the whole batch. I will have to put some thought into it and see if I can get the management to agree to a meeting and then I will post the time and place and we can all make ourselves heard. B

  25. #25
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792

    Post imported post

    daniel.call wrot
    Here is my question on the situation. When I took my Concealed Weapons course the instructor told us that businesses that allow the general public cannot ban concealed weapons. Looking through the weapons statutes there seems to be exceptions for private residences, houses of worship and secured areas. I don't know how this would apply to oc but does anyone know the specifics?
    Under the Utah State Supreme Court decision involving the AOL employees, businesses can have no-gun policies. These policies carry no force of law.

    IOW, you commit no crime if you ignore the policy. If you were to refuse to leave when asked, you might face trespassing charges. Or maybe not as Utah's commercial trespass law sets a fairly high bar for conviction. I have better use for my money than being the test case there....or patronizing anti-gun businesses for that matter.

    In any event, remember the difference between a private policy NOT creating a criminal offense and not being allowed to have a private policy. Businesses can have a private policy. That policy does NOT create a criminal penalty if you violate it. Contrast this with churches and private homes where violation of a private no-gun policy IS a criminal violation.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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