Question about NO-GUNS Signs

imported post

I've been doing a lot of research on various gun-laws in local municipalities today, and for some reason, I started thinking about something..

In a PRIVATE Establishment, what gives police (even ON duty) the right to carry into those establishments? I've seen plenty of places where the 'rules' make no mention of LEO Status - they simply say "FIREARMS ARE NOT PERMITTED ON THESE PREMISES". Is there a Michigan law that trumps property-owner's rights and allows police to carry anywhere?

More of a curiosity than a concern, but a curiosity none-the-less.

Ben

imported post

PilotPTK wrote:

I've been doing a lot of research on various gun-laws in local municipalities today, and for some reason, I started thinking about something..

In a PRIVATE Establishment, what gives police (even ON duty) the right to carry into those establishments? I've seen plenty of places where the 'rules' make no mention of LEO Status - they simply say "FIREARMS ARE NOT PERMITTED ON THESE PREMISES". Is there a Michigan law that trumps property-owner's rights and allows police to carry anywhere?

More of a curiosity than a concern, but a curiosity none-the-less.

Ben

Click to expand...

Simply put LEO is by definition use of necessary force and to take action or be willfully negligence or cowards .

imported post

PilotPTK wrote:

I've been doing a lot of research on various gun-laws in local municipalities today, and for some reason, I started thinking about something..

In a PRIVATE Establishment, what gives police (even ON duty) the right to carry into those establishments? I've seen plenty of places where the 'rules' make no mention of LEO Status - they simply say "FIREARMS ARE NOT PERMITTED ON THESE PREMISES". Is there a Michigan law that trumps property-owner's rights and allows police to carry anywhere?

More of a curiosity than a concern, but a curiosity none-the-less.

Ben

Click to expand...

This is probably why:

http://www.getsts.com/LawEnfOffSafetyAct.PDF

imported post

Actually, IMHO a person could ban ALL firearms from a property and POs have no more rights/ privileges than anyone else. What is the legal ramification of carrying on property that has a sign prohibiting firearms? A charge of trespassing if you don't leave when asked. So, would a citizen ask that an officer leave? Probably not. But if I walked into my backyard and saw a PO looking around w/out a warrant (or any warrantless entry exceptions), I would demand that they leave immediately. Legally, though, they could stand off my property and look under the "open fields" doctrine.

I see that Texas is actually considering making it legal for LEO to carry on private property with "No Handguns", as their law makes it a crime to carry on property with signage prohibiting firearms. IMHO, Michigan does not criminalize ignoring the signs per se. However, it could/would constitute Trespass whether you are a private citizen or PO w/out a warrant (or covered under warrantless entry exceptions) and would therefore be illegal.



I am not a lawyer. Information is provided for general, informational purposes only. If you have questions regarding specific legal issues, please consult an attorney.

imported post

DrTodd wrote:

Actually, IMHO a person could ban ALL firearms from a property and POs have no more rights/ privileges than anyone else. What is the legal ramification of carrying on property that has a sign prohibiting firearms? A charge of trespassing if you don't leave when asked. So, would a citizen ask that an officer leave? Probably not. But if I walked into my backyard and saw a PO looking around w/out a warrant (or any warrantless entry exceptions), I would demand that they leave immediately. Legally, though, they could stand off my property and look under the "open fields" doctrine.

I see that Texas is actually considering making it legal for LEO to carry on private property with "No Handguns", as their law makes it a crime to carry on property with signage prohibiting firearms. IMHO, Michigan does not criminalize ignoring the signs per se. However, it could/would constitute Trespass whether you are a private citizen or PO w/out a warrant (or covered under warrantless entry exceptions) and would therefore be illegal.



I am not a lawyer. Information is provided for general, informational purposes only. If you have questions regarding specific legal issues, please consult an attorney.

Click to expand...

Performance of Duty under color of Law To make it Legal ?

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

PilotPTK wrote:

I've been doing a lot of research on various gun-laws in local municipalities today, and for some reason, I started thinking about something..

In a PRIVATE Establishment, what gives police (even ON duty) the right to carry into those establishments? I've seen plenty of places where the 'rules' make no mention of LEO Status - they simply say "FIREARMS ARE NOT PERMITTED ON THESE PREMISES". Is there a Michigan law that trumps property-owner's rights and allows police to carry anywhere?

More of a curiosity than a concern, but a curiosity none-the-less.

Ben

Click to expand...

This is probably why:

http://www.getsts.com/LawEnfOffSafetyAct.PDF

Click to expand...

Specifically in document:

[align=left]`(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--[/align]
[align=left]`(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or[/align]

imported post

Yep, but this section doesn't make ignoring the sign illegal, just says it doesn't effect any functions the sign would have anywhere else in the law. Some states, Texas for instance, do make the signs have specific legal authority in their concealed carry laws.

And Taxwhat is right, to a point and this is covered under the warrantless search provisions I mentioned above. But, without those exceptions in play, the officer would be violating the law to the same degree as any other person. So, if I asked an officer to leave my store,, property, etc. he/she would have to unless a warrant was available or exceptions to a warrant were applicable. Remember too that if I call, they can come in (basically an invite in) or if someone else calls (emergency circumstance) it would be provided for in the warrantless exceptions. If the legislature wanted to make a general exception for POs, then it could be specifically allowed for in the MCL (I haven't seen it, not saying it isn't there, just haven't seen it) Perhaps someone who reads this can enlighten the conversation by finding it.


I am not a lawyer. Information is provided for general, informational purposes only. If you have questions regarding specific legal issues, please consult an attorney.