Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 96

Thread: Just got escorted out of Nordstrom/Chandler Fashion Center.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Chandler, AZ/Federal Way, WA, ,
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    Hello All,

    This occurred in Arizona, but has to do with Nordstroms.

    I was shopping with my girlfriend in the mall for an hour with no problems. I walked into nordstroms and I knew there was going to be a problem because the young teenage girl behind the jewelry counter immediately noticed my sidearm. I saw her talk to one of her co workers, then get on the phone. I didn't know if she was calling the police or the security. However, I finished looking and right as I was about to leave Nordstroms, an african american male named "Sam" from loss prevention approached me. He said that I could not carry on nordstroms because it's private property. I asked him if there was a written policy I could reference, or if he was just making this up on the spot without properly knowing policy. He refused to give me a written copy, saying that it's "private property" over and over again. I explained to him there are no signs on the doors either at the front of the store or the entrance leading to the parking lot. Anyways, I was getting no where with him. I left.

    As I was leaving, I went into another store and did some shopping and three security guards and a police officer approached me. Only the security officer spoke to me. He said that I needed to leave because they do not allow firearms on the property. I asked him for a written policy as well, he kinda reached into his pocket and grabbed some papers, then his other security officer friend just chimed in and said "This is private property, you need to leave." I kindly explained that there are no signs on the doors, and I have shopped here multiple times with no issues. He didn't care, he said "We don't have to put signs, but you need to leave now."

    I got up to leave, and they escorted me out.

    I came home and I called Nordstroms. I spoke with Marla, she was the manager on duty. She said that because the chandler fashion center doesn't allow firearms they do not either. I asked if specifically nordstroms has a policy against it -- and she said yes. I then asked for written confirmation, or a place on the website I could go to verify and she said she doesn't have it. I then asked for her executive offices # she referred me to Charlotte Jensen, the store manager. I called back and she was not in. I asked the person who answered for the executive # and she gave me the "Store 1" Number which was 206-628-2111. I called that #, and I spoke w/ the lady. I asked her to transfer to me the executive office. She asked for anyone in particular. I asked for the President & CEO. She gave me Eric Nordstroms voice mail. I left a voicemail asking for clarification and to either call me or email me.

    I have also emailed WestCor, the owner of the Chandler Fashion Center the following message:

    Hello,

    I was emailing you for clarification on your policy on carrying firearms on your mall properties in Arizona. I have looked and there are not any signs posted that say, "No firearms." However, I was recently asked to leave your Chandler Fashion Center location due to openly carrying a firearm.

    I do not know if you know this, however, Arizona state law allows for open carry unless specifically prohibited by the business owner. There are exceptions such as federal buildings, and bars.

    Could you please clarify?

    Thanks.
    I am waiting for a response on that.

    Just wanted to give you guys a heads up.



  2. #2
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    Kildars wrote:
    Hello All,

    This occurred in Arizona, but has to do with Nordstroms.

    I was shopping with my girlfriend in the mall for an hour with no problems. I walked into nordstroms and I knew there was going to be a problem because the young teenage girl behind the jewelry counter immediately noticed my sidearm. I saw her talk to one of her co workers, then get on the phone. I didn't know if she was calling the police or the security. However, I finished looking and right as I was about to leave Nordstroms, an african american male named "Sam" from loss prevention approached me. He said that I could not carry on nordstroms because it's private property. I asked him if there was a written policy I could reference, or if he was just making this up on the spot without properly knowing policy. He refused to give me a written copy, saying that it's "private property" over and over again. I explained to him there are no signs on the doors either at the front of the store or the entrance leading to the parking lot. Anyways, I was getting no where with him. I left.

    As I was leaving, I went into another store and did some shopping and three security guards and a police officer approached me. Only the security officer spoke to me. He said that I needed to leave because they do not allow firearms on the property. I asked him for a written policy as well, he kinda reached into his pocket and grabbed some papers, then his other security officer friend just chimed in and said "This is private property, you need to leave." I kindly explained that there are no signs on the doors, and I have shopped here multiple times with no issues. He didn't care, he said "We don't have to put signs, but you need to leave now."

    I got up to leave, and they escorted me out.

    I came home and I called Nordstroms. I spoke with Marla, she was the manager on duty. She said that because the chandler fashion center doesn't allow firearms they do not either. I asked if specifically nordstroms has a policy against it -- and she said yes. I then asked for written confirmation, or a place on the website I could go to verify and she said she doesn't have it. I then asked for her executive offices # she referred me to Charlotte Jensen, the store manager. I called back and she was not in. I asked the person who answered for the executive # and she gave me the "Store 1" Number which was 206-628-2111. I called that #, and I spoke w/ the lady. I asked her to transfer to me the executive office. She asked for anyone in particular. I asked for the President & CEO. She gave me Eric Nordstroms voice mail. I left a voicemail asking for clarification and to either call me or email me.

    I have also emailed WestCor, the owner of the Chandler Fashion Center the following message:

    Hello,

    I was emailing you for clarification on your policy on carrying firearms on your mall properties in Arizona. I have looked and there are not any signs posted that say, "No firearms." However, I was recently asked to leave your Chandler Fashion Center location due to openly carrying a firearm.

    I do not know if you know this, however, Arizona state law allows for open carry unless specifically prohibited by the business owner. There are exceptions such as federal buildings, and bars.

    Could you please clarify?

    Thanks.
    I am waiting for a response on that.

    Just wanted to give you guys a heads up.

    So you would like it better if they posted signs so every gun owner (even those who are licensed) will have to disarm before shopping at those locations?

    Asking if they have a policy about firearms is one thing, but asking where their sign is, is only an invitation to have a sign posted to exclude lawful handgun carriers.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    What is with this fetish for written policies from private property owners? I see a lot of like stories on OCDO. They've no obligation to give it to you. It's none of your business.

    Furthermore, when asked to leave by a representative of the private property owner you should have, smartly. It is fully within their authority to make policy on the spot, on the fly, without regard to circumstance. It is your legal obligation to obey their rules of conduct when and how they state them as long as they are not discriminating against you as a member of a protected class.

    This business of OCDO members taking affront with the legitimate rules of private property owners really must stop. It's a disservice to the movement.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Chandler, AZ/Federal Way, WA, ,
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    What is with this fetish for written policies from private property owners? I see a lot of like stories on OCDO. They've no obligation to give it to you. It's none of your business.

    Furthermore, when asked to leave by a representative of the private property owner you should have, smartly. It is fully within their authority to make policy on the spot, on the fly, without regard to circumstance. It is your legal obligation to obey their rules of conduct when and how they state them as long as they are not discriminating against you as a member of a protected class.

    This business of OCDO members taking affront with the legitimate rules of private property owners really must stop. It's a disservice to the movement.
    My "fetish" for a written policy is to ensure that I will never go back there. It could just be a rogue manager (like with WAL-Mart) who just thinks they have that policy. It also serves as validation to add to the DNP list.

    I did leave, I wanted to make sure I was clear (whether this is normal policy, or if I did something else) and then I left. I don't really need you explaining the law to me, I know when I'm supposed to leave, and when I don't have to and honestly the only person within their right to ask me to leave would be loss/prevention or a store manager (both were present).

    Asking for clarification and assurance that is really is a policy is not a disservice.

  5. #5
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    What is with this fetish for written policies from private property owners?* I see a lot of like stories on OCDO.* They've no obligation to give it to you.* It's none of your business.

    Furthermore, when asked to leave by a representative of the private property owner you should have, smartly.* It is fully within their authority to make policy on the spot, on the fly, without regard to circumstance.* It is your legal obligation to obey their rules of conduct when and how they state them as long as they are not discriminating against you as a member of a protected class.

    This business of OCDO members taking affront with the legitimate rules of private property owners really must stop.* It's a disservice to the movement.
    So when Sally yells at me at the top of her voice to leave, I should not question her authority to ask me to leave, specifically when she's violating her own store policy? Would her authority not be 'revoked' as she had stepped out of the bounds given to her by corporate? They're given authority only insomuch that their business structure allows them.
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Chandler, AZ/Federal Way, WA, ,
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    ConditionThree wrote:
    Kildars wrote:
    Hello All,

    This occurred in Arizona, but has to do with Nordstroms.

    I was shopping with my girlfriend in the mall for an hour with no problems. I walked into nordstroms and I knew there was going to be a problem because the young teenage girl behind the jewelry counter immediately noticed my sidearm. I saw her talk to one of her co workers, then get on the phone. I didn't know if she was calling the police or the security. However, I finished looking and right as I was about to leave Nordstroms, an african american male named "Sam" from loss prevention approached me. He said that I could not carry on nordstroms because it's private property. I asked him if there was a written policy I could reference, or if he was just making this up on the spot without properly knowing policy. He refused to give me a written copy, saying that it's "private property" over and over again. I explained to him there are no signs on the doors either at the front of the store or the entrance leading to the parking lot. Anyways, I was getting no where with him. I left.

    As I was leaving, I went into another store and did some shopping and three security guards and a police officer approached me. Only the security officer spoke to me. He said that I needed to leave because they do not allow firearms on the property. I asked him for a written policy as well, he kinda reached into his pocket and grabbed some papers, then his other security officer friend just chimed in and said "This is private property, you need to leave." I kindly explained that there are no signs on the doors, and I have shopped here multiple times with no issues. He didn't care, he said "We don't have to put signs, but you need to leave now."

    I got up to leave, and they escorted me out.

    I came home and I called Nordstroms. I spoke with Marla, she was the manager on duty. She said that because the chandler fashion center doesn't allow firearms they do not either. I asked if specifically nordstroms has a policy against it -- and she said yes. I then asked for written confirmation, or a place on the website I could go to verify and she said she doesn't have it. I then asked for her executive offices # she referred me to Charlotte Jensen, the store manager. I called back and she was not in. I asked the person who answered for the executive # and she gave me the "Store 1" Number which was 206-628-2111. I called that #, and I spoke w/ the lady. I asked her to transfer to me the executive office. She asked for anyone in particular. I asked for the President & CEO. She gave me Eric Nordstroms voice mail. I left a voicemail asking for clarification and to either call me or email me.

    I have also emailed WestCor, the owner of the Chandler Fashion Center the following message:

    Hello,

    I was emailing you for clarification on your policy on carrying firearms on your mall properties in Arizona. I have looked and there are not any signs posted that say, "No firearms." However, I was recently asked to leave your Chandler Fashion Center location due to openly carrying a firearm.

    I do not know if you know this, however, Arizona state law allows for open carry unless specifically prohibited by the business owner. There are exceptions such as federal buildings, and bars.

    Could you please clarify?

    Thanks.
    I am waiting for a response on that.

    Just wanted to give you guys a heads up.

    So you would like it better if they posted signs so every gun owner (even those who are licensed) will have to disarm before shopping at those locations?

    Asking if they have a policy about firearms is one thing, but asking where their sign is, is only an invitation to have a sign posted to exclude lawful handgun carriers.
    I am licensed, and I do believe they should have signs. I bet most of the gun owners on here carry concealed into businesses that are posted anyways. I follow those signs and instead of getting confronted by three security guards and an officer I would know just to avoid that business. Who knows if this officer wanted to be more aggressive and handucffed/demanded ID. Knowing before hand helps a lot.



  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    Their internal business structure is none of our business and should have no bearing on our conduct. We should obey all lawful rules of conduct when we are informed of them by anyone representing the private property owner.

    Does anyone disagree that the private property owner or their representative (any employee) has the full legal authority to make up lawful rules of conduct when and where they see fit, and to refuse service to anyone at any time?

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Come on Dean, we all know property owners have no rights when an offended OC'r is involved.:P

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Chandler, AZ/Federal Way, WA, ,
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    Their internal business structure is none of our business and should have no bearing on our conduct. We should obey all lawful rules of conduct when we are informed of them by anyone representing the private property owner.

    Does anyone disagree that the private property owner or their representative (any employee) has the full legal authority to make up lawful rules of conduct when and where they see fit, and to refuse service to anyone at any time?
    So if wal-mart says that their policy is to follow state law, and then some employee asks you to leave. You believe you should leave, even though that employee is completely violating the company policy?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327

    Post imported post

    Kildars,

    I'd definitely be a little careful in assuming I was the right person to intervene in a disagreement between corporate and local management as to what policies the store should be following, yes.




  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Kildars wrote:
    SNIP So if wal-mart says that their policy is to follow state law, and then some employee asks you to leave. You believe you should leave, even though that employee is completely violating the company policy?
    I do.

    Their internal policy promulgation problems are theirs.

    The agent asking me to leave is the proximate power. I might politely ask him to check the policy or call a supervisor---as I ask him to walk with me to the door.

    Its not my place to enforce their policy on their employees. That is between them and their employee.

    My only otherproper remedy for this sort of policy violation is to report or complain about it. If the employee is rude orobnoxious, too, I can add that aspect to my complaint. Same as if an employee said he needed to see my ID to buy toothpaste.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327

    Post imported post

    Try this thought experiment: suppose Wal-Mart does change their policy to give more discretion to the local managers and/or employees. Are they going to inform you about this???

  13. #13
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    Their internal business structure is none of our business and should have no bearing on our conduct.* We should obey all lawful rules of conduct when we are informed of them by anyone representing the private property owner.

    Does anyone disagree that the private property owner or their representative (any employee) has the full legal authority to make up lawful rules of conduct when and where they see fit, and to refuse service to anyone at any time?
    Not when those policies contradict the authority they've been given.

    Same goes with a manager kicking out all black people, the manager has gone outside the limits of his authority, so his request means nothing.
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    TechnoWeenie wrote:
    deanf wrote:
    Their internal business structure is none of our business and should have no bearing on our conduct. We should obey all lawful rules of conduct when we are informed of them by anyone representing the private property owner.

    Does anyone disagree that the private property owner or their representative (any employee) has the full legal authority to make up lawful rules of conduct when and where they see fit, and to refuse service to anyone at any time?
    Not when those policies contradict the authority they've been given.

    Same goes with a manager kicking out all black people, the manager has gone outside the limits of his authority, so his request means nothing.
    Or, to make it something which is as much a choice as carrying, kicking out all people wearing "Obama" or "anti-Obama" shirts ( you choose which fits your particular view ). The person doing so might not like what you have to say, but if it is beyond their purview to enforce it, they cannot. The only way to meet such people is to escalate until it's clear that they speak with the voice of property authority.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Chandler, AZ/Federal Way, WA, ,
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    Which is why I'll ask for a written policy. It covers two bases, it gets definitive evidence to place the business on the DNP list and it ensures the person asking me to leave actually knows the policy.

    They refused to get a written, so I left and I've escalated since I returned home.

    I'm sorry if I don't bow down and comply like some people here. If the employee is in the wrong, I intend to let them find out. How many other gun owners has he asked to leave besides me?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Chandler, AZ/Federal Way, WA, ,
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    kparker wrote:
    Try this thought experiment: suppose Wal-Mart does change their policy to give more discretion to the local managers and/or employees. Are they going to inform you about this???
    I'd bet either A) we'd find out about it here or B) the manager asking you to leave would explain the policy change.



  17. #17
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    Their internal business structure is none of our business and should have no bearing on our conduct. We should obey all lawful rules of conduct when we are informed of them by anyone representing the private property owner.

    Does anyone disagree that the private property owner or their representative (any employee) has the full legal authority to make up lawful rules of conduct when and where they see fit, and to refuse service to anyone at any time?
    When it comes to private property ANY person who works there, and is on site is acting as an agent of that company, and can tell any customer to leave. They do not have to show anyone a written policy, nor do they have to obey their own company policy (although they may be reprimanded for that by their company).

    What some folks here are not understanding is that the employee is not violating a law, therefore there is no legal ground for an OCer to stand on. It's PRIVATE property, and if you are asked to leave and fail to do so the Police can be called and will escort you off the property, if asked by ANY employee to do so. If youthen refuse, it becomes trespassing, and can become an arrest.

    If you feel the need to try and enforce a particular companies own policies, I suggest you own thatcompany first, otherwise you have no say in those policies or how they are enforced.
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    So if wal-mart says that their policy is to follow state law, and then some employee asks you to leave. You believe you should leave, even though that employee is completely violating the company policy?
    Of course. Any employee has full legal authority to ask you to leave, notwithstanding any internal company policy.

    Not when those policies contradict the authority they've been given.
    We're talking legal authority here. The only authority courts will recognize if the issue gets that far.

    The only way to meet such people is to escalate until it's clear that they speak with the voice of property authority.
    They do speak with the voice of property authority. "Such people" have been hired to represent the business owner. To not obey their lawful orders to leave is to committ criminal trespass.

    I'm sorry if I don't bow down and comply like some people here.
    If you don't, you're committing a crime: trespass.



  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    19

    Post imported post

    So if wal-mart says that their policy is to follow state law, and then some employee asks you to leave. You believe you should leave, even though that employee is completely violating the company policy?
    Of course!! When the business rep is asking you to leave, that is the NEW rule for YOU. If there is a written policy allowing you to stay, that is an internal matter that they will have to deal with (and you can help them in that process by sending an angry letter).

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    90

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    So if wal-mart says that their policy is to follow state law, and then some employee asks you to leave. You believe you should leave, even though that employee is completely violating the company policy?
    Of course. Any employee has full legal authority to ask you to leave, notwithstanding any internal company policy.

    I think you'll find that only management has the legal authority to speak for the owners.

    Not when those policies contradict the authority they've been given.
    We're talking legal authority here. The only authority courts will recognize if the issue gets that far.

    I agree. Please see my first comment.

    The only way to meet such people is to escalate until it's clear that they speak with the voice of property authority.
    They do speak with the voice of property authority. "Such people" have been hired to represent the business owner. To not obey their lawful orders to leave is to committ criminal trespass.

    If by "such people" you mean the management of an establishment they indeed have been hired to "enforce company "
    policy. That does not give them the authority to make policy on the fly. Of course you have the recourse of notifying the company headquarters after the fact and asking them to take disciplinary action if necessary to correct the wayward employee.

    I'm sorry if I don't bow down and comply like some people here.
    Asking for written clarification is not wrong. It is a wise and prudent thing to do. If as in this case the so called "manager" refuses to provide any written policy it most likely indicates that there is no policy. By directing your inquiries to the owners you will find out the true policy of the owners without filtering or personal bias of the employees being displayed.

    If you don't, you're committing a crime: trespass.


  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    I think you'll find that only management has the legal authority to speak for the owners.
    Any employee has been hired to, among other things, speak for the owners. We've had a police officer on this board weigh in, and he seems to agree with me, and I imagine he's had to deal with such a situation in more than an academic manner.

    If by "such people" you mean the management of an establishment they indeed have been hired to "enforce company " policy. That does not give them the authority to make policy on the fly.
    By "such people" I mean all employees. From the standpoint of strictly criminal law, yes, any employee has the right to eject any person for any legal reason at any time.

    If as in this case the so called "manager" refuses to provide any written policy it most likely indicates that there is no policy.
    But there is a policy at that point, written or not. You've just been notified of it: "you can't have that gun in here, you need to leave." That's the policy. There's no legal requirement that it be written. You are compelled to obey it or face a criminal trespass charge.

    Private businesses are complete dictatorships when it comes to their own internal policies. They can change them at will, any time they want, as many times as they want, verbal or written, notice or not, and even be selective about who they apply them to. Any employee can have the authority to make policy as they see fit. Whether or not any employee is authorized is none of our business when we have been asked to leave. It's not a matter the criminal court is concerned with.

  22. #22
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Kildars wrote:
    Hello All,

    This occurred in Arizona, but has to do with Nordstroms.

    I was shopping with my girlfriend in the mall for an hour with no problems. I walked into nordstroms and I knew there was going to be a problem because the young teenage girl behind the jewelry counter immediately noticed my sidearm. I saw her talk to one of her co workers, then get on the phone. I didn't know if she was calling the police or the security. However, I finished looking and right as I was about to leave Nordstroms, an african american male named "Sam" from loss prevention approached me. He said that I could not carry on nordstroms because it's private property. I asked him if there was a written policy I could reference, or if he was just making this up on the spot without properly knowing policy. He refused to give me a written copy, saying that it's "private property" over and over again. I explained to him there are no signs on the doors either at the front of the store or the entrance leading to the parking lot. Anyways, I was getting no where with him. I left.

    As I was leaving, I went into another store and did some shopping and three security guards and a police officer approached me. Only the security officer spoke to me. He said that I needed to leave because they do not allow firearms on the property. I asked him for a written policy as well, he kinda reached into his pocket and grabbed some papers, then his other security officer friend just chimed in and said "This is private property, you need to leave." I kindly explained that there are no signs on the doors, and I have shopped here multiple times with no issues. He didn't care, he said "We don't have to put signs, but you need to leave now."

    I got up to leave, and they escorted me out.
    By your estimates, how much time elapsed:

    a) in your interaction with Sam the Nordstrom LP fellow?

    b) in your interaction with the 3 SG/1 LEO group?

    Also, why did you have to "get up" to leave? Were you seated in the store?



  23. #23
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post


    RCW 9A.52.090
    Criminal trespass — Defenses.

    In any prosecution under RCW 9A.52.070 and 9A.52.080, it is a defense that:

    (1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.52.070 was abandoned; or

    (2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises; or

    (3) The actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license access thereto, would have licensed him to enter or remain; or

    (4) The actor was attempting to serve legal process which includes any document required or allowed to be served upon persons or property, by any statute, rule, ordinance, regulation, or court order, excluding delivery by the mails of the United States. This defense applies only if the actor did not enter into a private residence or other building not open to the public and the entry onto the premises was reasonable and necessary for service of the legal process.
    Your boss says I stay, which overrides anything someone lower down says.. Those with the authority (corporate) in cases where corporate policy has been established, is the 'law of the land', I obviously have reason to believe that I have the right to stay there if I have in my hand a document from the CEO (In effect, all policies are approved by them) saying my conduct is permitted...

    Will I stay if I'm asked to leave; NO!. COULD I STAY if I wanted, yes.
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

  24. #24
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    TechnoWeenie wrote:

    RCW 9A.52.090
    Criminal trespass — Defenses.

    In any prosecution under RCW 9A.52.070 and 9A.52.080, it is a defense that:

    (1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.52.070 was abandoned; or

    (2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises; or

    (3) The actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license access thereto, would have licensed him to enter or remain; or

    ...
    Your boss says I stay, which overrides anything someone lower down says.. Those with the authority (corporate) in cases where corporate policy has been established, is the 'law of the land', I obviously have reason to believe that I have the right to stay there if I have in my hand a document from the CEO (In effect, all policies are approved by them) saying my conduct is permitted...

    Will I stay if I'm asked to leave; NO!. COULD I STAY if I wanted, yes.
    That doesn't make any sense, TW. Why wouldn't you stay?

    A right unexcercised is a right lost.....

  25. #25
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    TechnoWeenie wrote:

    RCW 9A.52.090
    Criminal trespass — Defenses.

    In any prosecution under RCW 9A.52.070 and 9A.52.080, it is a defense that:

    (1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.52.070 was abandoned; or

    (2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises; or

    (3) The actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license access thereto, would have licensed him to enter or remain; or

    ...
    Your boss says I stay, which overrides anything someone lower down says.. Those with the authority (corporate) in cases where corporate policy has been established, is the 'law of the land', I obviously have reason to believe that I have the right to stay there if I have in my hand a document from the CEO (In effect, all policies are approved by them) saying my conduct is permitted...

    Will I stay if I'm asked to leave; NO!. COULD I STAY if I wanted, yes.
    That doesn't make any sense, TW. Why wouldn't you stay?

    A right unexcercised is a right lost.....
    Because I gain nothing by being a belligerent ass.
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... 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
  •