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

Cite Needed. No Firearms On Private Property

stainless1911

Banned
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
8,855
Location
Davisburg, Michigan, United States
I know of course, that a private property owner can ask you to leave for any reason, including the possession of a firearm, but where is the cite for the actual written law in case someone wanted to look it up.
 

Bronson

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
2,126
Location
Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
MCL 750.552

750.552 Trespass upon lands or premises of another; violation; penalty.
Sec. 552.

(1) A person shall not do any of the following:

(a) Enter the lands or premises of another without lawful authority after having been forbidden so to do by the owner or occupant or the agent of the owner or occupant.

(b) Remain without lawful authority on the land or premises of another after being notified to depart by the owner or occupant or the agent of the owner or occupant.

(c) Enter or remain without lawful authority on fenced or posted farm property of another person without the consent of the owner or his or her lessee or agent. A request to leave the premises is not a necessary element for a violation of this subdivision. This subdivision does not apply to a person who is in the process of attempting, by the most direct route, to contact the owner or his or her lessee or agent to request consent.

(2) A person who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 30 days or by a fine of not more than $250.00, or both.

Bronson
 

Bronson

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
2,126
Location
Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
(1) A person shall not do any of the following:

(a) Enter the lands or premises of another without lawful authority after having been forbidden so to do by the owner or occupant or the agent of the owner or occupant.

That right there is the sticky part. Does a sign on the door that clearly expresses the wishes of the property owner, that firearms are forbidden, constitute sufficient notice to warrant an arrest for trespassing without the owner having to ask you to leave?

In other words if you ignore a "no guns" sign can the owner just call the police and have you arrested instead of asking you to leave?

We keep hearing/reading that "all they can do is ask you to leave" and "you can't be prosecuted unless you refuse to leave" but that's not how I read it. I read it as IF you are asked to leave and you don't then, yes, you may be arrested/prosecuted for trespass, but section (a) says that you may also be arrested/prosecuted for trespass for simply entering property from which you have been forbidden. I know we don't have case law that says a prominently posted sign = sufficient notice but I can definitely forsee a judge interpreting it that way....I probably would.

Bronson
 

dougwg

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
2,443
Location
MOC Charter Member Westland, Michigan, USA
That right there is the sticky part. Does a sign on the door that clearly expresses the wishes of the property owner, that firearms are forbidden, constitute sufficient notice to warrant an arrest for trespassing without the owner having to ask you to leave?

In other words if you ignore a "no guns" sign can the owner just call the police and have you arrested instead of asking you to leave?

We keep hearing/reading that "all they can do is ask you to leave" and "you can't be prosecuted unless you refuse to leave" but that's not how I read it. I read it as IF you are asked to leave and you don't then, yes, you may be arrested/prosecuted for trespass, but section (a) says that you may also be arrested/prosecuted for trespass for simply entering property from which you have been forbidden. I know we don't have case law that says a prominently posted sign = sufficient notice but I can definitely forsee a judge interpreting it that way....I probably would.

Bronson
"There's a sign?"
"What sign?"
"Sorry, I was distracted while holding the door open for an elderly couple and didn't see any sign."
 

Bronson

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
2,126
Location
Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
"There's a sign?"
"What sign?"
"Sorry, I was distracted while holding the door open for an elderly couple and didn't see any sign."

Ignorance is no excuse. We won't know until there is case law but I'd guess that an anti-gun judge would say that a business prominently placing a sign as to their wishes has met their obligation at a good faith effort to inform gun owners of the policy.

Not to mention that when they pull the security camera footage and see you walking in without stopping to help an elderly couple....well now you have just lied in court.

Bronson
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
Ignorance is no excuse. We won't know until there is case law but I'd guess that an anti-gun judge would say that a business prominently placing a sign as to their wishes has met their obligation at a good faith effort to inform gun owners of the policy.

Not to mention that when they pull the security camera footage and see you walking in without stopping to help an elderly couple....well now you have just lied in court.

Bronson

I cannot speak to WI statute, but in NV, a sign prohibiting any specific act in an otherwise public establishment carries no weight; until the authorized agent of the establishment informs you that your presence is no longer desired (trespassed). Then anyone told this must leave. The ONLY signs that carry the weight of law are those that reference specific statute that prohibit carry; such as in specific municipal buildings.
 

Bronson

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
2,126
Location
Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
I cannot speak to WI statute, but in NV, a sign prohibiting any specific act in an otherwise public establishment carries no weight; until the authorized agent of the establishment informs you that your presence is no longer desired (trespassed). Then anyone told this must leave. The ONLY signs that carry the weight of law are those that reference specific statute that prohibit carry; such as in specific municipal buildings.

So far it's the same here but we're really talking about getting hit with a trespassing charge not a firearms specific charge.

The way our tresspassing law reads, if you enter a place you have been forbidden to enter then you can be charged with trespassing. We don't have any case law yet that determines if you must be individually told you are forbidden or if a sign posted at the entrance is sufficient. Other states/places have ruled that a sign is sufficient notice of the owner's policy.

Bronson
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
So far it's the same here but we're really talking about getting hit with a trespassing charge not a firearms specific charge.

The way our tresspassing law reads, if you enter a place you have been forbidden to enter then you can be charged with trespassing. We don't have any case law yet that determines if you must be individually told you are forbidden or if a sign posted at the entrance is sufficient. Other states/places have ruled that a sign is sufficient notice of the owner's policy.

Bronson
Just like I said, the sign alone cannot prohibit your lawful entry while carrying, unless the property owner's agent informs you to leave. It does not matter if the sign says "No blue shirts" or "No firearms." It does not carry the weight of law, unless there is a statute specifying that business owners can post discriminatory signs that carry the weight of law.

In other words, the sign alone does not forbid your entry.
 
Top