Not that I know of. This isn't California.
Has this group ever had an open carry protest in front of a business that posts a 4-229 sign?
Not that I know of. This isn't California.
I just don't ever spend any money in their place(s).
No guns sign = none of my money!
$2 Bill - Calling Card of the 2A Movement
If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
Seriously, who is John Galt?
Vires et honestas
Its just as much the business owners right to not allow weapons as it is everyone's right to carry. I just go elsewhere.
It makes me mad to see the sign, but he has rights as well.
Last edited by armedman; 01-23-2011 at 02:46 PM.
Blah, what i do while in AZ is that I stand outside the door and ring the door, knock on the window until someone comes out. I point out that I'm a 9/11 survivor, x-LEO and that I OC but can't get my f'ing pizza in Pizza Hut, so ask them to take my order on the sidewalk.
Another thing you can do is give out free signs, you know the ones that
have a circle with a line through it, and says "Gun Free Zone" then small writing saying
(all robbers welcome !)
My wife took her truck to Integrity Automotive on Ina Rd (Marana). She'd alread made the appointment by phone. There'a a big ol' 'No Firearms' sign on the door. Wife takes note... complains to the manager. Manager sez it comes from the owner. Sez it's 'cause of some OSHA reg... but the posting is ARS 4-229. OK... wife-poo's got a .40 in her purse. Tells the guy to advise the owner she's lost a repeat customer. Several in fact. This is a rare event for us.
I have spoken with managers and owners that have the signs posted. Most are just ignorant about it. One told me he did not want a "shootout" in his restaurant. He said if a BG points a gun at him and he gives up the $ hopefully he will leave and it will be over. If a "Rambo customer" comes to his aid and starts shooting, then the BG starts, all his customers are at a grater risk of being shoot. "Most likely the BG does not want to kill, he just wants the $."
My friend owns a store with the sign. She has a small 38 concealed on her all the time. Her brother has a 9mm and a shotgun by the safe. They let select customers carry concealed. She also does not want a shootout. She is a very good shot, and told me she has no idea how well a stranger (customer) can shoot. When she took her CCW class the instructor told her about some of the students that now carry and how bad and ignorant they are about guns. Thats when the sign got put up. She will let you carry if she knows you and if you are responsible and not a mall ninja. Get this, she has a NRA decal next the sign. I met them years ago when I was doing Armored work. I gave them crap all the time about the signs.
I know several people who carry concealed and just ignore the sign. How are they ever going to know if you're truly carrying concealed anyway.
It actually is a crime if you ignore the sign, and you can get charged with misconduct with a firearm and/or tresspassing, since they made it clear they did not want you in their business with a firearm. However, if you actually conceal it, they will never know, but you're still breaking the law technically.
An interesting point about these signs. They have to post 2 copies. One at all entrance doors and a 2nd by the liquor license. You are allowed to enter, with your firearm, for the purpose of checking if the 2nd sign is posted correctly. If it's not, then you are good to go. One thing about this, if you're open carrying, expect to be asked to leave anyway.
Last year we (AzCDL) got the liquor laws changed to require that the license be posted in a conspicuous location. Prior to that it could be anywhere. Chipotle's was in a back hallway, not accessed by the public, and next to it was the no firearms sign. They never posted on the door until recently.
Regarding penalties, it isn't a tresspassing violation to enter where liquor is consumed - it's a misdemeanor for ignoring the sign.
The trespassing issue is when businesses, like Costco, post a no firearms sign at the door.
If the business posts their front door NO FIREARMS, then it's trespassing.
If they don't post, but only display the requirements in the Alcohol law; it's not trespassing, it's failure to obey that load of crap about alcohol.
Same sign, different place, different law, different penalty. Could use some ironing out. No rational person would follow that process. It's illogical.
Looks like this one is past the time for someone quoting law to provide an actual quote from the statute.
Last edited by wrightme; 02-02-2011 at 07:34 AM.
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
If you are entering a place that serves alcohol for consumption that is "posted" (no firearms) it's a misdemeanor for carrying a firearm inside. This is covered in the liquor statutes. The sign does not have to be at the door - it's required to be near the liquor license.
Any other private property (other than a place that serves booze) that is posted "no firearms" is a trespassing issue. Different statute.
And, any "public" building (i.e., state and local government) that is posted is required to provide storage.
Logic has nothing to do with making laws. That's high school civics fantasy. If there is one thing I've learned from 5 years of successfully pushing through improvements to Arizona's firearms law is that "The perfect is the enemey of the good."
"1. Be posted in a conspicuous location accessible to the general public and immediately adjacent to the liquor license posted on the licensed premises."
This means 2, unless they post their liquor license in a "conspicuous" location, aka the front door.
It needs to be posted in a place where you can clearly see it when you enter, and next to their liquor license.
The operative law is ARS 13-1502A
13-1502. Criminal trespass in the third degree; classification
A. A person commits criminal trespass in the third degree by:
1. Knowingly entering or remaining unlawfully on any real property after a reasonable request to leave by the owner or any other person having lawful control over such property, or reasonable notice prohibiting entry.
2. Knowingly entering or remaining unlawfully on the right-of-way for tracks, or the storage or switching yards or rolling stock of a railroad company.
B. Criminal trespass in the third degree is a class 3 misdemeanor.
The operative words are 'reasonable request'. Your interpretation would mean that you could be ARRESTED for walking in to a 7-11 barefoot, if they post 'shoes required' on the door, or arrested for bringing in your dachsund when it's posted 'no dogs'. Such signs on non-Title 4 businesses ("shoes required", "no pets", "no firearms", etc) are advising you of terms of entry, but you are not trespassing until given a reasonable request to leave, since the signs are not 'prohibiting entry' to the business in general.
There is nothing in ARS 13-3102 (Misconduct Involving Weapons) that covers what you are saying. I'm not sure where you got that from.
However, 4-229 clearly says you can enter to check for the 2nd sign.
F. This section does not prohibit a person who possesses a handgun from entering the licensed premises for a limited time for the specific purpose of either:
1. Seeking emergency aid.
2. Determining whether a sign has been posted pursuant to subsection A of this section.
It's all rather silly.
I've been a cop for nearly 17 years. I've never even HEARD of anyone being arrested for ignoring any kind of 'no pets' 'shoes required' or 'no firearms' signs, unless they refused verbal request to leave first. Your lawyer friend may live in the world of 'anything is possible', but I live in the world of 'what is realistic'.