Picketing business with ARS 4-229 "no guns" sign

azcdlfred said:

Businesses do not have to post two signs. The law only requires one sign to be near the liquor license, which sometimes is hard to find. There is no requirement to post at the door.



Fred

Click to expand...

What 4-229 actually says

"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.

coorsleftfield said:

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.

Click to expand...

Nonsense.

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.

coorsleftfield said:

What 4-229 actually says

"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.

Click to expand...

Thanks for correcting that! I was wrong in my earlier statements.

Fred

AZkopper said:

Nonsense.

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.

Click to expand...

I talked to a lawyer about this. His opinion is that the no weapons sign could be considered "reasonable notice prohibiting entry" and if you enter with a weapon you could be charged with trespass, since you knowingly entered against their wishes, and they posted their wishes.

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.

coorsleftfield said:

I talked to a lawyer about this. His opinion is that the no weapons sign could be considered "reasonable notice prohibiting entry" and if you enter with a weapon you could be charged with trespass, since you knowingly entered against their wishes, and they posted their wishes.

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.

Click to expand...

Unlike geneal 'no trespassing' signs, this is a conditional term of business, for a building or location that is generally open to the public to conduct such business. They have to prove you saw the sign first. If you enter a business that has the usual 3" x 3" type signs, usually posted low and in the corner of the front window by the door, it is very easy to miss it. Unless they have it blazed on the front door, in 4" letters, it is impossible to prove you 'knowingly entered' unless you've been verbally informed and refused, (or there is record of you being verbally warned in the past, possibly). It is for this reason that reasonable request language is there.

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'.

He was definitely speaking from a what is possible standpoint. His point was the trespassing laws and the 4-229 law seem to be in conflict. 4-229 makes it clear that you can enter(for a limited time), with your handgun, even if you've seen the sign on the door , in order to check for the 2nd sign.

coorsleftfield said:

He was definitely speaking from a what is possible standpoint. His point was the trespassing laws and the 4-229 law seem to be in conflict. 4-229 makes it clear that you can enter(for a limited time), with your handgun, even if you've seen the sign on the door , in order to check for the 2nd sign.

Click to expand...

May be true, however...

All I need to do is see the sign on the door and my dollars go elsewhere!
"No guns" sign = No dollars spent. Period.
No need to check for a second sign inside.

-MH

For grins I went in 2 places today (Pei Wei and world market) that had no guns posted on the door. Neither of them had the required 2nd sign posted next to the liquor license, so I guess I'm good to go as far as carrying in these places..

coorsleftfield said:

For grins I went in 2 places today (Pei Wei and world market) that had no guns posted on the door. Neither of them had the required 2nd sign posted next to the liquor license, so I guess I'm good to go as far as carrying in these places..

Click to expand...

Cost Plus World Market doesn't serve alcohol for on-premise consumption, so they don't qualify under ARS 4-229. I don't know what Pei Wei is, so I don't know if you are making the same error there.

AZkopper said:

I don't know what Pei Wei is, so I don't know if you are making the same error there.

Click to expand...

It's a fast food Asian restaurant. A subsidiary of PF Chang. Booze is served for on premises consumption. Falls under 4-229.

FYI - the food is great at Pei Wei's (pronounced Pay Way, not Pee Wee).

Fred

AZkopper said:

Cost Plus World Market doesn't serve alcohol for on-premise consumption, so they don't qualify under ARS 4-229. I don't know what Pei Wei is, so I don't know if you are making the same error there.

Click to expand...

Really? That had a wine tasting on site yesterday that I went to. Would you consider that serving alcohol on premises?

coorsleftfield said:

Really? That had a wine tasting on site yesterday that I went to. Would you consider that serving alcohol on premises?

Click to expand...

OK, now we are getting deep in to Title 4, where I'm not so familiar. There a several types of Title 4 permits. I'm pretty sure CPWM is not an on-premise seller---otherwise you could just buy a beer and pop a top right there.

Wine tasting is most likely a single-use permit, issued for specific times and places.

That does raise interesting questions, though. If you are not a Title 4 'on premise seller', and are having a wine tasting in your business, how does that affect open carry (or no-permit conceal carry) during such an event??

AZkopper said:

OK, now we are getting deep in to Title 4, where I'm not so familiar. There a several types of Title 4 permits. I'm pretty sure CPWM is not an on-premise seller---otherwise you could just buy a beer and pop a top right there.

Wine tasting is most likely a single-use permit, issued for specific times and places.

That does raise interesting questions, though. If you are not a Title 4 'on premise seller', and are having a wine tasting in your business, how does that affect open carry (or no-permit conceal carry) during such an event??

Click to expand...

Which makes one wonder.....did they get such a single-use permit for that, or is a wine tasting such as this (sounds like a free sampler event?) a "permit" event?

I don't know, but they definitely have a liquor license on the wall. I didn't stop to read it.

coorsleftfield said:

I don't know, but they definitely have a liquor license on the wall. I didn't stop to read it.

Click to expand...

yes, because they need a license to sell. There are several types of liquor licenses: Off-presmise consumption, on-premise consumption, on-premise beer, on-premise hard liquor, etc. Just having a liquor license doesn't make it fall under 4-229, it has to be an on-premise consumption license.

So what if a non-alcohol serving business posts some generic "no firearms" sign, some place like Best Buy, does it mean anything?

I assume it means they will ask you to leave if they see it, but legally the sign doesn't have any law behind it. (besides trespassing maybe). Is this correct?

coorsleftfield said:

So what if a non-alcohol serving business posts some generic "no firearms" sign, some play like Best Buy, does it mean anything?

I assume it means they will ask you to leave if they see it, but legally the sign doesn't have any law behind it. (besides trespassing maybe). Is this correct?

Click to expand...

Yes. That was what I was trying to explain at the beginning of all of this.

coorsleftfield said:

So what if a non-alcohol serving business posts some generic "no firearms" sign, some place like Best Buy, does it mean anything?

I assume it means they will ask you to leave if they see it, but legally the sign doesn't have any law behind it. (besides trespassing maybe). Is this correct?

Click to expand...

Best Buy corporate police is to follow the laws of the state.

Was in Whole Foods last night. They have 4-229 plastered all over the front doors. I asked to see their liquor license. There was no 4-229 sign posted "immediately adjacent" to their license, as the law requires for it to be enforceable.

So to date, I've yet to come across an establishment who has the 4-229 signs posted correctly.

coorsleftfield said:

Was in Whole Foods last night. They have 4-229 plastered all over the front doors. I asked to see their liquor license. There was no 4-229 sign posted "immediately adjacent" to their license, as the law requires for it to be enforceable.

So to date, I've yet to come across an establishment who has the 4-229 signs posted correctly.

Click to expand...

Does Whole Foods even serve alcohol for on-premise consumption???? Or are they just that stupid?