• 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.

Business owners rights

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
You are woefully lacking in your knowledge of the law. A patron who enters a business that is open to the public is legally termed a "business invitee." That is, the proprietor has "invited" you to enter his business, but that "invitation" can be revoked for any reason whatsoever unless the law forbids specific discrimination, i.e., discrimination against the "protected classes" is not allowed. The right to bear arms is not a "protected class," so if a businessperson does not want anyone in his/her store to be carrying a firearm or other weapon, he has every right to exclude that person.

The 2nd Amendment, like all of the other amendments in the Bill of Rights, exists to prevent the *government* from treating its citizens unfairly. One cannot invoke the 2nd Amendment to force a private business owner to give up his property rights, e.g., the right to control who enters his establishment.

Well, you're mostly right on this.

Businesses open to the public are considered under most state laws as "semi-public" places. Many of your Constitutional rights extend into those locations, most specifically those preventing the owners from discriminating on the basis of race, religion, creed, gender, and disability. Those rights aren't absolutely, however, so Disneyland can erect signs requiring minimum rider height for some rides, and warnings against anyone with a cardiac condition from riding rides which may exacerbate the condition. It's even been held that if an obviously frail octegenarian wants to ride the "Thrill of Death" triple looping double-twisting roller coaster, the owners of that ride have a vested fiduciary interest in not allowing such an action.

Put simply, if a business owner tells you "no firearms," whether in signage or person, then I'd respect that and leave. Failure to do so in most states constitutes tresspass. If it's concealed, the waters are muddied and in some states it's still tresspass while in other states it's not.

In contrast, when you're on truly private property i.e. someone else's home or apartment, there are no "public use" issues. If they say "leave" you'd better get.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
Put simply, if a business owner tells you "no firearms," whether in signage or person, then I'd respect that and leave. Failure to do so in most states constitutes tresspass. If it's concealed, the waters are muddied and in some states it's still tresspass while in other states it's not.
Put simply, telling someone "no firearms" does not constitute "notice of trespass" in most states.

Some states DO have statute that permits a sign to be notice of trespass, but it is more common to only cause trespass in cases of "owner, or agent of an owner gives direct notice of trespass."

Until given notice by an owner or agent of the owner, you aren't "trespassed." It is polite to depart if "no guns in here" is stated, but it does not carry legal weight.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Put simply, telling someone "no firearms" does not constitute "notice of trespass" in most states...

In Alabama it doesn't. If you violate the sign and are caught, you will likely be asked to leave. If that request comes from the owner or his agent and you refuse, then that is trespass.

That being said, I honor all "No Guns" signs and encourage others to do so too. If we want our rights respected, we begin by respecting the rights of others.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP Oh, and two extra free pennies: I don't want carriers to become a protected class.

This comes closest to my sentiments.

Property rights are hugely important. And, so is self-defense. The problem enters in when one or the other seeks redress from government. Oh...my...god...no! No! No! NO!

As soon as either side asks government to step in, they've just authorized the most despicable, untrustworthy, anti-rights cesspool collection pond in history to do something. It is guaranteed that once government feels it is authorized to intervene once, it will assume to itself the authority to continue intervening, and will find numerous and creative ways to intervene in broader and broader areas until it tyrannizes left, right and far, far afield from where it started.

Just leave government out of it. Change society by persuasion; forget about government coercion making the change.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
In Alabama it doesn't. If you violate the sign and are caught, you will likely be asked to leave. If that request comes from the owner or his agent and you refuse, then that is trespass.

That being said, I honor all "No Guns" signs and encourage others to do so too. If we want our rights respected, we begin by respecting the rights of others.

In Nevada, a "no guns" sign carries no weight of statute or of trespass. The only signs valid by statute are those for specific "prohibited places," which are defined by statute.

What "Rights of Others" do you allege are violated if someone does not leave where legally able to be?
 
Last edited:

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
I can’t sue, if you post a sign denying me a right to carry my firearm, a situation where I could have done something about, if I was allowed to exercise my right to self defense.

Think about it.

This is America. You can sue for anything. Winning is another story, but if you left your weapon pursuant to company policy and some crazed person shot up the place and there was no attempt at security and your injuries were emotionally traumatic enough you may find an amicable jury. Or maybe not.
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Well, you're mostly right on this.

Businesses open to the public are considered under most state laws as "semi-public" places.



Gentlemen, I think we are over picking the wrong nit here.

I would submit that "most states" do not define/consider such businesses as "semi-public" in their statutes and that that reference is an attempt to refine the distinction between a business that invites the public and a private. non-inviting establishment i. e. your home.

I have long advocated "quasi-public" as a term fitting the need, but it too is not contained within any statute of which I am aware.

IMHO no additional distinction is needed other than to assist in layman's terms our daily conversation to this regard.

Now if some governmental entity were to say that if you generally invite the public then you may not restrict/limit any of the enumerated rights, I would personally be pleased. Still we run directly into states rights thinking, personal property rights and the problem of venue/promoter vs ownership. Would required some pointed and narrow application, I think. Feelings do run strong on these.
 
Last edited:

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Well, you're mostly right on this.

Businesses open to the public are considered under most state laws as "semi-public" places...



OCDO Rules said:
(5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

Moving on.
 

Jeff Hayes

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
2,569
Location
Long gone
Geeze the Constitution and Bill of Rights sets limits on the goverment not on individuals, business owners or organizations. You dont have 2nd Amendment rights on my property or any other rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. You do have some protection if you are in a protected class via Federal law but that is law not the Bill of Rights.

I agree with Eye there should not be any such thing as a protected class.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
Geeze the Constitution and Bill of Rights sets limits on the goverment not on individuals, business owners or organizations. You dont have 2nd Amendment rights on my property or any other rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. You do have some protection if you are in a protected class via Federal law but that is law not the Bill of Rights.

I agree with Eye there should not be any such thing as a protected class.

You clearly "get it."
 
Top