Trigger Dr
Regular Member
Or a sign stating
CAUTION CRIME SCENE IN PROGRESS
CAUTION CRIME SCENE IN PROGRESS
No this is not for "Private Property", but for business.
No this is not for "Private Property", but for business. Also, there are no property rights in the US
I am going to sit here and laugh my ass off when these places get robbed. Seriously, what better way to announce your vulnerable than to put a big sign saying "PROUD GUN FREE ZONE!" You're literally asking to be robbed in that case!
I'm not willing to go that far until I see case law.
Rcw 9A.52.090
This is part of a defense to being charged with trespass. If did not comply with all entry conditions then have you entered unlawfully? If the business owner communicates to you via sign that your gun is not welcome then I think entering with your gun is a textbook definition of trespass since you disregarded lawful conditions imposed on access to said property.
Now it's unlikely a DA will ever charge that. Still just because we don't have a specific law empowering signs, the sign still would put a reasonable person on notice that the behavior in question is prohibited on their premises.
Why would you want to spend money at such a place anyway?
Latest list of unarmed victim zones:
Participating Businesses
Barboza
Big Marios
Bitterroot
Brenthave
Bus Stop Espresso.
Cafe Paloma
Cafe Racer
Century Ballroom
Cupcake Royale
Elliott Bay Books.
Fish Fry
Fredd'ys Junion
Havana
Hot Cakes
Lindas
Lost Lake
Moe Bar
Neumo's
Oddfellows
Pies and Pints.
Quinn's
Silver Platters
Smith
Sweatbox Yoga
The Saint
Totokaelo
Valley of Roses.
Zoe
Perhaps some direct action is in order? Go to some of these businesses, create big orders, then say "Oh wait. You ban guns? I can't shop here, in good conscience."
Take up as much store employee time as possible. Really inconvenience them. ...
Perhaps some direct action is in order? Go to some of these businesses, create big orders, then say "Oh wait. You ban guns? I can't shop here, in good conscience."
Take up as much store employee time as possible. Really inconvenience them. The time for being respectful is over. It doesn't work.
So, what force of law does such signage have in Washington exactly?
If you carry despite such a sign, can police arrest you for trespass immediately, or only after you refuse to leave when an employee tells you to?
As I understand the law, these signs change nothing.
So, your premise is that I have to read every inch of an entryway before I can enter a business?
If I see a big sign placed at my eye level on the door and other places then, I will not offer the business my money.
Why can't they do as Starbucks does and just follow the law?
Pies & Pints Firstly, we haven't participated in any anti-gun or gun-ownership legislation or petition in anyway, though we have been asked to. Secondly, guns are not allowed in any place in King County that serves alcohol, which includes us. And also, gun ownership is a choice. Being black, or gay is not. Gun owners are not banned from our establishment, guns are, by law, not allowed in our establishment. And for the record, bigotry, and prejudice are not welcome here either. If you'd like to privately let us know where you incorrectly heard that we have any involvement with whatever it is you are referring to, we'll correct any misinformation. Thanks.
Stuff varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, becase in addition to case law you also have filing standards. Like in my jurisdiction, despite the fact that Assault on a LEO is a felony (Assault III), FILING STANDARDS for our county prosecutors (all felony cases go to county Prosecutors. City handles misdemeanors except for county cops) is a bit more - need disabling injury, past convictions for assault on a PO, etc.
I can tell you in my misdemeanor court (trespassing is either a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor depending), they will not file trespass charges if you violate a term of entry.
Iow, store says "shirts required" (similar to no firearms... a private property setting the rules to be served) and you walk in w/o a shirt, that in of itself is not going to get you arrested for trespassing. Store owner tells you to leave. You say "NO". He calls police. We will not arrest you for tresspass. Acting as agent of the store owner we tell you to leave or you will be arrested for trespasing. If you THEN refuse, you will get arrested (or cited) for trespassing.
I've gone to hundreds of trespassing type cases and it always works that way.
The store can also formally trespass you via notice, in other words at the time we eject you from the store (or the time you are getting arrested), you will be issued a trespass notice. The official notice, per the store personnel (we are merely acting as agents for them) puts you on notice that if you return within X years (it's on the form. Usually 1 yr), you will be arrested for trespassing. Even if you leave before the cops get there, if the guy positively ID's you (is sure it's you) you can be cited if not present, if you've been issued a trespass notice.
The guy I arrested last week started out as a terry for trespassing. He ended up having felony warrants, assaulted my partner, foot pursuit bla bla... it was a terry because the call came in that per the storeowner the person had been trespassed from the property previously and was thus trespassing. He said it was actually a condition of release from the judge, after "robbing" the store (turned out to be burglary not robbery). I could confirm none of this while enroute, but what he told dispatchers and willing to give his name etc means him reporting this stuff to us rose to the level of RAS. I could detain the male and then investigate further to find out if the trespass notice (whether a judge condition of release or a formal trespass notice) was still in effect AND he was the person trespassed.
To make a long story short, it turns out he WAS the person indicated but there was no trespass condition of release ANY MORE (it was a juvenile conviction and he had already completed his "community custody" (kind of like parole) thus there was no trespass notice/condition in effect.
However, he did have a felony warrant for Vehicular Assault and of course will also be charged for the Assault on a PO.
It was what the storeowner told us (dispatch) that gave me RAS. It turned out he WASN'T committing the crime that was reported, but that's irrelevant to the validity of the stop, since the specifics given (dress, location etc.) and the nonanonymous witness etc. gave me plenty of RAS to detain and investigate further.
And of course the fact that we can detain per RAS means that crimes like this can be investigated. It wasn't PC so I couldn't arrest and I wasn't going to walk into the store and speak to the storeowner to confirm if they had a notice or to get the guy's name so I could check with the courts on the condition of relase, since I couldn't keep an eye on the suspect AND do that. He would have ample opportunity to see my police car arrive and then leave before I had PC. Terry lets me freeze the scene and detain so I can investigate further without the suspect walking off, etc. Had to wait for backup so he could contact the store owner. Terry v. Ohio gave me the authoritah8 to detain him and investigate further to see if htere was PC or not.
Once I ran his name (which if he refused to give me I could have gotten from my laptop once I knew some incident particulars, since it was in our report database), he had felony warrant, so AT THAT POINT it went from RAS to PC
Also shows you what a moron some people are. he knew he had a warrant and yet he returned to the scene he had burglarized a few years earlier and hung out at one of their picnic benches (yes, the gas station had picnic bench outside). An intelligent person wouldn't go anywhere near that establishment since he could be recognized as a previous burglar and it was certainly a possibility the cops would be called on him etc.
If you are formally trespassed from a store and then steal a $1 stick of bubble gum, it is a burglary not a trespass and theft since you UNLAWFULLY entered (because you were trespassed and thus not allowed on property) and then you committed a crime within. I've arrested a few times for that.
Of course the prosecutor will always let it be pled down,. but technically it's a burglary (in some states, if they can prove you had the intent to steal before you entered, it is also burglary not shoplift iirc but not in my state)
Despite the fact that in my juridiction we won't arrest for trespassing based on the warning given prior to our arrival, I would not recommend standing your ground if ordered to leave. If they don't want you there, turning around and walking out is the best policy. Contrary to what others have said, they are not violating our constitutional (state or federal) RKBA rights in refusing to serve open carriers, any more than they are violting the first amendment by refusing to serve somebody that is wearing a "F*CK BUS" t-shirt, wearing of the latter being constitutionally protected, but that does not mean the store can't have a dress code that prohibits swear words on t's etc.