Misleading information on CC

This is a discussion on Misleading information on CC within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by _Hawkeye_ I guess it is ok, in an private store, that is open to the public, to say kick out people based ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 20 of 20
Like Tree3Likes

Thread: Misleading information on CC

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,811
    Quote Originally Posted by _Hawkeye_ View Post
    I guess it is ok, in an private store, that is open to the public, to say kick out people based upon skin color? I mean it is private property. But when you open a private property to the public, you shouldn't get to exclude members of the public based upon a constitutionally protected right. Whether it is the 2nd amendment, protecting firearms, or the 14th, protecting people of different skin colors. Private property that is not open to the public, sure, but private property that is open to the public should be, and in some cases is, held to a different standard.
    Nobody is being excluded. Your gun is being excluded. What is so hard for folks to figure that our. A gunowner is not a protected class under the law. Nor should they be. And the reason why business owners should be able to determine if folks caan carry on their property is clearly demonstrated by idiots like the guy in the theater two weeks ago that had an ND, the idiot in McDonalds, the idiot in a Walmart (or grocery store) last month.
    Not everyone is capable of using common sense and restraint with a firearm.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member Array SmokinFool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,297
    It seems we are talking about two different scenarios. First - public property being made available for private events, and second - private property being made available to the public.

    In the first scenario, I assume by "public" property we are talking about government property. In that case all will depend on your state and local laws regarding preemption.

    In the second scenario, it again depends on state and local laws. Do firearms prohibitions by private enterprises carry the weight of law? If yes, then you are prohibited from carrying at that venue. If the answer is no, then it's up to you whether or not you carry. Me, I would stay away from any business or private event that does not honor my right to self defense.

  4. #18
    New Member Array JasonGH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Spanaway
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Not everyone is capable of using common sense and restraint with a firearm.
    Ain't that the truth.

    SmokinFool, in my situation it is the first case. The Washington State Convention Center is government funded and falls under the classification as a public property.

    Obviously, no one would know I was carrying so I am not worried about being made. My concern comes from misinformation that seems to be prevalent when it comes to firearm issues, or really any issue in general. Such as a sign being placed out front of the WSCC that says no weapons allowed that carries no weight of law but is only there to keep street people out of the venue, para phrasing from one person in the thread that attended the NRA event here. It's the idea that criminals obey laws and that a sign will prevent a disaster that irks me, and I know it does a lot of other people as well. That same sign may make anyone in that building think that they have the authority to not let a person in who is carrying or kick them out if found to be carrying.

    Anyway, here is the Washington State Preemptive Law for everyone to see:

    RCW 9.41.290

    The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.

  5. #19
    VIP Member Array SmokinFool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,297
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonGH View Post

    Anyway, here is the Washington State Preemptive Law for everyone to see:

    RCW 9.41.290

    The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.
    Seems pretty straightforward.

  6. #20
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by BenGoodLuck View Post

    2. Denial of a person with a CPL to a private event at a public venue.
    Here in Virginia, a private event at a public venue, can get convoluted.

    A private entity leasing government property for an event generally may regulate or prohibit the carrying or possession of firearms on that property for such event. See http://www.ag.virginia.gov/Opinions%...09-Greason.pdf

    Lots of open questions as to what constitutes a lease.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •