No-Gun signs in GA - Page 6

No-Gun signs in GA

This is a discussion on No-Gun signs in GA within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by tacman605 2700. I agree with your post. Armyman as we have discussed many times before. A business is private property and yes ...

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 172
Like Tree48Likes

Thread: No-Gun signs in GA

  1. #76
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by tacman605 View Post
    2700. I agree with your post.

    Armyman as we have discussed many times before. A business is private property and yes you are a customer but the definition of a customer would be one who purchases a consumer goods from a place of business but I believe the legal term since it is private property is "invitee". You are invited into the retail outlet to purchase goods or services and as an invitee you can be asked to leave at anytime. As you stated you are not saying you would not leave it asked to but I have enough respect for the business owner whether the sign carries the weight of law or not I would respect his wishes.

    As stated above the sign does not say you cannot defend yourself simply that a firearm is not allowed/welcome in the business. Either find another way to defend yourself or shop somewhere else. Easy as that.
    I've already agreed many times that anyone has to leave when asked. Refusing to leave when asked should be a trespassing charge.

    That's not what we're talking about, though. The title of this thread is not "Being asked to leave in GA", it's "No-gun signs in GA".

    Walking past a sign is not being asked to leave. Walking past a sign should not result in a trespassing charge. If you're asked to leave it's because you did something disruptive and cought the owner's attention. You're harming the business in some way and you have no right to do that.

    Simply carrying a gun which no one even knows about, however, is not disruptive and does not harm the business.


  2. #77
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by Pythius View Post
    you can then be arrested for tresspassing when the owner asks you to leave, and you refuse.
    ...for refusing to leave when asked, but not for ignoring a no-gun sign.

    Maybe you don't understand that in some states the simple act of ignoring the sign is criminal. Not refusing to leave when asked, but just ignoring a sign, without ever being asked to leave, without ever refusing after being asked.

    If the owner has a no shoes/shirt sign posted but you pop in anyway to grab a quick drink, you can be asked to leave immediately, but that should not result in a criminal charge because you walked past a sign.

    If the owner has a no-smoking sign posted in an aria you could otherwise lawfully smoke, but you want to try and get your fix real quick and light up, you have to stop when asked, you have to leave when asked, you have to pick up your cigarette but, and the owner has every right to tell you not to return. But that shouldn't result in a criminal charge.

    These are civil matters. The criminal code should not apply.
    Lotus222 likes this.

  3. #78
    Member Array Ogre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Tuscaloosa, AL
    Posts
    292
    I guess THAT is the crux of the issue. Some here, myself included, feel the we as 2A Rights activist have an obligation to uphold the OTHER rights as well. Not just our "pet" rights. Whether the sign has the force of law (violator can be arrested on a weapons charge) or not, we should honor the rights of others if we want/expect ours to be honored. I for one don't really want there to be a weapons charge for violating the sign, but I do feel signage should serve as a statement of trespass. I.E. cross the sign, you are already trespassing. If found with a gun, then you pay the fine and may not enter again.

  4. #79
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by Pythius View Post
    that is correct. If Walmart says "no-guns", you have to abide by their rules or they can deem you a trespasser, ask you to leave, and have you arrested and press charges against you if you don't leave.

    Private-property rights in this instance, trump the 2nd Amendment as the 2nd Amendment only covers GOVERNMENT regulation of firearms.

    now, if Walmart said "no black people with guns", then we would have a case.

    but simply saying "no-guns", is allowed.
    Not in SD, GA or many other states. If Walmart posts a no-gun sign, you carry anyway, are caught, asked to leave, and you leave, that's the end of it. You are not trespassing when you leave when ask even-though you ignored a no-gun sign.

    In OH, TX, and other states, if Walmart posts a no-gun sign, you carry anyway, are caught, asked to leave, and you leave, you're arrested for criminal trespassing.

    A no-gun policy is a private policy. The criminal code should not be used to enforce private policies. If a private owner finds someone in violation of a private policy (for an act which is otherwise perfectly legal, btw) the owner can have them leave, but not criminally charged.

  5. #80
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by Ogre View Post
    I guess THAT is the crux of the issue. Some here, myself included, feel the we as 2A Rights activist have an obligation to uphold the OTHER rights as well. Not just our "pet" rights. Whether the sign has the force of law (violator can be arrested on a weapons charge) or not, we should honor the rights of others if we want/expect ours to be honored. I for one don't really want there to be a weapons charge for violating the sign, but I do feel signage should serve as a statement of trespass. I.E. cross the sign, you are already trespassing. If found with a gun, then you pay the fine and may not enter again.
    If someone brings a can of soda into a movie theater, that should not result in a criminal trespassing charge.

    The criminal code should not be used to enforce private business policies.

  6. #81
    Member Array Ogre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Tuscaloosa, AL
    Posts
    292
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    If someone brings a can of soda into a movie theater, that should not result in a criminal trespassing charge.

    The criminal code should not be used to enforce private business policies.
    I think it should, I'm for the preservation of ALL rights. Don't like the policies, go elsewhere , or work to get them changed. Work WITH the property owners not against them. You never know, your dollar may be just the one to convince him to change his policy. Mom & Pops are the easiest to influence and they need all the help they can get...that's why I shop there when possible.

  7. #82
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by Ogre View Post
    I think it should...
    That's just silliness.

  8. #83
    VIP Member Array pittypat21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,496
    Quote Originally Posted by Ogre View Post
    I think it should, I'm for the preservation of ALL rights. Don't like the policies, go elsewhere , or work to get them changed. Work WITH the property owners not against them. You never know, your dollar may be just the one to convince him to change his policy. Mom & Pops are the easiest to influence and they need all the help they can get...that's why I shop there when possible.
    You think a person should be charged with a criminal offense for violating a business' policy such as bringing in outside food or drinks?

    I agree with ArmyMan. That's just silliness.
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet."
    -General James Mattis, USMC

  9. #84
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,053
    Employees and customers are not social guests. Different rules apply.
    Correct but not in the way you are presenting. Employees are subject to the rules and regulations of the owner as subject to the provisions of employment. As an example as a business owner he may provide a smoking area for his customers but as a condition of employment he may state that employee's are not authorized to smoke on his property or a restaurant owner may allow his customers to bring in food from another restaurant but he may forbid his employees to do the same thing. His house his rules, don't like it don't work there.

    Here is what the legal precedent/definition in regards to invitee and their rights.

    An invitee is only an invitee within the scope of permission granted by the landowner. Thus, if an invitee is invited to do business in a store and is injured snooping around in the private storage area, he does not have invitee status in that area. So if the invitee is snooping around in the dark, trips and falls on something, the land occupier is not liable since the snooper exceeded the consent given him/her (Whelan v. Van Natta).
    The landowner has final say so period. Yes the legality of the signs varies from state to state but it is still the owner's choice as to what they say happens on their property. It cannot get any plainer than that.

    As far as the comment in regards to the state enforcing property rules and regulations.

    The US Constitution states that providing that powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the States or the people.
    So according to the this statement the state or the people do indeed have the right to enforce these rules and regulations.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  10. #85
    VIP Member Array pittypat21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,496
    I'm so glad you mentioned the Tenth Amendment. It has been my friend today.

    I have a very long post coming up that I'm working on right now.

    All posters - please try to keep your answers specific to GA law - that is the concern of this thread. Laws about what is or isn't private property, trespassing, etc., will not apply unless it is GA law. Thank you.
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet."
    -General James Mattis, USMC

  11. #86
    Member Array 2700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    SoFlo
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    In SD, carrying a gun past a sign does not constitute trespassing, which was the claim. In other states, carrying past a sign is trespassing.
    I never stated it was trespass in Georgia. But if you continue to ignore the wishes of merchants, the legislature will insure it will be.


    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    Employees and customers are not social guests. Different rules apply.
    I never said social guest, those were your words. I said, “guest” as a common term. Legally you are an invitee, which, insofar of what you think is your “right”, it is the same – you don’t have one. Do you have a problem as an employee? We can start another thread about that. Stay on track; this is about what you think is your right as a customer. Nonetheless you have no “right” to carry a firearm on private property as a customer or employee.

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    If no customer had 'a legal right to be' in any store, then every case of self defense which occurred in a store would result in a murder charge since the customer wasn't in a place he had a legal right to be.
    You are confusing and mixing laws. Your “right” as you say to be in the store is conditional and revocable. The meaning of “right” in any “Stand Your Ground” law is being in a place lawfully. If the intent of the legislature was to define “right” in that statement as a Constitutional right, every one of those defenses would fail on private property.

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    Customers have a right to do business with you when you're open to the public. You retain the right to close your doors to the public at any time.
    You have no “right” to do business with any store owner. You are an invitee. That is not a “right”. This is why I used the term guest, in hopes it would be easier to understand.

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    But I don't have to honor a gun-buster sign in SD.
    Of course, we know that, and your demonstration of a self-centric sense of entitlement is clear. And it is that very self-centric sense of entitlement that will cause the law to change and give signs the force of law, causing honest respectful gun owners to get arrested because that did not see the sign. Congratulations, you are a real asset to all gun owners.

    If people behaved properly we would not need all these laws, but because of people like you that have no sense of respect and must be forced legally to act properly, we need these laws.

    As I posted previously we should all be good ambassadors of gun owners. You are the antithesis of that. Moreover, it is your actions that will facilitate stronger anti-gun laws because you cannot simply respect a store owner's wishes because you need a “law” to instruct you how to behave with respect and decency when you are a guest (read, invitee) on someone’s private property.
    Last edited by 2700; October 25th, 2012 at 04:45 PM. Reason: removed a paragrah
    NRA Certified Instructor - RSO - Life Member

    The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.
    -Albert Einstein

  12. #87
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by tacman605 View Post
    Correct but not in the way you are presenting. Employees are subject to the rules and regulations of the owner as subject to the provisions of employment. As an example as a business owner he may provide a smoking area for his customers but as a condition of employment he may state that employee's are not authorized to smoke on his property or a restaurant owner may allow his customers to bring in food from another restaurant but he may forbid his employees to do the same thing. His house his rules, don't like it don't work there.

    Here is what the legal precedent/definition in regards to invitee and their rights.



    The landowner has final say so period. Yes the legality of the signs varies from state to state but it is still the owner's choice as to what they say happens on their property. It cannot get any plainer than that.

    As far as the comment in regards to the state enforcing property rules and regulations.



    So according to the this statement the state or the people do indeed have the right to enforce these rules and regulations.
    Who are you quoting?

  13. #88
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by 2700 View Post
    I never stated it was trespass in Georgia.
    I never said you said that, I said that was the claim I was responding to, you didn't make the claim I was responding to.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2700 View Post
    But if you continue to ignore the wishes of merchants, the legislature will insure it will be.
    The law is moving in the other direction. WE're getting guns-in-cars laws passed, it's only a matter of time before we remove criminal penalties for ignoring signs. After that we'll criminalize the signs.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2700 View Post
    I never said social guest, those were your words. I said, “guest” as a common term.
    That doesn't mean anything real, it has no weight.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2700 View Post
    Legally you are an invitee, which, insofar of what you think is your “right”, it is the same – you don’t have one. Do you have a problem as an employee? We can start another thread about that. Stay on track; this is about what you think is your right as a customer. Nonetheless you have no “right” to carry a firearm on private property as a customer or employee.
    Costumers have a legal right to do business which is open to the public. This is why, for example, protesters can not interfere. They have to keep your entrance clear and they can not obstruct me.

    But now w're getting off topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2700 View Post
    You have no “right” to do business with any store owner. You are an invitee. That is not a “right”. This is why I used the term guest, in hopes it would be easier to understand.
    Why are you obsessing over this? I never claimed that any business owner was forced to let me buy their goods and services. I never said that, so calm down and get back on topic. Focus.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2700 View Post
    If people behaved properly we would not need all these laws, but because of people like you that have no sense of respect and must be forced legally to act properly, we need these laws.
    Posting a gun-buster sign is disrespect. I choose just to ignore your disrespect.

  14. #89
    VIP Member Array pittypat21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,496
    Quote Originally Posted by 2700 View Post
    Of course, we know that, and your demonstration of a self-centric sense of entitlement is clear. And it is that very self-centric sense of entitlement that will cause the law to change and give signs the force of law, causing honest respectful gun owners to get arrested because that did not see the sign. Congratulations, you are a real asset to all gun owners.

    If people behaved properly we would not need all these laws, but because of people like you that have no sense of respect and must be forced legally to act properly, we need these laws.

    You sir, are an absolute embarrassment to me as not only a lawful, but respectful gun owner. Your attitude and action in the aforementioned settings does nothing to foster a positive image for gun owners - in fact, it compromises it.

    As I posted previously we should all be good ambassadors of gun owners. You are the antithesis of that. Moreover, it is your actions that will facilitate stronger anti-gun laws because you cannot simply respect a store owner's wishes because you need a “law” to instruct you how to behave with respect and decency when you are a guest (read, invitee) on someone’s private property.
    Cool your jets. Lawfully carrying a firearm, causing no disruptions, carrying concealed so as to keep his carrying private and secret, admitting to respectfully leaving an establishment if asked is all that he is guilty of. It's interesting how you progressed this from a conversation about the law to a bash fest. You don't know a single thing about this man, and your comments have done nothing more than discredit yourself. You call yourself a respectful gun owner, and yet act very disrespectfully towards your fellow gun owner.

    This man is not seeking out and walking into stores with no-gun signs with an AR slung over his shoulder and a pair of .44 revolvers open carried on either hip just because he can, making a fuss. He carries concealed, minds his own business, does not cause problems, and then leaves when he is done. I'd really like to know how this will lead to more anti-gun legislation.

    The law is there not only to protect everyone else, but to protect the rights of gun carriers. If the state makes no law restricting the carry of a firearm in a location, that that is our legal right to do so, and he exercises it.

    If you cannot have a conversation about the law in a polite and respectful fashion, then please, take your disrespectful rants to another thread, or better yet, off this forum.
    ArmyMan likes this.
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet."
    -General James Mattis, USMC

  15. #90
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    @Armyman: if it were legal for someone to own and carry a grenade around you would argue it is alright for them to ignore signs and bring them into a theater. For you it is a civil matter. A weapon (grenade or gun) is being carried because it can do harm to someone. A coke is not.
    If it were legal for someone to own and carry a grenade around I would fight to ban that. Those of us who've actually handled and used grenades know personally the profound difference between an explosive and a personal firearm.

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •  

Search tags for this page

are no firearm signs lawful in georgia
,

conceal carry ga posted no guns

,
ga no guns signs
,
georgia firearm signs
,
georgia no gun sign
,

georgia no gun signs

,

is it legal to post signs in ga as

,
no gun law signs in ga
,

official no gun sign for ga

,
pizza joint augusta ga no carry weapons
,
post no firearms in ga
,

signage for no guns in church in ga

Click on a term to search for related topics.