CCing where it is "not allowed"......

[Hammerhead]

I've given you code verbatim. You can decipher anyway you wish. I'm telling you how it's been enforced. You apparently aren't givng credit to the reasonable person standard often cited by courts. It's pretty easy to figure out. "What would a reasonable person believe a postng of a 'no firearms allowed" sign post outside of a business entrance mean?" A Bench or jury trial... you better bring your lunch, 'cause your feelingng are going to get hurt.

If you have issue with it, and think you can win a payday based on the recountings of "legal eagles" from an internet gun site, go for it. I'm telling you, that at least in Carmel, it's not a smart move.

All the more reason to stay the hell out of Carmel. If you're enforcing non-existent laws, I don't want to be anywhere near you.

My general rule is something like pat down or metal detector, no gun; otherwise it's business as usual. If something happens where I have to use it I'll apologize for carrying where I wasn't supposed too, if nothing happens then nobody knows I had it but me. Seems like the most reasonable course of action to me, but hey, I'm no Congressman.

Thing is, come July 1, local government buildings (town halls, city halls, the City County Building in Indy) can have all the metal detectors they want, they can't deny carry by a LTCH holder.

This is the way that I see it as well. Can you point us to where this has been covered? Perhaps that will settle the issue once and for all, yeah right.

This thread here is where it was discussed.

Since this is how you claim it's enforced, maybe you can cite some sort of precedent that shows someone convicted of trespassing based solely on a no-guns sign with no request for that person to leave the premises?

I've asked for this before but nobody ever seems to come up with any convictions for trespassing wherein the person wasn't first asked to leave and then either refused or came back.

My attorney explained to me that "no trespassing" and "no admittance" and "jbombelli is banned from the premises" would be denial of entry. "No Guns" is conditional admittance for lack of a better term, and not the same thing. They're not telling you that you can't come in, therefore it's not denial of entry.

Exactly, conditional entry isn't the same as no entry. They are making a request, that you not have a specific object. You don't have to follow their request. If they don't like you not following their request, the only recourse they have is to ask me to leave. You, as a LEO Kutnupe, have no authority to enforce anything before that with your badge, even if they call and summon your presence. They must speak to me (or lay a note down on my table) asking me to leave. The sign means nothing. There is no portion of the Indiana Code that says that signs are enforceable.**

**Edited to add: By this I mean "no guns" signs. "No Trespassing" signs are specifically denial of entry signs, and are as such enforceable by the exact IC Kutnupe quoted above.

 

[lashicoN]

I'm sorry, I wasnt aware that the 2nd Amendment was a limitation on private business as well as the govt

Are you aware of how big of a hypocrite you are to charge some innocent man or woman with trespassing, simply for carrying a firearm onto a place of business, while you, yourself, are carrying a firearm on the property that has a "No Guns Allowed" sign?

I just cashed out some stocks, and I would love nothing more than for some clown like you to walk up to me, while I'm carrying at a restaurant and try to charge with me trespassing, when I haven't even been asked to leave yet. I would use that money and whatever else I needed to make sure you lose the uniform that you believe gives you more rights than I have with my American birth certificate. You should really think twice before you step on someone's rights. Don't Tread on Me isn't just a flag, it's a loud and clear warning.

You need to come back to reality if you truly believe that a business can invite innocent people in to spend money, call the cops without them knowing, not ask them to leave, and charge them with trespassing because they had a sidearm on their person. Can the business also tell people they aren't allowed to talk? Can the business tell the shoppers that they have no right to privacy and put cameras in the bathroom? Can they rummage through their vehicle since it's on their parking lot?

 

[printcraft]

I have never seen a no gun allowed sign, nor will I ever

That being said, don't be off your rocker and go to a place that could result in a felony.

This.

 

[Jack Ryan]

I understand where you are coming from on this, I really do, but look at it from the other side... what would you do if there was a sign on the door of your favorite restaurant that stated "No Christians allowed"? it is the same thing.

No it's not the same thing. One is bringing something on to a person's property they do not want there. The other is religion.

They wouldn't be my favorite resturaunt if they had a no christians sign on the door.

if it discovered (cc'ing) they have every right to tell you to leave, no different than anything else.

They already told the people who can read and the ones with any sense. It SHOULD hurt to be stupid.

Also, on the thoughts of private property... if you are running a biz, then you automatically give up some amount of your "private property" rights. think of it this way, would you let total strangers wander into your home and order you to cook them something? probably not, however if you have a restaurant that is exactly what you are doing.

Resturaunts have this thing called a menue. On the menue they stipulate what they are OFFERING TO COOK. Try ordering a big Mc at Wendys.

Every resturaunt has the right to refuse service to any one. When you learn to read and understand these two words, "NO GUNS" you'll be on your way to a whole new world of enlightenment. "No shoes, no shirt, no service".

 

[Jack Ryan]

I know from personal experience, AND from the numerous posts on INGO, that LE WILL NOT arrest someone for trespassing without first warning them. The first time they are caught, they get off with a verbal warning. The same as when you are caught carrying in a store with a "no guns" sign. That being said, Why worry about "No trespassing" or "no hunting" signs because they hold "no legal teeth"?

Hunting with out permission is not the same as simple tresspass. There is no need for warning.

 

[Jack Ryan]

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that a company policy or request trumped the 2nd Amendment, or more specifically a natural right. I am not required to follow a request, unless it is a request to leave the premises.

Property rights don't trump the 2nd Amendment but nothing in the 2nd amendment says a gun comes with the right to use what ever property you want in any manner you please in direct conflict with the property owner who bought and paid for it.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Nope. Sorry. We've had this discussion here before. It's been shown, by some of the legal eagles here that a sign that states "No Firearms Allowed" does not meet the standard of a trespass warning. The sign would have to read "You May Not Enter This Property With a Firearm" (or some similar statement denying entry) to qualify. "No Firearms" is the same as "No Bananas" or "No Purple Socks". It's a request not to possess a specific object, not a denial of entry. Not only that, it's a request with no legal teeth.

But please, keep thinking that a company request is law. I guess I'll be trespassed from a movie theater if I ever carry my own candy in. They usually put something like "no outside food or drink allowed" on a sign. So I can be arrested and detained for that, right? Or at the very least forced by you to leave, just because there's a sign?

"No Firearms" signs do not hold the weight of law in Indiana, no matter how much you might think otherwise.

And you're right, you didn't say that you'd cuff and detain/arrest/use thumb screws. I was making a point. And before you ask, that point was, you can't enforce company policy/requests with your badge and the weight it carries.

If I'm ever in a place that requests I leave because of my sidearm, I will happily walk out and never return. That does not mean I have to follow stupid signage or stupid company policies.

You might try throwing yourself on the floor and holding your breath or you could just learn to read.

It's all pretty much irrelevant because the internet commandos talk this blather on the internet then tuck their tales and run back to the keyboard at the first comment from a gum cracking teen in a blue smock any way.

 

[Hkindiana]

Does it have to be SPELLED out for you on the sign:

"The owner of this property says NO GUNS allowed on this property, so if you ARE in possession of a firearm on this property, you are TRESPASSING, this IS your warning"

Would this sign carry the legal weight of the law, and if so could a LE officer arrest you for trespassing when you IGNORE it and carry anyway?

 

[ATM]

The owner of this property says NO BANANAS allowed on this property, so if you ARE in possession of a banana on this property, you are TRESPASSING, this IS your warning


"Are you just happy to see me or are you going to jail?"

 

[Hammerhead]

I wanted to make sure I addressed this post specifically since I hadn't done so yet.

I suggest you don't put that to the test...

Really? Luckily I don't have to follow your suggestions.

The request is orginally that you NOT come on the premises with a frearm. No it's not, and this is why you're completely wrong. It's not a request to not enter the property, it's a request that you not possess a specific object when you do come onto the premises. It doesn't say "stay out if you're packin' heat" it is more akin to them saying "please leave your gun elsewhere", which is similar to saying "please leave your hairbrush elsewhere". You are bound by that request first. No, I'm not bound by any request, period. Once you enter a private owners premises after ignoring his original request, you think he needs to make another request for you to leave? Nope, you were warned before you ever set foot on the property. Wrong. Being asked to comply with a request isn't the same as being told to leave. The ball is out of your court when 5-0 arrives. Only if I haven't complied with a demand to leave. Otherwise, the 5-0 can go pound sand.

If you are trespassed from a property, you will have to be identfied for obvious reasons, I can certainly disarm you, hell even though I didn't mention it, I can certainly cuff and detain you. No, you can't. It's a civil matter, not a criminal one. You have no authority to disarm, cuff or detain me. It only becomes a criminal matter if I refuse to leave after the first demand by the agent of the property and am stupid enough to still refuse once a LEO arrives. You may only make sure I gather my personal belongings, leave the premises and make sure that I'm informed how long I'm not allowed back, after I've been asked to leave. But again, if I'm ever asked to leave because of my sidearm, I'm not going to be there anyway if and when you ever arrive. I'm well informed of the law and my responsibilities as a guest in a business. I can be asked to leave for any reason, and will do so. Until that specific point, everyone can pound sand.

Perhaps you need a lesson on Indiana Law:
Trespassing:
35-43-2-2 (b)
A person has been denied entry under (a)(1) of this section when the person has been denied entry by means of:
(1) personal communication, oral or written;
(2)posting or exhibiting a notice at the main entrance in a manner that is prescribed by law or likely to come to the attention of the public;

That sir is Trespassing subsection B.... thus you are breaking the law, if appropiate signage is evident. You're adding things in that aren't there. Your personal opinion isn't the law. thus you are disarmed. possibly cuffed. Once again, my lawyer needs a new Benz and I need a vacation home. Please trample my rights. certainly identifed. Name, DOB, address. Am I being detained, am I free to go? certainly walked to your car. and certainly told "don't come back."
If you have a lawyer that told you that you can beat that, you probably need your money back.

Just so we're clear what we are contesting. I'm sayng that if you enter the property of another where it is clearly stated "No firearms on the Premises," and you are indeed carryng a firearm, if the property owner calls the police, you have committed trespassing. Bzzzz...wrong. I am only committing trespassing if I am asked to leave and don't comply. Upon arrival of police, you will be identified, you will be disarmed, and you will be walked of the property and not even a legal hack will tell you that you have recourse.
You may resist, but all that will do is add an extra charge, because we wouldn't have arrested you in the first place. We would have just told you to not come back. So now you're saying that you know me well enough to figure that I may "resist"? Seems to me that you're saying "contempt of cop" is enough to merit a resisting charge. But then again, I'm probably making broad accusations, just like you. I'll forgo the accusation that this portion of your statement here makes you sound like a JBT. I'm not saying that you are, or that in general your demeanor or posting style portrays you as being one. I don't believe that you are a JBT, but comments like this don't give me confidence.

Once again, "no firearms" signs are a request, not a denial of entry, and thus are not enforceable as trespass warnings.

 

[jbombelli]

Does it have to be SPELLED out for you on the sign:

"The owner of this property says NO GUNS allowed on this property, so if you ARE in possession of a firearm on this property, you are TRESPASSING, this IS your warning"

Would this sign carry the legal weight of the law, and if so could a LE officer arrest you for trespassing when you IGNORE it and carry anyway?

Yes it needs to be specific. "You can't come in if..." is vastly different from "you can come in but..."

 

[Hammerhead]

You might try throwing yourself on the floor and holding your breath or you could just learn to read.

It's all pretty much irrelevant because the internet commandos talk this blather on the internet then tuck their tales and run back to the keyboard at the first comment from a gum cracking teen in a blue smock any way.

It's all moot anyway. I've never been asked to leave because of my sidearm. Not once since I began carrying. Not saying it couldn't happen, since I OC 95% of the time anyway. But it hasn't happened.

Have I covered when I've seen a sign? Yes, depending on the location. But that doesn't mean I disarm.

 

[youngda9]

I wanted to make sure I addressed this post specifically since I hadn't done so yet.
...(Whoopin omitted)...
Once again, "no firearms" signs are a request, not a denial of entry, and thus are not enforceable as trespass warnings.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Are you aware of how big of a hypocrite you are to charge some innocent man or woman with trespassing, simply for carrying a firearm onto a place of business, while you, yourself, are carrying a firearm on the property that has a "No Guns Allowed" sign?

I just cashed out some stocks, and I would love nothing more than for some clown like you to walk up to me, while I'm carrying at a restaurant and try to charge with me trespassing, when I haven't even been asked to leave yet. I would use that money and whatever else I needed to make sure you lose the uniform that you believe gives you more rights than I have with my American birth certificate. You should really think twice before you step on someone's rights. Don't Tread on Me isn't just a flag, it's a loud and clear warning.

You need to come back to reality if you truly believe that a business can invite innocent people in to spend money, call the cops without them knowing, not ask them to leave, and charge them with trespassing because they had a sidearm on their person. Can the business also tell people they aren't allowed to talk? Can the business tell the shoppers that they have no right to privacy and put cameras in the bathroom? Can they rummage through their vehicle since it's on their parking lot?

So signs that state "no hunting" are simply a request that you can ignore because the person who posted the sign didnt, come up to you, and request you not do it? That's the logic you're using right?

If a person has a sign that simply states "private property," that doesnt mean anything either right. because the owner didnt specifically ask you not to be there, right?

Or, if a business has a sign posted that says "Closed: business hours from 5am to 5pm," and for some reason they left the door unlocked, and you waltz in to a dark empty store, purposefully, at 6pm, that's alright too because they didn't specifically say that they didnt want you in their business after 5pm, when the signage says closed?

I've given you guys the code, if reading comprehension is that difficult, then that's on you.

 

[Jack Ryan]

No shoes, no shirt, no service
No dogs
No pets
No smoking
No hunting
No fishing
No tresspassing
Even semi literate half wit morons can comprehend those.

Which of these is it you boys have trouble understanding?
Safety Signs | Traffic Signs | Parking Signs weapons

 

[Roadie]

So signs that state "no hunting" are simply a request that you can ignore because the person who posted the sign didnt, come up to you, and request you not do it? That's the logic you're using right?

If a person has a sign that simply states "private property," that doesnt mean anything either right. because the owner didnt specifically ask you not to be there, right?

Or, if a business has a sign posted that says "Closed: business hours from 5am to 5pm," and for some reason they left the door unlocked, and you waltz in to a dark empty store, purposefully, at 6pm, that's alright too because they didn't specifically say that they didnt want you in their business after 5pm, when the signage says closed?

I've given you guys the code, if reading comprehension is that difficult, then that's on you.

You are still missing the point. As posted, and referenced, several attorneys on this site have backed up what the other posters here are trying to tell you.

"Do Not Enter" is not the same thing, legally as "No Guns". If you are asked to leave when observed carrying, and you do not, THEN it is Trespass.

Try it this way...
There are bars that have "No Colors" signs. If someone comes in, passes the Bouncer, then puts on his bandana, is he automatically Trespassing? Of course not. If he is asked to remove the bandana or leave, and does neither, THEN he is trespassing.

Insert "No Bare Feet" above. Is the person who walks in barefoot trespassing, or breaking a posted rule?

Again, there is no "denial of entry" in a no guns sign(unless spelled out specifically, as previously stated), but there are "conditions of entry".

Sure, it's a fine line, but aren't most laws?

 

[Roadie]

No shoes, no shirt, no service
No dogs
No pets
No smoking
No hunting
No fishing
No tresspassing
Even semi literate half wit morons can comprehend those.

Which of these is it you boys have trouble understanding?
Safety Signs | Traffic Signs | Parking Signs weapons

Most of those are conditions of entry, or "rules", not "laws". (or could be either, depending on the type of property we are discussing) so no, they are not all the same thing.
What were you saying about "semi literate half wit morons"?

 

[Hammerhead]

No shoes, no shirt, no service
No dogs
No pets
No smoking
No hunting
No fishing
No tresspassing
Even semi literate half wit morons can comprehend those.

Which of these is it you boys have trouble understanding?
Safety Signs | Traffic Signs | Parking Signs weapons

Here's the thing, Jack. No dogs, no pets, no smoking (depending on those crappy anti-smoking ordinances) are requests. No hunting, no fishing, no trespassing are legally enforceable warnings.

What part of a request not being equal to a law do you not understand?

If I bring a dog or other pet, or light up a stogie where someone doesn't like it, they can ask me to leave. That's the enforceable part. Hunting, fishing and trespassing are defined in the law. Bringing my dog somewhere isn't, unless it's not on a leash (and even then, I am not clear on the state or local leash laws).

And the "no shirt, no shoes, no service" falls under the "I can ask you to leave for any reason, these are specific things that will cause me to do that". It still is not a denial of entry, it's a warning that you'll be asked to leave if you don't comply. It's still a request.

 

[Sylvain]

Even if its not illegal to CC in a place that has a "no gun" sign I usually dont go there since I am not welcome.
I rather spend my money where I am welcome as a armed citizen.

This is the kind of sign I like to see in a store:

 

[ATM]

How are we still having this debate after so many threads on the topic?

Oh yeah... because it's fun.

But seriously, every request or desire you print on a sign does not automagically become trespassing if it's ignored.