Chuck E Cheese...

[radar44]

I may be in the minority , maybe I was really hungry or something , but I love their pizza .

I was thinking that I would go in , grab a pizza and take it home once the kids got to old for that scene .

We always end up staying and goofing around . It doesn't take much to keep us entertained .

 

[Roadie]

Not sure how the legality would change, it's still a sign with no statute to back it up. IANAL

One of our resident attorneys said something about it being a direct reference to trespassing, which is an enforceable statute.

Anyone else remember that?

 

[ModernGunner]

Well my man, if you can figure out how to get him to carry that concealed, have at it!
I must reluctantly admit, that shotgun's a bit bigger than anything I have tucked down below my waistband.

Tyranny!

"Where's the pizza, Uncle Kirk?"

 

[TheSpark]

Some have gone to this wording, which might change things legally... (IANAL, IDNSAAHIELN)

IANAL.

This argument is defeated by one simple fact: A property owner, or anyone else really, can't just create a law and/or define the penalty for doing so.

With this sign they are trying to create a law of "no guns allowed" and setting the penalty, or really rather the charge, for it as "trespassing". You can not be legally trespassed from their property unless you are asked to leave and refuse.

Now some may rebuttle this saying the sign is asking you to leave and you refuse to do so right away by going on in (ignoring the sign). Wrong. The sign addresses both a person and an object. Your person is not a gun, so your person is not in violation of anything. The fact that you have a gun on you is irrelevant because there is nothing illegal about that and they can't get you charged with a crime for having one on you because there is no such crime defined by law (assuming you are legal in all other respects) and they are addressing an object. The law some may cite in support of this sign carrying weight of law look over a key phrase "a person...". The sign must address a person, end of story.

Also, this appears to be a corporate sign and it is possible in the home state of chuck e cheese the sign does hold weight of law. In Indiana it is just a sign though and nothing more. Now, there is no known case law to back me up but I believe the lack of case law in Indiana on this is more evident of the fact that prosecutors, and maybe even the police, realize by law these signs are toothless.

If you are still afraid the sign might hold weight of law then just don't go there. You will be doing yourself a favor. Chuck e cheese is a parents nightmare. Hundreds of screaming kids running around like mice. The place is loud, boring, and usually pretty hot due to all the people in there. I will say I like the pizza though.

 

[PistolBob]

This is a classic from Tim Wilson...may he rest in peace.[video=youtube_share;G4xg6WeB8_A]http://youtu.be/G4xg6WeB8_A[/video]

 

[HoughMade]

I'm just sitting back, basking in my own superiority for never having set foot in the place in 43 years and almost 18 years of fatherhood.

suckers.

 

[Rocketscientist]

I'm just sitting back, basking in my own superiority for never having set foot in the place in 43 years and almost 18 years of fatherhood.

suckers.

I envy you sir. Only been there once, and I'd sooner chew off my own arm than go back to that awful hell on earth.

Last time I went was for a friends kids birthday. Within minutes, a family with like a hundred little brats, I mean "manners-challenged young people", all made a run for the human hamster pipes. The following log jam of children was so bad, the employees had to shut the place down and help dislodge the clog. Never again. Ever.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I'm just sitting back, basking in my own superiority for never having set foot in the place in 43 years and almost 18 years of fatherhood.

suckers.

Fine, rub it in. It is a true test of unclehood.

 

[VERT]

"Human Hamster Pipes".

 

[wingnut]

I envy you sir. Only been there once, and I'd sooner chew off my own arm than go back to that awful hell on earth.

Last time I went was for a friends kids birthday. Within minutes, a family with like a hundred little brats, I mean "manners-challenged young people", all made a run for the human hamster pipes. The following log jam of children was so bad, the employees had to shut the place down and help dislodge the clog. Never again. Ever.

i have found my signature but i cant make one

 

[HoughMade]

IANAL.

This argument is defeated by one simple fact: A property owner, or anyone else really, can't just create a law and/or define the penalty for doing so.

With this sign they are trying to create a law of "no guns allowed" and setting the penalty, or really rather the charge, for it as "trespassing". You can not be legally trespassed from their property unless you are asked to leave and refuse.

Now some may rebuttle this saying the sign is asking you to leave and you refuse to do so right away by going on in (ignoring the sign). Wrong. The sign addresses both a person and an object. Your person is not a gun, so your person is not in violation of anything. The fact that you have a gun on you is irrelevant because there is nothing illegal about that and they can't get you charged with a crime for having one on you because there is no such crime defined by law (assuming you are legal in all other respects) and they are addressing an object. The law some may cite in support of this sign carrying weight of law look over a key phrase "a person...". The sign must address a person, end of story.

Also, this appears to be a corporate sign and it is possible in the home state of chuck e cheese the sign does hold weight of law. In Indiana it is just a sign though and nothing more. Now, there is no known case law to back me up but I believe the lack of case law in Indiana on this is more evident of the fact that prosecutors, and maybe even the police, realize by law these signs are toothless.

If you are still afraid the sign might hold weight of law then just don't go there. You will be doing yourself a favor. Chuck e cheese is a parents nightmare. Hundreds of screaming kids running around like mice. The place is loud, boring, and usually pretty hot due to all the people in there. I will say I like the pizza though.

I wouldn't think of rebuttling you. If I were to rebuttle you, I'm sure it would be one of the hugest mistakes, I had ever done in my life.

 

[Lex Concord]

2) is the pizza any good?

[video=youtube_share;5YFcBgzRSR8]http://youtu.be/5YFcBgzRSR8?t=1m50s[/video]

Edit: Linking to video at particular time not working...booooo! It starts at 2:50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YFcBgzRSR8#t=171

 

[Roadie]

IANAL.

This argument is defeated by one simple fact: A property owner, or anyone else really, can't just create a law and/or define the penalty for doing so.

With this sign they are trying to create a law of "no guns allowed" and setting the penalty, or really rather the charge, for it as "trespassing". You can not be legally trespassed from their property unless you are asked to leave and refuse.

Now some may rebuttle this saying the sign is asking you to leave and you refuse to do so right away by going on in (ignoring the sign). Wrong. The sign addresses both a person and an object. Your person is not a gun, so your person is not in violation of anything. The fact that you have a gun on you is irrelevant because there is nothing illegal about that and they can't get you charged with a crime for having one on you because there is no such crime defined by law (assuming you are legal in all other respects) and they are addressing an object. The law some may cite in support of this sign carrying weight of law look over a key phrase "a person...". The sign must address a person, end of story.

Also, this appears to be a corporate sign and it is possible in the home state of chuck e cheese the sign does hold weight of law. In Indiana it is just a sign though and nothing more. Now, there is no known case law to back me up but I believe the lack of case law in Indiana on this is more evident of the fact that prosecutors, and maybe even the police, realize by law these signs are toothless.

If you are still afraid the sign might hold weight of law then just don't go there. You will be doing yourself a favor. Chuck e cheese is a parents nightmare. Hundreds of screaming kids running around like mice. The place is loud, boring, and usually pretty hot due to all the people in there. I will say I like the pizza though.

I wouldn't think of rebuttling you. If I were to rebuttle you, I'm sure it would be one of the hugest mistakes, I had ever done in my life.

What he said

I wish I could find the thread and see if my memory is correct. IIRC the attorney in question did say it was a BIG "if".. Either way, concealed means concealed

 

[indiana36Bravo]

"Human Hamster Pipes".

Agreed this just made my entire thread worth it just to find the new name for that. haha perfect!

 

[TheSpark]

What he said

I wish I could find the thread and see if my memory is correct. IIRC the attorney in question did say it was a BIG "if".. Either way, concealed means concealed

There was an attorney who argued opposite of what I said. Of course, attorneys are often wrong. Heck, pretty much every court case has two attorneys arguing the complete opposite side of something.

 

[Mauser-K98]

Honestly, the last time I went to Chucky Cheese I wish I was armed. I've felt safer pumping gas at 2am on 38th Street, they have gone downhill a lot....

 

[nakinate]

Remember it used to be "Showbiz Pizza"? [video=youtube_share;QHXuf-xH6vQ]http://youtu.be/QHXuf-xH6vQ[/video]

 

[HoughMade]

I drive past the Chuck E. in Hobart (Merrillville) 6 days a week. It seems to be about once a week that I see the Po Po, lights flashing, parked outside. Maybe not quite that often, but it sure seems like it.

 

[wtfd661]

We used to take the kids there when they were younger for their birthdays and other occasions, it sucked but the kids had a blast so we endured it.

Pizza sucked and never once saw a hot waitress.


CC'd there many a time just had to remain extremely vigilant against 5 yr old girls!!

 

[Paul30]

should have posted under a quote, fixing.