carry past "gunbuster" sign

[morrisster]

a local hospital has a "gunbuster" sign on the door and under it it says "weapons prohibited" is this a legally binding sign or merely a suggestion? i mean there are the "cig buster" signs that say no smoking on property and the employees stand right outside the door smoking so...

Seriously though, from the TN code it would appear that the sign must state something along the lines of "according to TN state law - carrying a firearm on this property is against the law" - etc. is the gunbuster sign enough for them to post?

[Punisher84]

a local hospital has a "gunbuster" sign on the door and under it it says "weapons prohibited" is this a legally binding sign or merely a suggestion? i mean there are the "cig buster" signs that say no smoking on property and the employees stand right outside the door smoking so...

Seriously though, from the TN code it would appear that the sign must state something along the lines of "according to TN state law - carrying a firearm on this property is against the law" - etc. is the gunbuster sign enough for them to post?

It is now. Sign and/or similar language is all that's required. I work in hospital security and my facilities aren't posted, but we still have a policy against it. Most likely they will just ask you to leave, but you can't always bet on that.

The thing about the "cig buster" sign is that it's actually illegal to smoke ANYWHERE on hospital property after Nov. 2007. They can write a ticket for it, but really nobody cares unless the Admin people wanna fire employees.

[Fallguy]

"Gun Buster" sign alone is now a legal posting in TN.

[DRM]

Fallguy - can you share a link to the details of that change? I was not aware. Thanks!

[Fallguy]

Fallguy - can you share a link to the details of that change? I was not aware. Thanks!

See 39-17-1359 at http://www.michie.com/tennessee

Section ((1) Notice of the prohibition permitted by subsection (a) shall be accomplished by displaying one (1) or both of the notices described in subdivision ((3) in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited. Either form of notice used shall be of a size that is plainly visible to the average person entering the building, property, or portion of the building or property, posted

Section ((3)© A building, property or a portion of a building or property, shall be considered properly posted in accordance with this section if one (1) or both of the following is displayed in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited:

(i)

The international circle and slash symbolizing the prohibition of the item within the circle;

or

(ii)

The posting sign described in this subdivision (

(3).

These changes were made in Section 3 of SB3012 which became effective June 4, 2010 as Public Chapter 1009

Edited December 9, 2010 by Fallguy

[DRM]

Thanks. Makes sense, but sucks all the same.

[Guest bkelm18]

An unfortunate side effect of passing restaurant carry this past session.

[Jonnin]

I don't get that, they had 1 sign before, now they have 2 signs, but the actual places you can go are not changed, just the way it is marked, so why is this a big deal? The only problem I have with it (beyond that it is legal to infringe at all, violation of 2nd) is that the new sign is small enough to miss and you now have to LOOK for it proactively.

I can accept that for being able to eat somethign besides fast food without worry.

[DavidD]

.......you now have to LOOK for it proactively.

QUOTE]

Yep, I find myself stopping at entrances now a scanning all around. Was going to go to Cinco De Mayo the other night and even though I wasn't carrying (planned on having a drink), I saw the gun buster sign and left. Went to another one of the many fine Mexican restaurants Mt. Juliet has to offer that do not discriminate against law abiding citizens . I firmly believe it is their right to choose not to serve me as it is my right not to patron their establishment.

[Guest 270win]

If you read the law, the signs have to be prominently posted at pretty much all the entrances primarily used by people entering the buildings/property. I see that as I shouldn't have to look high and low for a sign and the signs should be at all the entrances used for entry by customers/employees to a building. Most properties are not 'posted' properly if you look hard enough. They miss putting up signs at all entrances to a big building or the signs are stuck way low, somewhere you don't really notice, or real small for the average person to see going about his business, in my opinion, not even following the law making the person carrying probably ok. It is an invitation to a lot of "he said/she said" silliness if your gun is ever seen. I think worst that would ever come out of anything if your gun is exposed is you will be asked to leave.

That is my opinion. I conceal well because I don't look high and low and shouldn't be expected to look everywhere for a silly sign. It's kept me out of problems for a long time.

[Guest BungieCord]

This was a problem at Shopryland pre-flood. Some of the entrances to the mall did not have any semblance of a gunbuster sign and the others were poorly marked. The only prominently-displayed sign was next to the exit from Bass Pro into the mall proper. Yet the management considered their signage adequate and had it enforced by their Segway-mounted rent-a-cops. And apparently some CCWers were careless because they reportedly were "made" by the security staff and were asked to leave.

[RobertNashville]

Unfortunately, a sign being easy or not easy to see probably won't stop you from being charged with carrying in a prohibited (posted) location - whether the sign(s) are truly visible/easy to find would likely become a matter for a jury or judge to decide. The other day when I went to see a Dr; his office is on hospital grounds (although separate from the hospital itself)...I didn't see any signs anywhere turning into the complex or anywhere in the parking lot and I was carrying...even so, I left my firearm in a portable safe in my vehicle...sure enough, on the entry door to the office facility was a big sign saying all firearms were prohibited anywhere in the facility OR on the grounds. Made me wonder if I was actually breaking the law at that point. I probably was...makes me wonder, realistically, what they (owners) expect people to do when their signage isn't visible until you get the door.

Edited December 13, 2010 by RobertNashville

[Guest HexHead]

I don't get that, they had 1 sign before, now they have 2 signs, but the actual places you can go are not changed, just the way it is marked, so why is this a big deal? The only problem I have with it (beyond that it is legal to infringe at all, violation of 2nd) is that the new sign is small enough to miss and you now have to LOOK for it proactively.

I can accept that for being able to eat somethign besides fast food without worry.

Keep in mind the signage regulations do not apply just to eating establishments, but any business now. All they need is the "gunbuster" and you could be liable for a criminal offense and a $500 fine.

[Oh Shoot]

Keep in mind the signage regulations do not apply just to eating establishments, but any business now. All they need is the "gunbuster" and you could be liable for a criminal offense and a $500 fine.

And according to 39-17-1352, losing your permit, either temporarily or permanently.

THAT little ditty has yet to be played out in the first test cases.

- OS

[aquaman67]

And according to 39-17-1352, losing your permit, either temporarily or permanently.

THAT little ditty has yet to be played out in the first test cases.

- OS

That's the answer I was looking for in the "DMZ" thread. I wondered how far the courts would ever push it. I seems that either it's rare to be confronted or no one is talking about it. I hope it's the former.

[Fallguy]

That's the answer I was looking for in the "DMZ" thread. I wondered how far the courts would ever push it. I seems that either it's rare to be confronted or no one is talking about it. I hope it's the former.

Also it actually isn't up to the court to do anything to your HCP. They are just supposed to forward anything to the Dept of Safety for their action. It already seems some courts are lax at forwarding some information.

[K191145]

Unfortunately, a sign being easy or not easy to see probably won't stop you from being charged with carrying in a prohibited (posted) location - whether the sign(s) are truly visible/easy to find would likely become a matter for a jury or judge to decide. The other day when I went to see a Dr; his office is on hospital grounds (although separate from the hospital itself)...I didn't see any signs anywhere turning into the complex or anywhere in the parking lot and I was carrying...even so, I left my firearm in a portable safe in my vehicle...sure enough, on the entry door to the office facility was a big sign saying all firearms were prohibited anywhere in the facility OR on the grounds. Made me wonder if I was actually breaking the law at that point. I probably was...makes me wonder, realistically, what they (owners) expect people to do when their signage isn't visible until you get the door.

I know the past law was that to ban guns anywhere on the property, clear readable signs must be posted at all entrances to the parking area of the property. I've known that St. Thomas was a prohibited area for a long time but to read their small print sign on the road around the hospital, you would have to come to a full stop, blocking several cars of traffic and take at least a minute to read all the rules while people are road raging behind you.

[Oh Shoot]

... I seems that either it's rare to be confronted or no one is talking about it...

We have yet to find any documentation of ANYone being charged with it, under the previous OR current statute.

- OS

[mdmoseley]

First off I'm not advocating breaking the law in any way but I will say this. If you did carry past a sign the only way you can be arrested/cited for it is if a LEO observes you carrying in a prohibited location. This is a misdemeanor charge and must be observed by the LEO. If you are no longer in the prohibited area if and when one is called then you can not be charged. Now the property owner could prosecute it if so inclined but the likelihood of that is really slim. Again I'm not advocating breaking the law I'm just stating fact about misdemeanor citations/arrests.

[Glenn]

It seems to me that by winning the battle to carry in a unposted restaurant, we have lost the war. It seems I find there are a lot more places I can't carry now than there were a couple of years ago.

Glenn

[Fallguy]

First off I'm not advocating breaking the law in any way but I will say this. If you did carry past a sign the only way you can be arrested/cited for it is if a LEO observes you carrying in a prohibited location. This is a misdemeanor charge and must be observed by the LEO. If you are no longer in the prohibited area if and when one is called then you can not be charged. Now the property owner could prosecute it if so inclined but the likelihood of that is really slim. Again I'm not advocating breaking the law I'm just stating fact about misdemeanor citations/arrests.

What he said...

[Oh Shoot]

It seems to me that by winning the battle to carry in a unposted restaurant, we have lost the war. It seems I find there are a lot more places I can't carry now than there were a couple of years ago.

Glenn

Yep, a handful of us here really lamented the change, but only a handful.

- OS

[Fallguy]

It seems to me that by winning the battle to carry in a unposted restaurant, we have lost the war. It seems I find there are a lot more places I can't carry now than there were a couple of years ago.

Glenn

Guess that maybe an advantage of living in a smaller town, can't say I've really seen any difference...

[RobertNashville]

It seems to me that by winning the battle to carry in a unposted restaurant, we have lost the war. It seems I find there are a lot more places I can't carry now than there were a couple of years ago.

Glenn

I can't say I've noticed that but then again, I don't get out much.

In any case, I try to be optimistic when I can so my feeling is that at least I have a better idea of what businesses support my choice to go armed for protection and therefore, which businesses I'll spend my money in.

[Fallguy]

I can't say I've noticed that but then again, I don't get out much.

In any case, I try to be optimistic when I can so my feeling is that at least I have a better idea of what businesses support my choice to go armed for protection and therefore, which businesses I'll spend my money in.

....and of course that is the flip side of living in a larger town/city...choice. While there aren't really very many positing in smaller towns (it seems) when there are, there may not always be an easy alternative, if one at all.