Scott's furniture- Cleveland TN

[Guest Lstevison]

They have a hand written "NO GUNS ALLOWED" sign on the window by the front door. I actually did not see it at first, I would haved turned around at that point. My wife mentioned it after we were inside. I asked a salesman the purpose of said sign and he replied; and I quote:

"With all the shootings and stuff in the nation, the girls handling the account payments are afraid of all the angry customers lately, that they fear one is gonna carry a gun in and shoot them".

I asked why everyone paying on there account is so angry and he replied, you know, people don't want to pay their bills. Ok? I guess. I responded by informing him that a "sign" would not keep anyone with ill intentions from carrying a gun in the store, and it will possibly keep permit carriers from patronizing the place of business. He said the owner isn't anti-gun and he keeps one in the store, he just wants to be the only one with a gun if there is trouble. I thanked him for his conversation and imformed him I was a permit carrier and I would not be shopping there and to let the owner know why I chose not to do business with him. He said no problem and he understood.

Question? How is a handwritten w/sharpie marker on printer paper legal? What exactly is the legality of said signage?

Edited April 4, 2011 by Lstevison
ask additional question

[enfield]

It's legal. Didn't use to be, but it is now.

I bought a lot of furniture at Scott's in '06. Guess I won't be back.

[Guest RevScottie]

I was browsing thru the carry prohibited locations forum on this sight and ran across a thread concerning Scott's Furniture in Cleveland. A moderator answered that a no guns allowed hand written sign is "now" a legal posting? My question is since when? I thought a legal posting consisted of a "gun buster" logo or substantially similar wording as the state statute. While the sign may very well convey the owners wishes I did not think this kind of sign was legally binding.

[Guest bkelm18]

It's not legal. It's either the gunbuster or a "substantially similar" sign for it to be legal.

39-17-1359. Prohibition at certain meetings — Posting notice.

(a) (1) An individual, corporation, business entity or local, state or federal government entity or agent thereof is authorized to prohibit the possession of weapons by any person who is at a meeting conducted by, or on property owned, operated, or managed or under the control of the individual, corporation, business entity or government entity.

(2) The prohibition in subdivision (a)(1) shall apply to any person who is authorized to carry a firearm by authority of § 39-17-1351.

( (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.

(2) The notice required by this section shall be in English, but a duplicate notice may also be posted in any language used by patrons, customers or persons who frequent the place where weapon possession is prohibited.

(3) (A) If a sign is used as the method of posting, it shall contain language substantially similar to the following:

AS AUTHORIZED BY T.C.A. § 39-17-1359, POSSESSION OF A WEAPON ON POSTED PROPERTY OR IN A POSTED BUILDING IS PROHIBITED AND IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.

( As used in this section, “language substantially similar to” means the sign contains language plainly stating that:

(i) The property is posted under authority of Tennessee law;

(ii) Weapons or firearms are prohibited on the property, in the building, or on the portion of the property or building that is posted; and

(iii) Possessing a weapon in an area that has been posted is a criminal offense.

© 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).

© (1) It is an offense to possess a weapon in a building or on property that is properly posted in accordance with this section.

(2) Possession of a weapon on posted property in violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by fine only of five hundred dollars ($500).

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter, reduce or eliminate any civil or criminal liability that a property owner or manager may have for injuries arising on their property.

(e) The provisions of this section shall not apply to title 70 regarding wildlife laws, rules and regulations.

(f) This section shall not apply to the grounds of any public park, natural area, historic park, nature trail, campground, forest, greenway, waterway or other similar public place that is owned or operated by the state, a county, a municipality or instrumentality thereof. The carrying of firearms in those areas shall be governed by § 39-17-1311.

Acts 1996, ch. 905, § 11; 2000, ch. 929, § 1; 2009, ch. 428, § 4; 2010, ch. 1009, § 3.

Edited April 4, 2011 by bkelm18

[Oh Shoot]

It's obviously not compliant with the statute, but that doesn't guarantee you wouldn't be convicted, either. At least not until some solid case law is established.

- OS

[Guest RevScottie]

I was just a bit surprised to see a moderator indicate it was a legal posting. I didn't think anything had changed since last year but wasn't sure. If a location had to be legally posted to appear in the carry prohibited sub forum a bunch of them wouldn't be listed. That sub forum has really become cluttered up with places that aren't legally posted.

[Oh Shoot]

I was just a bit surprised to see a moderator indicate it was a legal posting. I didn't think anything had changed since last year but wasn't sure. If a location had to be legally posted to appear in the carry prohibited sub forum a bunch of them wouldn't be listed. That sub forum has really become cluttered up with places that aren't legally posted.

Likely he just skimmed it, thought it involved a gun buster sign, too.

Right Enfield? Yeah, that's the ticket.

- OS

[JAB]

That sub forum has really become cluttered up with places that aren't legally posted.

Cluttered up? The purpose of the subforum seems to be to alert us about places that have either legally posted or attempted to post. If it were intended for places that were legally posted, only, then I doubt that the owner of the forum would have put this in the FAQ that is stickied at the top of the page telling how he intended the forum to work (I have underlined and bolded the pertinent line):

Posting Format:

• Use the TITLE field to state the Location Name, Street Name (if appropriate) and City.
  

An example would be:

Bubba's Screen Doors and Rhinoplasty. Main Street. Nashville.

• Use the body of the post to list any pertinent details. Things to include would be the same info stated in the title, the complete street address, city name, ZIP code, and a description of whether the property is properly posted, etc.
  

[Guest RevScottie]

Cluttered up? The purpose of the subforum seems to be to alert us about places that have either legally posted or attempted to post. If it were intended for places that were legally posted, only, then I doubt that the owner of the forum would have put this in the FAQ that is stickied at the top of the page telling how he intended the forum to work (I have underlined and bolded the pertinent line):

That is exactly what I mean by cluttered up. Before the changes in the law allowing the gun buster signs this forum used to be very clear about whether the postings were legal or not. Now it just all gets thrown together with no attempt to classify postings as to their legality.

[Garufa]

That is exactly what I mean by cluttered up. Before the changes in the law allowing the gun buster signs this forum used to be very clear about whether the postings were legal or not. Now it just all gets thrown together with no attempt to classify postings as to their legality.

Much like the handgun carry laws in this state.

[Oh Shoot]

Much like the handgun carry laws in this state.

Really.

Remember, we have untested laws.

- Have AG who has said that we can still be convicted of carrying in a off limits park, even though the municipality didn't post it, even though TCA says it must.

- Or you could be guilty of a felony as you toddle through a legal carry park and happen to encounter a high school tennis match, or grammar school picnic, or ....

- Or you come to Knoxville, whose parks are not posted but it's illegal to carry by old city ordinance; out-of-towners just have to "know" that, you see...

- Or you carry on a county greenway which is legal, but it meanders into a city greenway, where it's not, then right back to county greenway, etc.

Enough. That's just a few regarding parks.

- OS

[Guest RevScottie]

You would think last year's change in the law that allowed gun buster signs to be legal postings would have been communicated to hand gun permit holders. I will bet you that there are thousands of permit holders in TN who have no idea that there have been any changes to the law since they obtained their permits.

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

You would think last year's change in the law that allowed gun buster signs to be legal postings would have been communicated to hand gun permit holders. I will bet you that there are thousands of permit holders in TN who have no idea that there have been any changes to the law since they obtained their permits.

Its up to the permit holder to keep up to date with the gun laws. I read up on the gun laws 4 or 5 times a year just to keep myself up to date...

[Fallguy]

I'm moving this from the Carry Prohibited Locations since it asked a question.

The FAQ - How This Sub Forum Works clearly says "Only the person who starts a thread and the moderating team may respond to a thread. This is to reduce off-topic chatter."

The Carry Prohibited Locations sub-forum is supposed to be a database of posted locations, not used for discussion.

[Fallguy]

It's legal. Didn't use to be, but it is now.

I bought a lot of furniture at Scott's in '06. Guess I won't be back.

I actually don't think a sign that only says "NO GUNS ALLOWED" comes close to meeting the the 3 things required to be in a wording only sign per 39-17-1359 unless the "Gun Buster" symbol is also used with it.

[Fallguy]

I moved the thread from the Carry Prohibited Locations sub-forum and will merge it with this thread.

[OngoingFreedom]

I agree.

Not a legal posting but worthy of avoidance and notification of such to the owner. Seriously owners, a little education goes a long way.

[Fallguy]

I agree.

Not a legal posting but worthy of avoidance and notification of such to the owner. Seriously owners, a little education goes a long way.

I'm not sure how much you can educate someone that thinks a sign will prevent someone with ill intent from carrying a handgun inside.......

[Erik88]

I'm not sure how much you can educate someone that thinks a sign will prevent someone with ill intent from carrying a handgun inside.......

exactly!

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

Here is Scott's Furniture Company contact info. My wife was going to buy some stuff there this week but she is not now and I emailed them and told them why and how much money they just lost out on..

Name:Scott's Furniture Company

Phone 423-614-7577 Fax 423-479-7677

Address:1650 South Lee Highway

Cleveland, TN 37311

Owner Contact:Mr. Bobby Scott, Owner - 423-614-7577

you can send them an email at this link

http://scottsfurniturecompany.com/contact.html

Edited April 5, 2011 by GLOCKGUY

[enfield]

It's legal. Didn't use to be, but it is now.

I was wrong.

I bought a lot of furniture at Scott's in '06. Guess I won't be back.

This part's still right.

[Guest Lstevison]

Goes to show the power of information via the internet. Scott's Furniture is no longer posted.