is this sign legal

[skipsfirearms]

As someone who stood on the freeway for 2 hours getting my vehicle searched and then being put into Handcuffs just because I did not tell the FL State Trooper I had a loaded handgun in the vehicle. He said it was the law I did, I have the ATF state law book that disagrees with him. It states that on "Demand of the Officer you must provide your permit". He did not demand and actually refused to let me show it to him once he saw the pistol in the floor , 1 of 3 I had in the vehicle.

He totally stomped on my civil rights by going into my car, taking me handgun then refusing to allow me to prove I had a permit, stating that I had broken the law by not telling him right off. BS BS BS

The moral of this story is this: YES, THEY WILL ARREST YOU whether they know the law or not. LEO's get you to jail and then you have to get an attorney and prove your case, then sue if you want. Whether they let you go and drop the charges or not, you are out some personal time and probably a large sum of money.

My idea on this is don't rely on the law to protect you, that is not what it is going to do. These days we are guilty until proven innocent, not the other way around.

PS. I could find not one lawyer who would take my case or do anything. Out of 100 lawyers I contacted they all said it would be my word against the LEO's. Even though I could prove all I did was speed and that I had not broken a law that did not exist. OH WELL, so much for our RIGHTS>>>>

[Fallguy]

IANAL but IMO the Comcast sign is not subatainally silmilar to the wording of 39-17-1359.

Again IMO I would think that in addition to stating that weapons are banned the wording would need to contain 39-17-1359 and violation of state law.

But I agree the intent of the owner is not in question.

Also the AG is simply reflecting the law when he says "subatainally silmilar" because that is what the actually law says.

On the slash and gun the AG does say it can be used with the proper wording but not by itself.

[Guest janwbrown616]

Come on guys.

I think you should always pick your battles, but If you nit pick this type of stuff too much, then you may find you're on the short end of a long stick sooner than you might want to be.

If there is a HINT of the owner NOT wanting a weapon in his establishment, then MY weapon stays out. If I"m attached to it and I don't want to put it away then I stay out also.

[Guest tcampbell]

Come on guys.

I think you should always pick your battles, but If you nit pick this type of stuff too much, then you may find you're on the short end of a long stick sooner than you might want to be.

If there is a HINT of the owner NOT wanting a weapon in his establishment, then MY weapon stays out. If I"m attached to it and I don't want to put it away then I stay out also.

If the owner does not want my weapon in his establishment, then I just stay out alltogether....attached to it or not.

[Guest canynracer]

The fact that you got a warning from the cops tells me that the cops knew the law, and knew the sign was improperly posted....I am not sure if you would have been treated the same if the sign was correct...

I would say, lesson learned (check t-shirt BEFORE walking away from car), and carry on

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

OK talk with Mike (one of the LEOs that was there) last night. this is what he said. someone working there called and said i was carrying. he said that no the sign is not legal but if your in a business or resident posted or not and the owner ask you to leave or remove your gun and you dont you can be charged with trespassing. in this case the owners had the LEOs ask me to remove it. now he said if he had made a report and my name was in the report telling me i was ask to remove my gun or leave and i was caught back there in a later time i would more then likely be going to jail. but he said theirs was no report made. he said next time i need to make sure im CC. but he did say the next couple of times i go in there if he was me he wouldn't carry that way if they recognize me and call the law thinking im carrying it will make them look like dumbarse when they get there and im not.

[cadillacdude1975]

read these opinions carefully:

Opinion No. 07-43

Posting Notices that Handguns Are Not Permitted in Private Buildings

QUESTIONS

1. In order to prohibit handgun permit holders from carrying their handguns in a nongovernmental building, must the sign contain the exact language set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1359(a)?

1. No. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1359(a) requires the posting of a notice which uses language that is “substantially similar” to the language provided in the statute.

ok. so it states that it has to be "substantially similiar"

read on to the next one below:

Opinion No 07-43

2. May a property owner use the international circle and slash symbol in lieu of a sign that uses the language prescribed by Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1359(a)?

2. No. The international circle and slash symbol may not be used in lieu of a sign that uses the language prescribed by Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1359(a).

well i have news for you. 39-17-1359 says NOTHING about wording being exact or similiar. here is that section below:

PURSUANT TO § 39-17-1359, THE OWNER/OPERATOR OF THIS PROPERTY HAS BANNED WEAPONS ON THIS PROPERTY, OR WITHIN THIS BUILDING OR THIS PORTION OF THIS BUILDING. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROHIBITION IS PUNISHABLE AS A CRIMINAL ACT UNDER STATE LAW AND MAY SUBJECT THE VIOLATOR TO A FINE OF NOT MORE THAN FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500).

do you all see anything that covers how the signs are supposed to be worded? i dont. this would be the basis of a lawsuit IMHO. lawyers love loopholes and this my friends is a huge loophole.

[DaveTN]

do you all see anything that covers how the signs are supposed to be worded? i dont. this would be the basis of a lawsuit IMHO. lawyers love loopholes and this my friends is a huge loophole.

Yes....

The sign shall be of a size that is plainly visible to the average person entering the building, premises or property and shall contain language substantially similar to the following:

PURSUANT TO § 39-17-1359, THE OWNER/OPERATOR OF THIS PROPERTY HAS BANNED WEAPONS ON THIS PROPERTY, OR WITHIN THIS BUILDING OR THIS PORTION OF THIS BUILDING. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROHIBITION IS PUNISHABLE AS A CRIMINAL ACT UNDER STATE LAW AND MAY SUBJECT THE VIOLATOR TO A FINE OF NOT MORE THAN FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500).

[Fallguy]

What Dave said!

The law itself says the wording of the sign is supposed to substantially similar to what is in 39-17-1359 as does the AG opinion.

[Fallguy]

OK talk with Mike (one of the LEOs that was there) last night. this is what he said. someone working there called and said i was carrying. he said that no the sign is not legal but if your in a business or resident posted or not and the owner ask you to leave or remove your gun and you dont you can be charged with trespassing. in this case the owners had the LEOs ask me to remove it. now he said if he had made a report and my name was in the report telling me i was ask to remove my gun or leave and i was caught back there in a later time i would more then likely be going to jail. but he said theirs was no report made. he said next time i need to make sure im CC. but he did say the next couple of times i go in there if he was me he wouldn't carry that way if they recognize me and call the law thinking im carrying it will make them look like dumbarse when they get there and im not.

Glad one of the LEO's was a friend. Sounds like it was handled well on his part.

[Guest nraforlife]

OK talk with Mike (one of the LEOs that was there) last night. this is what he said. someone working there called and said i was carrying. he said that no the sign is not legal but if your in a business or resident posted or not and the owner ask you to leave or remove your gun and you dont you can be charged with trespassing. in this case the owners had the LEOs ask me to remove it. now he said if he had made a report and my name was in the report telling me i was ask to remove my gun or leave and i was caught back there in a later time i would more then likely be going to jail. but he said theirs was no report made. he said next time i need to make sure im CC. but he did say the next couple of times i go in there if he was me he wouldn't carry that way if they recognize me and call the law thinking im carrying it will make them look like dumbarse when they get there and im not.

Just wear an empty holster. No gun in the car either

[DaveTN]

Just wear an empty holster. No gun in the car either

What on earth could possibly cause you to want to do that?

[Fallguy]

Just wear an empty holster. No gun in the car either

What on earth could possibly cause you to want to do that?

Just a passive/peaceful form of protest.

[SpacemanSpiff]

OK talk with Mike (one of the LEOs that was there) last night. this is what he said. someone working there called and said i was carrying. he said that no the sign is not legal but if your in a business or resident posted or not and the owner ask you to leave or remove your gun and you dont you can be charged with trespassing. in this case the owners had the LEOs ask me to remove it. now he said if he had made a report and my name was in the report telling me i was ask to remove my gun or leave and i was caught back there in a later time i would more then likely be going to jail. but he said theirs was no report made. he said next time i need to make sure im CC. but he did say the next couple of times i go in there if he was me he wouldn't carry that way if they recognize me and call the law thinking im carrying it will make them look like dumbarse when they get there and im not.

I guess your conversation with your friend sums it up. Now we all know some of the ins and outs.

The way I see it, pick your battles. I do want to make sure that I'm always safe as best I can. Part of that also means not to draw attention to myself. Unfortunately, there are people that do not like guns because of the negative press so I'm not going to add to their paranoia. When I go to the range, I look around to see if any neighbors are around as I'm loading and unloading my car. I just don't want to be put in an awkward position. I love shooting but others may not. To me, it's like politics and religion, you believe in what you want, just don't push your beliefs on me. I'm fine with a friendly discussion, but when people start to preach to me, that's what I get pi$$ed.

Glad it worked out for you.

[molonlabetn]

My local Charter location has the same sign. It carries no legal weight.

[Guest strelcevina]

Well… there you have your answer.

The AG as left the door open with the “substantially similar†language. It’s up to the cop. Obviously the signs conveys the message that they don’t want you to carry.

Trust me; you do not want the cost or the risk of going to trial on a weapons charge. Even if it is dismissed the arrest is still there.

You are the first person that I have heard of actually having an encounter with real cops over a posted building.

Dave, can you please explain this statement?

it can be that i don't understand it well.

it sounds to me that LEO has power to make our life miserable if they wont to.

if LEO arrest me without any reason, and i I'm innocent

suddenly I'm bad guy, just because i was arrested.

i don't get it at all

[Guest ProguninTN]

I've seen similar signs on shopping malls. The intent may be clear, but they are not substantially similar, (they do not reference the statute). Hence, no legal weight.

[DaveTN]

Dave, can you please explain this statement?

it can be that i don't understand it well

Discretion and interpretation. (I’m speaking based on Illinois law) I had the discretion on a misdemeanor complaint to either make an arrest or not; on a felony I did not have that discretion. So let’s say that I am called to a posted business and it is a misdemeanor that can result in physical custody. You tell me you didn’t see the sign, weren’t paying attention or whatever. I can explain the law to you, tell you that the owners don’t want you carrying in their business, and if you do it again you will be arrested. I send you on your way with that warning.

Now let’s say I get there and instead of you it’s Super K. He tells me that is not a legal sign and there is nothing I can do but ask him to leave. I put him in the position, disarm him, cuff him up, haul him off to jail and seize his weapon as evidence.

Am I doing this because I am pissed at him? (Although that will be his story) No, he is letting me know that if I don’t deal with him right now some other cop is going to have to do it. He is more than willing to bring down a load of crap on all HCP holders because he is too ignorant to understand the law. He is also letting me know that he thinks that piece of paper in his pocket gives him some special privileges that supercede the rights of a business owner.

Now on to interpretation. I have read the Tennessee law and the state Attorney Generals opinion on the signs. My opinion, based on the intent of the law, is that is a legal sign. And at the point in time my opinion is the only one that matters.

He can then go to the DA, go to court, and may even have the charge dismissed; I don’t know. I did my job and have nothing to worry about.

Now… Super K will be screaming that he is going to make a citizens complaint against me, get a lawyer, and sue me, my department, and anyone else he can think of. I would not be concerned about that one bit and would gladly explain the complaint process to him and get him the proper forms. As I said before I’m sure he can find a lawyer that will be glad to take his money and leave him with nothing.

it sounds to me that LEO has power to make our life miserable if they want to.

Certainly they do. They can make your life miserable and they can take your freedom. If you happen to run into a bad cop it can be devastating.

if LEO arrest me without any reason, and i I'm innocent

suddenly I'm bad guy, just because i was arrested.

It would be a bad cop that arrested you without reason, but it could be a good cop that arrested you for a reason that you may not understand or agree with.

i don't get it at all

Well here are some thoughts and ideas….

Life isn’t fair. When the cops are called there are mistakes and misunderstandings.

When you see that sign on the door and you make the decision to walk past it because of someone posting on the internet that it is not legal…. Stop and think.

We don’t have a justice system; we have a legal system. The legislature is filled with lawyers. They make laws that you have to have a law degree to interpret. There are plenty of people on here that are interpreting the printed law based on absolutely no legal training. They don’t have access to case law and they are sometimes clueless to what they are posting.

Know the laws. Especially if it is one that you are going to flagrantly violate like walking past a sign in a posted business or carrying a gun somewhere it is forbidden.

How cops handle violations of the law can change city by city and county by county. If you want to know how a certain action will be handled go talk to the Officers from the department that will be dispatched to handle the call.

Court isn’t held on the street and probable cause is a long way from beyond reasonable doubt.

You are not innocent until proven guilty. When I arrested someone and hauled them off to jail, I handcuffed them, towed their car (if they were driving) and locked them up until they could post bond. If the charge happened to be a felony, they could be in jail over the weekend until they saw a Judge to set bond. Or if it was a misdemeanor and they couldn’t raise the money they could set there overnight. Then you get to pay an Attorney a bunch of money to defend you against a crime you may not have committed. Sound to you like this is innocent until proven guilty?

And then if the charges are dismissed the arrest is still there and there are some jobs that you will not get because of it.

Our legal system is not a game you want to play.

Did I mention life isn’t fair?

Edited July 21, 2008 by DaveTN

[cadillacdude1975]

and Dave, i stand corrected. i overlooked that small line on the page i grabbed that pasting from.

[Guest strelcevina]

@Dave

thanks for taking your time to explain my question.

i appreciate your opinion, it makes a lot of sense .

that was more than just understandable.

thanks again:)

[Guest justaman30]

All Im saying is. If a buisness has placed a large sign in plain view that weapons are not permitted even if it is not 100% worded per §§ 39-17-1351 the people dont want guns on their property. Just CC & go on by. All this playin lawyer / word wrangler just makes the problem worse. Im not tryin to get everyone stirred up but sometimes it seems like some folks are just lookin to test/buck the system. Maybe the buisness wouldnt have a leg to stand on if it actually went to court but really would you want the stress & headache to find out? Not to mention the other people in the place of buisness that would be watching like gawkers if you were asked to leave by the police. Then let someone like the News channels get ahold of a story like that & put a funky spin on permit holders showin that sign on the news with a comment like Handgun Carry Permit holders ignore postings & do as they will. Im just kinda looking at the big picture on this topic.

Yeah, no use in stirring up the idiotic masses. Just check the CC and move along. We do not need to go out of our way to appear as gun-toting freaks who look for excuses to stir up trouble. The whole idea of carrying a concealed handgun is to end trouble when it finds you, not to cause any.

[Guest nraforlife]

Just a passive/peaceful form of protest.

Bingo...

[Mousegun]

Wouldn't it be nice if all this crap could be eliminated and Tennessee law read that the owner could only ask a patron to leave if that patron was observed with a firearm ( concealed is concealed ) and the legal ramifications could only be trespassing.

Fat chance that will ever happen but I can dream can't I.

Lucky are those in states that have gone this route. It is a form of saying that individual rights are recognized in those states just slightly above a proprietor or corporation's desire to legally stop you from being the master of your own protection.

Before all the " business' have the right to determine their own rules" come at me, I am not saying that they shouldn't be able to do so if they knew you were armed. If concealed, you get the best of both worlds in that it is your decision to leave if made, and if you don't do it, the business can then claim trespassing.

[molonlabetn]

Sure one could be arrested (cops have alot of leeway with regard to what they can do, and how loosely they can interpret something as a crime). But the sign wouldn't hold up in court. Just depends on what is of more value... your life or your temporary inconvenience.

As soon as I have another option with regard to telecommunications providers, Charter won't be getting any more of my money.

[G27]

As soon as I have another option with regard to telecommunications providers, Charter won't be getting any more of my money.

That's your best bet, and let them know why.

If I see that sign on someone's business, the intention is clear whether it's a legal sign or not.