Properly posted?

[Twin]

According to the TN code, a property is considered "properly posted" if the sign with a slash through a handgun is displayed. Which was previously unknown to me. So, when you guys say "not properly posted", what exactly do you mean? The sign is not in plain sight? Not on a primary entrance? Or...?

 

 

http://state.tn.us/sos/acts/106/pub/pc1009.pdf

[Oh Shoot]

"No guns allowed", for example.

 

No case law whether you could still be convicted, though. Discussed just today in:

 

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/48050-carmike-thoroughbred-20-posted/

 

- OS

[Twin]

"No guns allowed", for example.

 

No case law whether you could still be convicted, though. Discussed just today in:

 

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/48050-carmike-thoroughbred-20-posted/

 

- OS

 

You said that if your caught on a properly posted property with your handgun, you face suspension of said permit if convicted? So not just a $500 fine.

Edited July 26, 2013 by Twin

[TMF]

You said that if your caught on a properly posted property with your handgun, you face suspension of said permit if convicted? So not just a $500 fine.

If that happens, with no other aggravating factor, such as trespassing, I'll gladly pay the person's fine for them.

[Twin]

If that happens, with no other aggravating factor, such as trespassing, I'll gladly pay the person's fine for them.

 

Can I please have your phone number?  :D

[TMF]

Can I please have your phone number? :D

Ha, well feel free to send me a PM if you get rolled up.

Point I'm making though is that getting charged with carrying past a posting is something that isn't happening. There are only a few cases I've seen discussed here and each one the carrier was doing something stupid, like having their firearm in the carry on luggage at the TSA checkpoint; not just carrying past a posting.

I think we'll see a few people get charged with this over the years and the common thread will be they were breaking another law along with this one, or trying to argue over a posting's validity when spotted by the owner/management. These are the type of people I don't feel bad for.

I've seen a several stories in the news as well as several accounts here of folks carrying past a posting and then simply being told to leave or stow it in their vehicle. By all accounts it seems that even if you mistakenly carry past a posting, it will not result in being charged unless you're doing something stupid.

[Oh Shoot]

You said that if your caught on a properly posted property with your handgun, you face suspension of said permit if convicted? So not just a $500 fine.

 

That's what 39-17-1352 states, not me. Says permit will be suspended or revoked.

 

- OS

Edited July 26, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[monkeylizard]

You said that if your caught on a properly posted property with your handgun, you face suspension of said permit if convicted? So not just a $500 fine.

 

Yep, that's what the man said. TCA 39-17-1352 requires that the HCP be suspended or revoked for a conviction of 39-17-1351 through 39-17-1360, which of course includes 39-17-1359, the statute on posting.

 

If I recall correctly, the wording in 39-17-1359 replaced an old statute that was more vague in its posting requirements. 39-17-1359 says the posting has to be plainly visible, located at every entrance used by the public, and must contain either the circle & slash "gunbuster", or language substantially similar to a phrase provided in 1359 that specifically cites TCA 39-17-1359. In other words, "no guns allowed" doesn't meet the content requirement of 39-17-1359.

 

When OS says that there's nothing that says you can't get popped for a 1359 violation even with an improper sign, it's because 1359 leaves out a clause that is found in the federal code. In 18 USC 930 it says at the end in section (h)

 

 

(h) Notice of the provisions of subsections (a) and (e ) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility, and notice of subsection (e) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal court facility, and  no person shall be convicted of an offense under subsection (a ) or (e ) with respect to a Federal facility if such notice is not so posted at such facility, unless such person had actual notice of subsection (a ) or (e ), as the case may be.

 

It's sort of a mixed bag. The USC doesn't have specific language requirements, but does say that if what posting requirements it does list aren't met, then no conviction. TCA has very specific requirements, but doesn't have the get out of jail free card. Without case law, we really don't know how a 39-17-1359 violation might go down if the sign in question didn't meet the content requirements, or what exactly "plainly visible" means.

 

A simple reading of the law would say that a normal person going about their normal behavior would see the sign and that it would be a gunbuster OR have the legalese language which also cites TCA 39-17-1359. i would expect a defense lawyer to use the fact that 39-17-1359 replaced the earlier vagueness to show that the legislature did very much intend to standardize how a public facility may properly post and that they should have to comply with the content and location requirements of the law. I would equally expect that a prosecutor would use the fact that "no guns allowed" is pretty dang self explanatory. Until we have an actual case, we won't know which side has the better lawyer.

Edited July 26, 2013 by monkeylizard

[Guest 270win]

The best thing to do would have the legislature remove the 500 dollar fine and permit suspension from this silly sign law.  After this year's mess up of the safe commute law, why not ask just to remove the criminal penalty from schools, posted property, and parks for those with permits?  I am not saying that property owners and schools should be forced to allow people with guns, but that someone with a permit cannot be charged with a weapons misdemeanor or felony.  If the legislature makes those fixes, we will have some of the best weapons laws in the country as far as where we can legally carry a gun with a permit.

Edited July 26, 2013 by 270win

[JAB]

The best thing to do would have the legislature remove the 500 dollar fine and permit suspension from this silly sign law.  After this year's mess up of the safe commute law, why not ask just to remove the criminal penalty from schools, posted property, and parks for those with permits?  I am not saying that property owners and schools should be forced to allow people with guns, but that someone with a permit cannot be charged with a weapons misdemeanor or felony.  If the legislature makes those fixes, we will have some of the best weapons laws in the country as far as where we can legally carry a gun with a permit.

 

In some, other states the signs do not have the weight of law.  My understanding is that if you are 'busted', asked to leave and refuse then they can get you for trespassing but if you leave then there are no criminal charges that can be filed.  That seems reasonable.  Tennessee, however, has to break our balls about it.  Honestly, for a supposedly Southern state, TN isn't the best on firearm rights (although there are certainly worse places.)  I think there are two reasons for this - 1. Tennessee politicians are greedy and like the idea of the state having an opportunity to collect $500 fines (or any fines.)  2. We have too danged many liberal, anti-gun Yankees from places like Illinois, etc. who have moved to TN and want to gripe about our firearm freedoms (no offense to any non-liberal, non-anti-gun Yankees from places like Illinois, of course - I don't blame you for wanting to escape.)

Edited July 26, 2013 by JAB

[sschrick]

According to the TN code, a property is considered "properly posted" if the sign with a slash through a handgun is displayed. Which was previously unknown to me. So, when you guys say "not properly posted", what exactly do you mean? The sign is not in plain sight? Not on a primary entrance? Or...?

 

 

http://state.tn.us/sos/acts/106/pub/pc1009.pdf

any or all of the above.

 

only having verbage stating "no guns allowed, no weapons allowed, guns are banned on the property, etc. . .".  Also, not within plain visible sight at ALL entrances of an establishment, etc. . .

[JAB]

"No guns allowed", for example.

 

No case law whether you could still be convicted, though. Discussed just today in:

 

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/48050-carmike-thoroughbred-20-posted/

 

- OS

 

At least one Knoxville location of a larger chain (Carrabba's) has some long, drawn out BS posting that is something like,

 

"While we respect our customer's rights, it is our policy that weapons not be allowed on the premises."

 

I will just say that, as I am not one of their employees, I do not give a flying fig about their company's 'policy'.  To me, that isn't a legal posting (although I haven't been back to Carrabba's since I noticed it - I like their food well enough but there are too many other Italian joints that don't try to pay lip service to our 'rights' but then say that they don't want us carrying.)

 

To me, that is like saying, "I absolutely respect your right to free speech.  Now shut the hell up."  I'd rather see a legal posting than someone trying to blow smoke up my butt by claiming to respect my right to carry then telling me they don't want me doing it.  That is saying, "We respect the right in theory but not in practice."  Whole lot of bloody good that does.

Edited July 26, 2013 by JAB

[monkeylizard]

Carrabba's is owned by the same comapny that owns Outback, Fleming's, and Bonefish. They all have the same wishy-washy signage. My wife likes Carrabba's too much for me to make that a fight worth having.

[JAB]

Carrabba's is owned by the same comapny that owns Outback, Fleming's, and Bonefish. They all have the same wishy-washy signage. My wife likes Carrabba's too much for me to make that a fight worth having.

 

Well, as I said (and this is just me, not legal advice) not being one of their employees, I don't really care what their 'policy' is - their 'policy' means nothing to me, although it is generally my 'policy' that a place that doesn't want my gun on their premises doesn't want my money there, either.  I haven't been back but if for some reason I did go back, it would be with the opinion that their sign does not pass legal muster.  That is all I will say about that.

Edited July 26, 2013 by JAB

[Twin]

Do any of you carry regardless of whether its properly posted? My thought is, if you did ever have to use your weapon while in such a place, then you'd be charged. But then again, you'd be alive to be charged.

Edited July 26, 2013 by Twin

[monkeylizard]

No, you wouldn't be charged, well not for violating any part of 39-17-13xx. TCA is pretty clear on that.

 

TCA 39-17-1322 says:

 

A person shall not be charged with or convicted of a violation under this part if the person possessed, displayed or employed a handgun in justifiable self-defense or in justifiable defense of another during the commission of a crime in which that person or the other person defended was a victim.

 

 

"part" refers to 39-17-13, so it applies to any 13xx.

Edited July 26, 2013 by monkeylizard

[JAB]

Do any of you carry regardless of whether its properly posted? My thought is, if you did ever have to use your weapon while in such a place, then you'd be charged. But then again, you'd be alive to be charged.

 

The way TN law is worded, there are some protections from being charged if you legitimately use your firearm in self defense even in an area where having the firearm is not 'legal'.  I am not sure if that rule would apply in such a situation or not.  Still, I don't know that knowingly breaking the law is something that should be advised.  When possible, it is probably better to find another establishment - one that doesn't treat lawful carriers like criminals - to receive your business and money.  Of course, if visiting someone in a hospital that is posted, etc. that option might not exist.  Still, advising (or admitting) to knowingly breaking the law on an Internet forum is probably not a good idea.

 

Now, if the posting isn't legal but is just some wishy-washy phrase then - while I would still rather give money to an establishment that doesn't make any attempt to discourage legal carry - that could be a different matter, IMO.  I used to feel that we should respect the business' 'wishes', regardless, but have come to the point that I really don't give a crap about their 'wishes'.  I simply don't want to be caught breaking the law.

[Twin]

 Still, advising (or admitting) to knowingly breaking the law on an Internet forum is probably not a good idea.

 

 

 

Lol. That crossed my mind. Well said.

[peejman]

Do any of you carry regardless of whether its properly posted? My thought is, if you did ever have to use your weapon while in such a place, then you'd be charged. But then again, you'd be alive to be charged.

 

 

I will admit to having carried past signs.... because I didn't seem them until subsequent visits.  Then I don't go there anymore.  I'm not eyeballing every square inch of the entrance for a sign.  If its not prominent, I'm not going out of my way to find it. 

 

As stated above, there's very little case history of people being charged.  Those that have been charged were doing something stupid like open carrying past a sigh they knew was there, then argued with the property management about it, then got belligerent with the cops that showed up. 

[JAB]

I will admit to having carried past signs.... because I didn't seem them until subsequent visits.  Then I don't go there anymore.  I'm not eyeballing every square inch of the entrance for a sign.  If its not prominent, I'm not going out of my way to find it. 

 

As stated above, there's very little case history of people being charged.  Those that have been charged were doing something stupid like open carrying past a sigh they knew was there, then argued with the property management about it, then got belligerent with the cops that showed up. 

 

Hypothetically speaking, if there were a restaurant where I have only eaten once or twice and that was in a part of the state that is a little distance from where I live - we'll call it Vegas steakhouse in Crossville, TN just for the sake of argument - and if the last time I was there this restaurant were only posted with a small, gun-circle-slash sticker that had a clear background and if said posting were on the innermost set of two glass doors and if someone were holding the door open when I entered, I might accidentally carry past it without ever even seeing the 'posting'.  If such an unfortunate mistake were, hypothetically, to take place, I would posit that - again, hypothetically, of course - I could probably be seated, eat an entire hypothetical meal and leave all while keeping my hypothetical 642 in my hypothetical pocket and not even noticing the sign until I was leaving without anyone there ever even knowing I was hypothetically carrying, much less saying anything about it.  Hypothetically. :shrug:

Edited July 29, 2013 by JAB

[TMF]

Hypothetically speaking, if there were a restaurant where I have only eaten once or twice and that was in a part of the state that is a little distance from where I live - we'll call it Vegas steakhouse in Crossville, TN just for the sake of argument - and if the last time I was there this restaurant were only posted with a small, gun-circle-slash sticker that had a clear background and if said posting were on the innermost set of two glass doors and if someone were holding the door open when I entered, I might accidentally carry past it without ever even seeing the 'posting'. If such an unfortunate mistake were, hypothetically, to take place, I would posit that - again, hypothetically, of course - I could probably be seated, eat an entire hypothetical meal and leave all while keeping my hypothetical 642 in my hypothetical pocket and not even noticing the sign until I was leaving without anyone there ever even knowing I was hypothetically carrying, much less saying anything about it. Hypothetically. :shrug:

Yes, all well and good, but how do I make my point unless I open carry into a place with a gunbuster?

[peejman]

Yes, all well and good, but how do I make my point unless I open carry into a place with a gunbuster?

 

Hypothetically speaking, of course....

[JAB]

Yes, all well and good, but how do I make my point unless I open carry into a place with a gunbuster?

 

Heh, I am more about 'going about my business' than 'making a point' in situations like this so I don't have much advice for you along those lines.  Maybe you could buy a rubber chicken to carry in your holster in place of a firearm when in posted places?

 

 

Hypothetically speaking, of course....

 

Yep! :up:

[TMF]

Heh, I am more about 'going about my business' than 'making a point' in situations like this so I don't have much advice for you along those lines. Maybe you could buy a rubber chicken to carry in your holster in place of a firearm when in posted places?

Good idea! I bet no one has tried that before.

[Spiffy]

Proper Concealed Carry would prevent all these problems.  I'm not saying break the law I'm just saying don't let everyone in on "your little secret", i.e. Don't wear a mini skirt and no panties (aka don't open carry).