[tpishdad]

Can a private shop post a sign to make it illegal for a conceal carry owner to carry in the store? What is the legal requirement that has to be met for a shop owner: Starbucks, Lucky gas station, etc. have to do, to make it stick, if you violate it?

Seems the state legislature writes the laws and has in many states, restricted conceal carry in schools, airports, bars, etc....but now a shop owner can also post as sign and that also be a restriction?

I am assuming, that just saying to not bring guns in the store does not carry as much weight as a public notice/sign!!

Any incite on this for Florida, where I live..but all perspectives are important as I travel around the US.

Thanks,

 

[deadeyedick]

In Florida, signs prohibiting firearms have no legal weight. However, if you enter such a place and are discovered to be carrying a weapon by the staff, you can be asked to leave and failure to do so constitutes armed trespassing. Your right to carry does not trump the rights of the property owner.

OTOH, those signs do carry legal weight in some states (Texas for example) and you can be arrested if you ignore them, so it is wise to know the laws of the state you're visiting.

BTW, the CEO of Starbucks only requested that people not bring guns into their stores, so it wasn't an outright prohibition. Of course, that's likely to change if the open carry zealots ignore this request.

 

[brownie]

From the title I thought there was some update from the CEO on the SB debacle two weeks ago. Do search on starbucks here, you'll learn things.

Starbucks ceo speaks, is it legal?

Yes, under the 1a :grin

 

[Shorts]

In Florida, signs prohibiting firearms have no legal weight. However, if you enter such a place and are discovered to be carrying a weapon by the staff, you can be asked to leave and failure to do so constitutes armed trespassing. Your right to carry does not trump the rights of the property owner.

OTOH, those signs do carry legal weight in some states (Texas for example) and you can be arrested if you ignore them, so it is wise to know the laws of the state you're visiting.

BTW, the CEO of Starbucks only requested that people not bring guns into their stores, so it wasn't an outright prohibition. Of course, that's likely to change if the open carry zealots ignore this request.

In Texas the sign has to be 30.06 and meet 30.06 requirements to carry legal weight.

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:

(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and

(2) received notice that:

(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or

(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.

(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.

(c) In this section:

(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).

(2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).

(3) "Written communication" means:

(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or

(B) a sign posted on the property that:

(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;

(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and

(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.


​

The simple ghost buster signs hold no weight. If while in a non-posted business a CHLer is made, s/he must leave if asked to do so. If the CHLer refuses to leave then it becomes a matter of trespass.



ETA: As for the statement being effective notice in Texas, it is not.

 

[AirForceShooter]

You know the Starbucks guy did not say you couldn't carry.

AFS

 

[deadeyedick]

ETA: As for the statement being effective notice in Texas, it is not.

My point was that in some states, signs do carry the weight of law, even if they have to be configured and/or posted in a specific manner. That's why it is important to know the laws of the state one is visiting.

 

[birdman]

My point was that in some states, signs do carry the weight of law, even if they have to be configured and/or posted in a specific manner. That's why it is important to know the laws of the state one is visiting.

Such as here in North Carolina. Unlike Texas where "the sign" has to meet specific requirements, here in NC the only requirement for the "no guns" sign is it must be conspicuously displayed. Like DED said, know the laws were you are at the moment as their cops aren't particularly interested in how we do it in Florida.

Allan

 

[7.62Kolectr]

In Florida, signs prohibiting firearms have no legal weight. However, if you enter such a place and are discovered to be carrying a weapon by the staff, you can be asked to leave and failure to do so constitutes armed trespassing. Your right to carry does not trump the rights of the property owner.

Isn't this a contradiction though? If your right to carry does not trump the rights of the owner than would the sign not carry weight in his place of business?

 

[brownie]

Isn't this a contradiction though? If your right to carry does not trump the rights of the owner than would the sign not carry weight in his place of business?

Your right to carry doesn't trump the store owners rights to restrict firearms from that business. The state says the signs hold no weight, but the real weight is that you can be asked to leave, and you'd better or you're likely going to take the ride if you challenge their right to tell you to GTFO for ignoring the sign to begin with.

 

[Shorts]

My point was that in some states, signs do carry the weight of law, even if they have to be configured and/or posted in a specific manner. That's why it is important to know the laws of the state one is visiting.

Hey man, I didn't intend to ruffle your feathers. So if I offended you with the correction, I am sorry for the offense, but not the correction.

Those ghost buster type no guns signs do carry weight in certain states. I'm not contesting that. But they do not carry weight in Texas as you initially stated. That is all.

 

[Mac45]

Your right to carry doesn't trump the store owners rights to restrict firearms from that business. The state says the signs hold no weight, but the real weight is that you can be asked to leave, and you'd better or you're likely going to take the ride if you challenge their right to tell you to GTFO for ignoring the sign to begin with.

Actually, the State of Florida has never specified exactly what type of printed signage would constitute sufficient warning of trespass to allow arrest, simply for violating the signage, with respect to trespass in a building, nor has it been decided in a court of law. While it is generally accepted that the international No Firearms signage does not constitute sufficient warning of trespass for arrest, more elaborate signage may. Your "right" to possess a firearm is binding only on the government, not private individuals and their property.

One final word of caution, an arrest for trespass while armed is a felony. Bye bye firearm ownership and your CWFL, if you are convicted.

 

[pod]

Now, here is the tricky part, are businesses, outside of bars and nightclubs and such, allowed to search you and your belongings for such things as firearms? For example, if I owned a pizza joint and didn't want people with weapons inside, could I have a pat-down at the door? Or is that a privilege exclusively reserved for bars, clubs, and the like?

Reason I ask is because some people take the view of "OK, the sign is bunk as long as I don't mess up and expose in front of an employee that cares enough to report me..." - however, could a search happen just because the business is feeling obnoxious?

 

[brownie]

Now, here is the tricky part, are businesses, outside of bars and nightclubs and such, allowed to search you and your belongings for such things as firearms? For example, if I owned a pizza joint and didn't want people with weapons inside, could I have a pat-down at the door? Or is that a privilege exclusively reserved for bars, clubs, and the like?

Reason I ask is because some people take the view of "OK, the sign is bunk as long as I don't mess up and expose in front of an employee that cares enough to report me..." - however, could a search happen just because the business is feeling obnoxious?

I'd suggest not touching people, wand em if you want, but don't touch em, certainly as a search for weapons.

 

[notalawyer]

Actually, the State of Florida has never specified exactly what type of printed signage would constitute sufficient warning of trespass to allow arrest, simply for violating the signage, with respect to trespass in a building, nor has it been decided in a court of law. While it is generally accepted that the international No Firearms signage does not constitute sufficient warning of trespass for arrest, more elaborate signage may. Your "right" to possess a firearm is binding only on the government, not private individuals and their property.

One final word of caution, an arrest for trespass while armed is a felony. Bye bye firearm ownership and your CWFL, if you are convicted.

Wrong again. Still.

Florida's Trespassing statutes are VERY detailed and VERY specific. There is not even a hint of what you suggest in the statutes nor in any trespassing case to come before the Florida DCA's nor the Florida Supreme Court.
:smack

 

[notalawyer]

Now, here is the tricky part, are businesses, outside of bars and nightclubs and such, allowed to search you and your belongings for such things as firearms? For example, if I owned a pizza joint and didn't want people with weapons inside, could I have a pat-down at the door? Or is that a privilege exclusively reserved for bars, clubs, and the like?

Reason I ask is because some people take the view of "OK, the sign is bunk as long as I don't mess up and expose in front of an employee that cares enough to report me..." - however, could a search happen just because the business is feeling obnoxious?

No business may search you without your consent, period.

Any business or private individual could require, as a condition of remaining on the property, require you allow them to perform a search for weapons. Perfectly legal because you allowed it. Choose to not allow it? Fine, they are free to require you to depart.

 

[brownie]

No business may search you without your consent, period.

Any business or private individual could require, as a condition of remaining on the property, require you allow them to perform a search for weapons. Perfectly legal because you allowed it. Choose to not allow it? Fine, they are free to require you to depart.

That's physically search you/hands on. Using a wand would or wouldn't be within the laws in Fla? Of course, if you said no to being wanded, you'd be asked to leave at that point.

 

[notalawyer]

That's physically search you/hands on. Using a wand would or wouldn't be within the laws in Fla? Of course, if you said no to being wanded, you'd be asked to leave at that point.

Kind of hard to wand someone without their consent, no?

 

[Shorts]

Mac and pod, the condundrum/balance that you guys are hashing out is exactly why Texas went with the specific 30.06 language and signage. It puts the CHLer and business on equal ground as they both must comply with state statute. There was too much ambiguity as to exactly what point and what scenarios constituted a crime. So, they made it simple. If you're a CHLer and go in a building with an enforceable 30.06 sign, that's a crime. If you're a business owner and wish to prohibit CHLers from carrying on your property, you put up an enforceable 30.06 sign. Simple as that.

 

[brownie]

Kind of hard to wand someone without their consent, no?

You think so? I might be invading your space while you're in my store, but unless you run away from me, it's not that difficult to wand someone as they stand there. "Hey, I don't want you to do that", as you're running it around their body. You aren't touching them, what are they going to do, get physical for you to stop? I hardly think that would happen, they'd just leave without having to be asked, and we know why 99.9% of the time if they did balk or leave wouldn't we?

 

[notalawyer]

You think so? I might be invading your space while you're in my store, but unless you run away from me, it's not that difficult to wand someone as they stand there. "Hey, I don't want you to do that", as you're running it around their body. You aren't touching them, what are they going to do, get physical for you to stop? I hardly think that would happen, they'd just leave without having to be asked, and we know why 99.9% of the time if they did balk or leave wouldn't we?

Invading my personal space while holding something that could be a weapon would cause me to stop the person from doing it. :dunno