GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-11-2013, 06:57   #76
Ryobi
SummertimeRules
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,293
You can't expect maturity from everyone. Permit holder carry where posted is like drunk driving: if it wasn't clear to them it was a bad idea in the first place, no amount of explaining is likely to turn their light bulb on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AXaxiom View Post
All I see here is what is Legal, legal this and legal that. Where is the personally held morality and integrity anymore, does it exist in this world anymore?

Do we not hold ourselves to the same accountability as we hold others?

We are to judge others by their actions but judge ourselves by our intentions? This breads only disrespect for others and their property. ItísOK if not caught attitude is why we require lawyers. Can we not internally police ourselves and do what is right only because it is the right thing to do?

You people keep doing what you can get away with and argue how to perceive the law in your best interest and Iíll choose to do the right thing just because I try to hold my personal integrity above the law.
Ryobi is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 08:43   #77
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernBoyVA View Post
Yes.

Question user. Suppose you have a neighbor who owns a jewelry store and his store has a prominently displayed No Guns sign. You enter armed, he sees you, you point to the sign, and he says, "That's okay, don't worry about it. I know you". Doesn't he have the right to waive the sign and allow you to stay in his place of business while perhaps demanding others to leave?
That's a great point. Another reason why I say the sign sets an expectation that you may be asked to leave for carrying a firearm but ultimately the owner or store management may decide not to enforce it. Maybe because they know you. Maybe because its a large corporation that has a national policy of no firearms in its stores and posts on each store, but the local management is more gun friendly and don't care and thus don't enforce it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AXaxiom View Post
All I see here is what is Legal, legal this and legal that. Where is the personally held morality and integrity anymore, does it exist in this world anymore?

Do we not hold ourselves to the same accountability as we hold others?

We are to judge others by their actions but judge ourselves by our intentions? This breeds only disrespect for others and their property. ItísOK if not caught attitude is why we require lawyers. Can we not internally police ourselves and do what is right only because it is the right thing to do?

You people keep doing what you can get away with and argue how to perceive the law in your best interest and Iíll choose to do the right thing just because I try to hold my personal integrity above the law.
That is a very good point, the different between what it ethical/moral/right and what is legal. Reminds me of my college ethics class, we were asked to describe something that is not ethical but legal, and something that was ethical but not legal.

Ultimately it comes down to the sign. Is carrying where the sign says not to ethical/moral? We each have our own moral beliefs. Overall what is ultimately moral i believe is something that come from the creator, God. Now for those who don't believe in a God you can just substitute your own personal morality.

I think a lot of people operate on their own personal morality, and when the morality is shall we say questionable that's why the government steps in with laws, to define boundaries that are not to be crossed, and if they are they set penalties.

A sign is a sign, it inherently is not prohibitive. Why well I think there are several reasons but one, I don't really know the posters intention in posting it. Now some states like Texas law makers have written laws to give the sign a prohibitive nature, the reason for the law, the sign in some moral views is not prohibitive. Am I any more right or wrong to say it is not prohibitive compared to someone who says it is?

Morality can be viewed two ways..absolute or relative. I think its both, I believe there is a absolute morality guided by the creator of the universe (not to try to make this a religious argument feel free to disagree). Then we each have our choice of our own morality, for me I try to keep it inline with what I see as the absolute morality, what is really the right thing to do.

So it is right or moral to ignore the sign? Is it right or moral to follow the sign? I say both, as I mentioned you don't know who posted the sign or what their intentions were in posting it. Maybe its left over from a previous business and the new business hasn't remove it because they didn't notice it, or just haven't often around to it. Maybe its posted by the building owner but the business inside welcomes legally carried firearms and is trying to get permission to remove the sign. Whole other discussion on property owner vs business owner rights there.

Most people will say the second amendment gives us the right to carry firearms. I actually have to disagree personally I believe it confirms our God given right to defend ourselves from criminals and tyranny. As such I believe it to be right and moral to carry whenever possible.

I also support the owner's right to restrict who is in his business, and what he allows there, the business owner exercises this by asking people to leave and or not return.

But signs by nature are not restrictive. Think of a city that posts no parking signs throughout, but has no law about parking on the books.

What is the intention of the sign, no parking during certain hours, no parking unless you have written permission of the police? they mayor? A law must be on the books to give the sign its prohibitive nature because naturally it has none on its own, because the law will make assumptions of what this signs intentions are to make it clear to all.
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 08:49   #78
Fear Night
NRA Life Member
 
Fear Night's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Posts: 3,853
I find it hard to respect anybody that thinks a "gun free zone" makes them any safer.

Concealed is concealed. If you happen to get caught, explain that you missed the sign and leave immediately. Then take your business elsewhere.

The signs carry no force of law in AL, but if you refuse to leave at the request of the owner, you can get hit with trespassing.

Last edited by Fear Night; 05-11-2013 at 09:02..
Fear Night is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 09:43   #79
actionshooter10
CLM Number 19
Charter Lifetime Member
 
actionshooter10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
Its not about liking or disliking anything. Please read my previous posts. Its about the fact they are a business and have opened up their property to the public, at that point I have the right to enter with or without a gun. If they don't like it then THEN have the right to ask me to leave.

The no gun sign, that sets the expectation that I may be asked to leave. Now in your state it doesn't just set the expectation it is actually prohibitive under the law, that's different than the property owner's rights.

If I have not been asked to leave then I am welcomed in regardless of any sign posted. That's what having a business is, your property is open to the public unless you ask them to leave and/or not come back.
You've referenced "rights" several times.

I believe you and I have a different definition of "rights".

In your opinion:

Where do rights come from?

What protects these rights?

Are these rights defined somewhere?
__________________
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence Ö from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable Ö the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference ó they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States
actionshooter10 is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 10:40   #80
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Why do I get the feeling this thread is no longer a civil discussion?

Last edited by Ryan WA; 05-11-2013 at 10:45..
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 10:56   #81
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,033
I haven't seen anything that seems less than civil in the thread. I have seen people who have different views as to whose rights are more important.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is online now  
Old 05-11-2013, 12:32   #82
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
Why do I get the feeling this thread is no longer a civil discussion?
Maybe because the facts don't support your position?

It's been very civil as far as I can see, you are just holding an untenable position supported neither by case law nor any know interpretation of the Constitution. Other than that, the thread is fine.
countrygun is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 12:41   #83
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Night View Post
I find it hard to respect anybody that thinks a "gun free zone" makes them any safer.

Concealed is concealed. If you happen to get caught, explain that you missed the sign and leave immediately. Then take your business elsewhere.

The signs carry no force of law in AL, but if you refuse to leave at the request of the owner, you can get hit with trespassing.
^^^^^ That sounds like the reasoning of a liberal politician. "It's OK until you get caught, then lie and say "I didn't know""

See Axaxiom's post.
countrygun is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 13:53   #84
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 42,620
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
That's a great point. Another reason why I say the sign sets an expectation that you may be asked to leave for carrying a firearm but ultimately the owner or store management may decide not to enforce it. Maybe because they know you. Maybe because its a large corporation that has a national policy of no firearms in its stores and posts on each store, but the local management is more gun friendly and don't care and thus don't enforce it.
No. The expectation is that you will not bring a firearm onto the premises.

The sign states the intention of the owner/controller of the property. Until, and only until an exception is granted, the expectation is that all will honor the sign.

While open to the public, a condition for admittance to the property is that no one will bring a firearm onto the premises. That is the "price of admission."
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 14:24   #85
sandworm40
Silver Membership
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Alabama
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
^^^^^ That sounds like the reasoning of a liberal politician. "It's OK until you get caught, then lie and say "I didn't know""
It's this acceptance of lying that seems to be part of the growing moral decay of this nation's citizens.
__________________
Jim Clark
sandworm40 is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 14:37   #86
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
Maybe because the facts don't support your position?

It's been very civil as far as I can see, you are just holding an untenable position supported neither by case law nor any know interpretation of the Constitution. Other than that, the thread is fine.
I've given many facts to support my position. And I don't generally consider personal attacks civil.

Case law? No law is being broken so what case would we reference? Laws generally work where it is permissible unless prohibited, the constitution does't have a provision that says unless there is a no guns sign does it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
No. The expectation is that you will not bring a firearm onto the premises.

The sign states the intention of the owner/controller of the property. Until, and only until an exception is granted, the expectation is that all will honor the sign.

While open to the public, a condition for admittance to the property is that no one will bring a firearm onto the premises. That is the "price of admission."
That would require the sign to be prohibitive. Signs by nature give information, they do not prohibit. A law (like in Texas) may prohibit where a sign exists. But that is not the case in my state at least. A no parking sign means nothing without a law saying you cannot park where the sign exists.

Thus in a state where there is no such law I have every right to continue into the building until asked to leave. The owner's right is to ask me to leave is he/she wishes.

Last edited by Ryan WA; 05-11-2013 at 14:44..
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 14:49   #87
wprebeck
Die, bird, die!
 
wprebeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In a swamp, if I'm lucky
Posts: 8,444
The owner doesn't wish you to carry firearms onto his property, hence the sign. Too bad folks can't act like mature adults, instead of stomping their feet and refusing to honor the property owner's wishes - law or not.
wprebeck is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 14:53   #88
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by wprebeck View Post
The owner doesn't wish you to carry firearms onto his property, hence the sign. Too bad folks can't act like mature adults, instead of stomping their feet and refusing to honor the property owner's wishes - law or not.
I got a sign for you...I don't wish for you to make personal attacks. Who is acting immature when you have to resort to attacking someone for a differing opinion.
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 15:07   #89
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
Case law? No law is being broken so what case would we reference? Laws generally work where it is permissible unless prohibited, the constitution does't have a provision that says unless there is a no guns sign does it?



.
In case you don't recall your history lessons, (the way it is taught these days my absolve you of blame) part of the reason we fought the Revolutionary War was the issue of a person being able to determine what happened on their own property. Look up the issue of "quartering troops".

Look at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to gain an insight. The rights of property were established in the Constitution. The right to keep and bear arms was added later as an addendum IE "The Bill of Rights". That BOR was a list of things that it was felt needed to be enumerated to protect the rights established in the Constitution, not the other way around.

The right of a property owner trumps your right of free speech on his property, your practice of religion on his property, so what rational basis is there to think the Second Amendment is exempt from the same conditions?
countrygun is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 15:12   #90
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
In case you don't recall your history lessons, (the way it is taught these days my absolve you of blame) part of the reason we fought the Revolutionary War was the issue of a person being able to determine what happened on their own property. Look up the issue of "quartering troops".

Look at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to gain an insight. The rights of property were established in the Constitution. The right to keep and bear arms was added later as an addendum IE "The Bill of Rights". That BOR was a list of things that it was felt needed to be enumerated to protect the rights established in the Constitution, not the other way around.

The right of a property owner trumps your right of free speech on his property, your practice of religion on his property, so what rational basis is there to think the Second Amendment is exempt from the same conditions?
I never said they don't have the right to control what happens on their own property I have said many time they may ask anyone to leave at anytime for any reason. Whether its regrading them carrying a gun, saying something the business owner doesn't like, hell they can ask me to leave if they don't like the color of my skin if they want.

But they have to ask me to leave, its established by law in my state. Your state may vary.
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 15:22   #91
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post


That would require the sign to be prohibitive. Signs by nature give information, they do not prohibit. A law (like in Texas) may prohibit where a sign exists. But that is not the case in my state at least. A no parking sign means nothing without a law saying you cannot park where the sign exists.

Thus in a state where there is no such law I have every right to continue into the building until asked to leave. The owner's right is to ask me to leave is he/she wishes.
That is a representation of the thinking that is at the heart of our moral decay in this Country.

"I don't have to respect anyone else's rights unless there is a law"

You do not even grasp how far that is from the Founder's intent. Too many push for agendas based purely on law, and some of those agendas even include complaining about too many laws.

Any of your rights are only as strongly protected as you protect the rights of others. That includes the rights of a property owner. How do you ever expect they will respect your right if you show you don't care about their rights?

There is more to this Country than the words written that we call laws. There are principles and responsibilities that exist as part of an unwritten contract between responsible citizens. One of the details is respect for others rights. Occasionally that means setting aside your rights to show that respect.
countrygun is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 15:30   #92
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
That is a representation of the thinking that is at the heart of our moral decay in this Country.

"I don't have to respect anyone else's rights unless there is a law"
What I believe my rights to be will vary from what you do. Rights being by nature intrinsic and not defined are therefore going to vary based on each person. That is why we have laws, to confirm the socially agreed upon rights.

My right to life is confirmed by state law prohibiting homicide, and is also limited by state law stating you may kill me if i threaten your life.

Rights of property owners are confirmed and limited by what we call trespass laws. Under Washington State laws by them opening their business an invitation has been extended to the public to enter their property. They can then exercise control by asking individuals to leave at their discretion, posting a sign SAYING ANYTHING does not constitute being asked to leave and therefore I cannot be trespassing until I have been asked to leave and refuse to do so.

I am not ignoring their rights they still have the right to get me off their property but something has to establish HOW that is done, that is what the law does! CLEARLY you don't grasp that.

You don't like how the law has established their ability to exercise their right of control over their property...write your state senator.

If I wasn't respecting their right, I wouldn't leave when they ask me to and force them to use the remedies afforded to them by the law.

There is a relationship between rights and laws that cannot be ignored. Laws confirm rights and establish when and how they can be exercised.

Last edited by Ryan WA; 05-11-2013 at 15:36..
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 15:53   #93
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
What I believe my rights to be will vary from what you do. Rights being by nature intrinsic and not defined are therefore going to vary based on each person. That is why we have laws, to confirm the socially agreed upon rights.

There is your education failing you again. Your true rights are no "socially agreed upon." If that were the case you might find you have fewer than you enjoy today

My right to life is confirmed by state law prohibiting homicide, and is also limited by state law stating you may kill me if i threaten your life.

A State law is not a confirmation of YOUR rights, it is a limit placed upon them to protect the rights of others.

Rights of property owners are confirmed and limited by what we call trespass laws.

Wrong again. Go back and re read (if you ever did read) the Constitution.



Under Washington State laws by them opening their business an invitation has been extended to the public to enter their property. They can then exercise control by asking individuals to leave at their discretion, posting a sign SAYING ANYTHING does not constitute being asked to leave and therefore I cannot be trespassing until I have been asked to leave and refuse to do so.

States do have different laws ,but by ignoring a sign stating the owners intentions you are showing zero respect for their rights. And knowing that they can order you off, all you amount to is a rule breaking child trying to "get away with something".

I am not ignoring their rights they still have the right to get me off their property but something has to establish HOW that is done, that is what the law does! CLEARLY you don't grasp that.

I now don't feel bad if anything I have said has been perceived as an insult. You are rather undereducated in these matters and are on one hand foisting off an emotional position and trying to hide behind what you think are loopholes in the laws.

You don't like how the law has established their ability to exercise their right of control over their property...write your state senator.

You seem to be the one who has problems dealing with the rights of property owners, you do the writing.

If I wasn't respecting their right, I wouldn't leave when they ask me to and force them to use the remedies afforded to them by the law.

That is like saying "I was obeying the rules until I got caught cheating".

There is a relationship between rights and laws that cannot be ignored. Laws confirm rights and establish when and how they can be exercised.

And once again your education fails you. Laws limit rights, in the case of CCW they actually grant you nothing you do not have under the Constitution, they are a response to a Court decision that in effect nullified existing legal RESTRAINTS and have replaced them with acceptable RESTRAINTS. Case law and Court decisions either reaffirm the laws or strike them down based on constitutionality

You are obviously a product of the "Me" generation or its progeny and do not realize the bigger picture beyond the end of your own shoelaces.
countrygun is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 15:59   #94
Fear Night
NRA Life Member
 
Fear Night's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
^^^^^ That sounds like the reasoning of a liberal politician. "It's OK until you get caught, then lie and say "I didn't know""

See Axaxiom's post.
Well, I'm not really referring to lying about not seeing the sign. I'm referring to the fact that most people, including myself, don't stand outside and read every little message posted on the front of businesses. If we are held accountable for every little fine print rule that a business owner decides to create out of thin air, then they should make us sign a waiver at the door that we have read and understand their rules.

I have literally never seen a "no carry" sign on any business in Alabama, the exception being "no loaded weapons" at some local gun stores (which I do honor).

Last edited by Fear Night; 05-11-2013 at 16:32..
Fear Night is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 16:27   #95
wprebeck
Die, bird, die!
 
wprebeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In a swamp, if I'm lucky
Posts: 8,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
I got a sign for you...I don't wish for you to make personal attacks. Who is acting immature when you have to resort to attacking someone for a differing opinion.
I'm not attacking anyone. You are far from the only person in this thread displaying a "But my opinion is the ONLY one that matters - I'm special" attitude.

Its simple. If a business posts a "No guns" or similar sign, then it should be fairly obvious they don't want guns on the property. Its a sad commentary on society that people feel a LAW should be in place before one must respect the wishes of others.
wprebeck is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 16:28   #96
wprebeck
Die, bird, die!
 
wprebeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In a swamp, if I'm lucky
Posts: 8,444
Courtesy, respect, proper manners. all lacking in today's society. I was born much too late.
wprebeck is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 16:49   #97
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,033
Some people can function within the civil confines of society, without needing a specific statute to guide them. Some people will only function within the confines of the law. Some people can not function even within the confines of the law.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is online now  
Old 05-11-2013, 17:13   #98
actionshooter10
CLM Number 19
Charter Lifetime Member
 
actionshooter10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,752
You continue to display your ignorance of what rights truly are.

I'll briefly explain it to you.

"Rights" are given to us by our creator, not by any other man.

The Constitution acknowledges some of those rights and protects those specific rights from government oppression.

The Constitution does not protect your rights from other individuals.

Your rights do not trump anyone else's rights...no matter how much you would like to think they do.

If a property owner expresses his wishes to you by an "informational" sign, you violate his rights to regulate what happens on his property when you don't respect his written wishes.

Laws don't protect "rights".

Laws are based on Judeo-Christian teaching and societal mores...not rights.

Just because something is illegal, doesn't mean it's immoral.

Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it's moral.

Morality and the law are not neccessarily the same.

Hope this clears things up for you.
__________________
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence Ö from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable Ö the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference ó they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States
actionshooter10 is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 18:25   #99
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 42,620
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
That's a great point. Another reason why I say the sign sets an expectation that you may be asked to leave for carrying a firearm but ultimately the owner or store management may decide not to enforce it. Maybe because they know you. Maybe because its a large corporation that has a national policy of no firearms in its stores and posts on each store, but the local management is more gun friendly and don't care and thus don't enforce it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
No. The expectation is that you will not bring a firearm onto the premises.

The sign states the intention of the owner/controller of the property. Until, and only until an exception is granted, the expectation is that all will honor the sign.

While open to the public, a condition for admittance to the property is that no one will bring a firearm onto the premises. That is the "price of admission."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
That would require the sign to be prohibitive. Signs by nature give information, they do not prohibit. A law (like in Texas) may prohibit where a sign exists. But that is not the case in my state at least. A no parking sign means nothing without a law saying you cannot park where the sign exists.

Thus in a state where there is no such law I have every right to continue into the building until asked to leave. The owner's right is to ask me to leave is he/she wishes.
So, now you want to take "expectation" out of the equation? Why? When the "expectation" moves over to the property owner's side, you drop it?
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline  
Old 05-11-2013, 18:39   #100
fg17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
Whether its regrading them carrying a gun, saying something the business owner doesn't like, hell they can ask me to leave if they don't like the color of my skin if they want.
Not necessarily. There is a difference between private property and private property that is open to the public. I worked for a business that found this out in court.
If I noticed the sign I would not go in or put my gun in the car.
fg17 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:32.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,166
340 Members
826 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42