Do Gun Free Zones Create A Legal Liability?

Captain's Quarters ^ | Dec. 10, 2007 | Ed Morrissey

[Kenton]

Well none actually, since the company lacks any enforcement mechanism the only thing they could do is to ask you to leave the premises. IMHO

I think this point is a little vague. I suppose it depends on the laws of the state you live in. If it's written into law that your permit does not allow you to carry in a business that forbids it, they might choose to call the police on you rather than risking a confrontation themselves. Then the police would have to enforce the law.

I don't have a permit, but I'm taking the requisite classes to get one this weekend. I'll probably understand what I can and can't do after I get the training, which is state-specific.

[Joe Brower]

I am continuing to compile a list of FreeRepublic folks who are interested in RKBA topics. FReepmail me if you want to be added.

Conversely, if you want off my ping-list, let me know.

And my apologies for any redundant pings.

If you're looking for the standard FR "bang list", please click HERE.

[Oatka]

The owners of the mall were exercising their private property rights in declaring the mall a "gun free" zone. By posting that sign, they implicitly take responsibility for the safety of all who enter...including assurance that their prohibition is enforced on everyone who enters. The owners failed to prevent an armed person from entering their premises and killing persons unarmed by their policy. It is reasonable to hold the owners accountable for creating the situation that allowed the carnage.

That would be my take on it. Some years back, Texas enacted a law interestingly titled 30-06, which allowed businesses to ban CCW on their premises.

Some CCW holders had business cards made up and handed them out to those businesses that posted "no guns allowed" signs. It went something like "Thank you for assuming the liability of providing for my safety while in your store. Since the state of Texas has issued me a license that I may legally carry a concealed weapon, your action means that you willingly assume the burden. My attorney has been so notified." After that, a lot of signs came down. The wording needs to be shorter, but similar cards today might cause some of these "gun free zone" idiots some second thoughts.

[Sender]

There are certain places listed on the back of my GA CCW permit that are illegal to carry. It specifies:

"..."public gathering" shall include, but shall not be limited to, athletic or sporting events, churches or church functions, political rallies or functions, publicly owned or operated buildings, or establishments at which alcoholic beverages are sold for consumption on the premises."

So I cannot legally carry to church, a political rally, a bar or the courthouse. It doesn't say anything about malls.

It also exempts LEO active and retired, judges, magistrates etc from these restrictions.

[MainFrame65]

In Tennessee the laws provide certain protections regarding lawful protection of self and others. But all of these are dependent on condition of lawfulness. Carrying a weapon illegally - such as in a posted location - removes these protections. The bad guy you shoot - or stab - inside that posted location can sue you, and you will NOT have the presumption of self- defense for legal protection.

[rjsimmon]

In Nebraska, and I believe some other states (Texas is one), signs that meet certain standards do have force of law. You could be arrested for illegal possession of a firearm in a place with a properly posted sign even if you were otherwise legally permitted to carry.

Interesting point. Does the mere fact of a posted sign override a Constitutionally protected right? For instance, can a sign deny the right to free speech?

This may seem a far stretch, but appears to be hard to defend in the extreme.

[The KG9 Kid]

Unless the building is a government building, school of any kind, or has metal detectors at all entrances, I don't enter while CCW.

I ignore signs everywhere else. They don't mean a thing.

[ArrogantBustard]

Interesting piece of news ... according to the "blog" link in #4, the mall took down the "no guns" signs.

[ArrogantBustard]

As a related question, if you are a legal CCW holder and are carrying in a legal manner, what penalties does one face for carrying in a business marked “no guns”?

Immediately ... none. However, by doing so you commit trespass. If they ask you to leave, you'd best do it. If you refuse, you could be committing "belligerent trespass", or "armed trespass", or some such. That's more serious ... police could get involved ... you could go to trial ... prison even.

IIRC.

IANAL

[Phantom Lord]

If it's a concealed carry state, how can they tell you don't have a weapon on your person?

Private Property.

[Phantom Lord]

As a related question, if you are a legal CCW holder and are carrying in a legal manner, what penalties does one face for carrying in a business marked “no guns”?

Management can ask you to leave and state why. You are carrying a weapon in violation of their policy.

If you refuse to leave, they can have you arrested for trespass.

They are sure to tell you that you are not allowed to return with your weapon. If you do, again you will be arressted for trespass.

[Still Thinking]

Not so. In some states, the legislature enableing CCW also criminalizes carrying in zones where the owner has posted no-carry.

[Myrddin]

I love the selection of 30-06 as the title for the legislation. I also agree with the approach of notifying the business owners of their assumption of liability for the safety of customers they have disarmed. We have had quite of few examples of the negative consequences of "gun free" zones over the last year. It's a shame to see so many people killed for no good reason.

[Phantom Lord]

What I would like to know is where they get the notion that a constutionally protected right can be violated.

Tell me exactly what constitutional rights you retain when you enter my home?

I can ban you from speaking and if you do kick you out. 1st Amendment hasn't been violated.

I can conduct a religious ceremony in your presence (shoving religion down your throat as the libs say) and the 1st Amendment hasn't been violated.

I can deny you the ability to carry firearms in my home. 2nd amendment not violated.

The list goes on and on and on.

[mountainbunny]

If it's a concealed carry state, how can they tell you don't have a weapon on your person?

They may not be able to tell if you are concealed carrying, but if you are a CCW permit holder carrying in an area with signs telling you that you may not be armed, you could be putting your permit at risk.

In some states, if there is a posted sign, you cannot carry and may lose your permit if you do so.

[Dead Corpse]

The heck with civil liability though. Go for the Accessory to Murder. Let them know that it isn’t just the companies pocket book we are going after...

[Turbopilot]

Here is a link to a .PDF of the GA Attorney General's written opinion stating that a mall is not a "public gathering" for the purposes of that statute.

Incidentally, if you carry in GA, have you ever checked out georgiacarry.org? Worth a look, IMHO. Their project this year has been to file a lawsuit against cities that ban firearms in local parks, contrary to the state law that forbids such restrictions, and many of those cities have repealed those laws. Next year they are going to try to get legislation passed reducing the multitude of restrictions on where Georgians can carry legally.

[Phantom Lord]

For instance, can a sign deny the right to free speech?

If a retail business had a sign on the window saying "You may not exercise your 1st amendment rights inside" how would that be a violation of your 1st amendment rights, and how exactly did "Congress make a law" in this instance violating your 1st amendment rights.

Remember, the Constitution limits Government. Not individuals and private parties.

[Phantom Lord]

Interesting point. Does the mere fact of a posted sign override a Constitutionally protected right? For instance, can a sign deny the right to free speech?

Does JimRob deleting your posts and banning you (or any poster) from participating at FR violate and deny your 1st amendment rights?

If not, how is JimRob doing it any different than a retail establishment doing it?

[Turbopilot]

Private property owners can prohibit whatever activities they like on their own property. The problem I have is with states that allow those property owners to create crimes out of such activity (above and beyond common-law trespass). My state gets it right; anyone can put up whatever sign they like, but if carry isn’t otherwise prohibited in that area, you haven’t broken any law unless someone representing the property’s owner asks you to leave and you refuse.

Some states let property owners create crimes by posting signs that are enforceable by law, such that you can be arrested for illegal possession even though you would be carrying legally if not for the privately posted sign. I think this is akin to some liberal property owner posting a sign saying that you can’t speak ill of Hillary on his property, and having the state give him the right to have you arrested for treason if you do so, because he decided that particular speech on his property was treasonous.