I’d be more than happy to go before a jury on such a trespassing charge.
If a jury of my peers can’t see that I prevented dozens if not hundreds of deaths and injuries by my unselfish actions in the defense of others, then I’m really missing the point of having juries at all.
If you had to deal with an anti-2nd-Amendment police force and DA, they could try you for murder. And an idiot jury would gladly help them.
As I understand it, in WV, you can be asked to leave the premises or check your weapon. If you refuse, then you can be charged with trespassing. My guess is, if you are not asked to do either one, then the business owner doesn’t have a leg to stand on, even in the event that something happens, since you have to be asked to leave or check your firearm first.
“Any person carrying or possessing a firearm or other deadly weapon on the property of another who refuses to temporarily relinquish possession of such firearm or other deadly weapon, upon being requested to do so, or to leave such premises, while in possession of such firearm or other deadly weapon, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or confined in the county jail not more than six months, or both.”
If there is no confrontation, there can be no violation. A sign is not, for purposes of the law, considered a confrontation.
I am not a lawyer, but this is the assumption under which I carry in WV...I’d rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.
There is always an affirmative defense.
FYI for CHL'ers, I have seen theaters here in Texas "wand" people at premiers to keep out cell phones.
IMHO, I think the guy would have fled or surrendered, or hopefully died, as soon as someone starting shooting back at him.
The police do not charge you, they arrest you based on their understanding of the law.
The city/county/state attorney general charges you at their discretion. These are likely three different people.
Since these guys are elected by the people it stands to reason for someone who just saved 10’s of lives (read voters) any minor non-self aggrandizing indiscretion by the permit holder who stopped the mutt would likely be overlooked.
Ask yourself; how unpopular would the guy be who charged the savior??
(not an attorney and don’t play one on TV either)
YMMV
Ridiculous.
It'd be just as likely that in some places, you could have...
...one shooter & 2-4 permit loaded-weapon carriers
Or you might have -- like with Columbine...
...two shooters...
...and multiple permit loaded-weapon carriers...
Add to that a dark theater with tear gas going off...
And you could easily get two guys with permits shooting @ each other -- because they might assume two shooters...
People utterly fail to think thru a multiple-weapons & multiple carriers scenario where there's poor vision and mass confusion.
Obviously, by the way the laws are written, the gov't would rather you DIE in a massacre than defend yourself with a gun. Whether you accept this is up to you! I refer you to the Declaration of Independence for guidance.
I think of it this way, if I’m alive then I’ll suffer the consequences at my jury trial versus the alternative of being dead and not really having the luxury of a jury trial.
Carried by 6
Judged by 12
I guarantee you that corporation would absolutely wither under public support for the lifesaver.
Chances are, in such a scenario, nothing. The chain could ban him from their premises, but they probably wouldn’t given the huge negative publicity and economic loss that would follow banning a hero.
Under other scenarios where it would be discovered someone was carrying they’d ask them to leave, or put their gun in their car and come back.
I carry everywhere I rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.