Carrying Concealed in Malls - Page 4
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 70

Thread: Carrying Concealed in Malls

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by achalmers View Post
    I'm from Michigan and a new CPL holder. I noticed that Laurel Park mall in Livonia, MI has a tiny code of conduct sign posted just inside the doors of the mall. Rule #20 is: Carrying or displaying weapons of any kind except those carried by certified law enforcement officers in the performance of their duties.

    I actually found the list on their site: Laurel Park Place -- Code of Conduct

    My question is can I still carry concealed at this mall? I think I should be able to. I'm not displaying my pistol, although I am "carrying" it. There's this thing called the 2nd amendment that should supersede the mall's code of conduct, plus I have a CPL. Any thoughts on this?

    AC
    I also live in SE Michigan. Have you considered joining the Michigan Coalition of Responsible Gun Owners? Here is there website. MCRGO - Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners Membership is free but you can get a lot of good info such as places that do not allow guns ("places to avoid" in the left hand column). It is updated frequently.

  2.   
  3. #32
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by achalmers View Post
    I'm from Michigan and a new CPL holder. I noticed that Laurel Park mall in Livonia, MI has a tiny code of conduct sign posted just inside the doors of the mall. Rule #20 is: Carrying or displaying weapons of any kind except those carried by certified law enforcement officers in the performance of their duties.

    I actually found the list on their site: Laurel Park Place -- Code of Conduct

    My question is can I still carry concealed at this mall? I think I should be able to. I'm not displaying my pistol, although I am "carrying" it. There's this thing called the 2nd amendment that should supersede the mall's code of conduct, plus I have a CPL. Any thoughts on this?

    AC
    Under MI law, the owner of the private property has the right to enforce their own firearms property. Malls are considered to be private property in Michigan, therefore, they can dictate if they want you to carry on their property. If you choose to do so regardless of the signage and they find out, they can ask you to leave and secure your firearm in your vehicle in the parking lot. If you refuse, or if you return to the mall still carrying your firearm, you can be charged with misdemeanor trespassing.

    I have had some rather heated discussions with a couple of people on the forum about this, but until we can get Michigan law to recognize that businesses are not private property in the same way as one's home, that is the law. Private property rights supersede carry rights.

    Woodland Mall in Grand Rapids has a sign prohibiting weapons of all sorts, but Rivertown Crossing in Grandville allows CC.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    I guess I don't understand the perspective of sneaking a concealed gun into a business where the property owner has exercised his valid right to ban guns.

    I asked these questions before but I'll ask them again.........

    -Why would anyone support a business that bans guns by spending money there? Why not spend your money at a business that doesn't ban guns instead of helping the gun banner make enough money to open yet another business and ban guns there too?

    -Why would anyone expect their right to bear arms be respected when they are willing to disrespect the property owner's equally as valid right to ban the bearing of arms by sneaking in a concealed gun? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.


    Well, because I haven't seen any of those sign at the mall I go to nowhere.

  5. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    54
    I agree, it's hard to get the inflection and tone while conversing in an Internet forum. I'm at an additional disadvantage in that I'm using Tapatalk on an iPad.

    Bikenut: I take no personal affront to anything you've written. I find this a very interesting and enlightening discussion. It's also provided some insight into my thought process and others'.

    I find it interesting that you use the word 'sneak' all the time. As CCDW holders and people who exercise our rights using aren't we 'sneaking' a gun whenever we conceal one?

    I'm not going to respond to each of your points because it is cumbersome on the Tapatalk iPad platform.

    Decisions are made from self-interest. So yes, I've decided that I will do business with a retailer who has a store in a mall that bans firearms. That retailer made a business decision from self-interest to do business there. If you choose to punish him for making, what to him, is a rational business decision, that's up to you.

    I choose to bring a concealed firearm into the mall (or movie theatre) because, through my decision making process, I've decided that it is in my best self-interest to do so.

    You also use the word 'rationalize' a lot, like it's some kind of pejorative. It's not. Everyone rationalizes every decision they make. The rationale used or the decision making process may be flawed, but that us largely a subjective observation.

    Good conversation and debate. I don't think we'll meet up in the middle somewhere, but understand that I respect your position and opinion.

  6. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,663
    Quote Originally Posted by Geosan1030 View Post
    I agree, it's hard to get the inflection and tone while conversing in an Internet forum. I'm at an additional disadvantage in that I'm using Tapatalk on an iPad.

    Bikenut: I take no personal affront to anything you've written. I find this a very interesting and enlightening discussion. It's also provided some insight into my thought process and others'.
    Thanks Geosan... and respecting your position and opinion is why I wanted to make sure there was an understanding that we are discussing principles.. not personalities. We don't have to agree on our positions or opinions... but we can discuss them without getting into "dis" ing or "cuss" ing.

    About my using the word "sneak"... I use that in reference to "sneaking" the concealed gun in where it is known to be banned because the person doing the "sneaking" knows he is disrespecting the property owner's right to ban guns. The normal carrying of a concealed gun in places where guns are not banned isn't "sneaking"....

    And I'd like to mention one very important thing..... extremely important.

    I know folks refer to carrying a concealed gun with a carry permit as "the right to bear arms". But actually carrying a concealed gun with a concealed carry "permit" is NOT the right to bear arms. It really is having a "privilege" granted by the State to carry a concealed gun without suffering legal penalties. If it were the right to bear arms then no "permit" (a permit is "permission") would be needed nor would there be any penalties assessed for doing so. And if it were the actual right the State could not deny anyone the ability to carry a concealed gun. After all... when the State is in control of who is "allowed" to have permission... the State is also in control of who IS NOT "allowed" to have permission.

    "Shall not be infringed" could also be written as "Shall not be controlled by the government being in charge of handing out permission slips."

    Edited to add:

    About the word "rationalize"... sometimes folks spell "rationalize" as..... "excuse".

  7. #36
    I have been following this thread and felt the need to comment.
    ~
    First off the malls in my area put their generic list of rules on the wall in the entry ways as guidelines for conduct on their property. Since Ohio is very specific about Gun Buster signage they do not qualify as legal notification of restriction.
    Secondly only mall concourse entries are even posted with those types of signage, the anchor stores who have outside entrances to their floor space have absolutely no code of conduct signage posted..........so if they are claiming personal property rights why then is not all entrances marked accordingly even if those posted are posted incorrectly?
    ~
    Those anchor store that I can enter without going through the mall concourse to me is eligible to receive my money everyone else be damned. I carry cards that explain my point regarding GFZs and will disarm to deliver a card to make my point.
    ~
    Taking a stand on principle to me means doing it regularly not just as a convenience. I have stood by my principles all my life and have paid the consequences for doing so and have always been willing to accept the consequences of my actions. Doing so can be expensive emotionally as well as financially, doing so has cost me a marriage, jobs, arrests, at times my dignity. It all depends on just how deep your convictions run and what taking stand means to YOU.
    ~
    Rationalize - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
    ~
    ra·tio·nal·ize: to think about or describe something (such as bad behavior) in a way that explains it and makes it seem proper, more attractive, etc.
    ~
    We can make excuses for what we do to make ourselves feel better, but if what we are doing is unlawful/illegal not matter what we say or think it is still unlawful/illegal. If you persist and get caught you will need to accept the consequences for your rationalized conduct. I hope you can feel good when that occurs.
    I'd rather be a Conservative Nutjob. Than a Liberal with NO Nuts & NO Job

  8. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    54
    The point, dogshawred, is that it is not illegal. At least not here. A sign does not have the force of law.

    I will not carry into a place where I am prohibited to carry by federal or state law.

  9. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,663
    Perhaps there is some confusion about signs "having the force of law". Some States have specific signs that carry the full weight of gun law while in other States a sign may not have any connection to any gun law but may still have the weight of trespass law behind it. Either way taking a gun into/onto that property would be illegal.

    Please... let us make sure we understand the laws in our respective States and not confuse a sign that doesn't have any connection to a gun law as not having any weight of law behind it because it might still have the weight of the trespass laws.

    Which basically could mean that the sign still has the "weight of law" behind it..... it just might be a different law that what is being thought.

    And I worded that carefully because I am not up on all the laws of all the States... and although in Michigan a gun buster sign doesn't have any connection to any gun laws it could be upheld as sufficient notification for trespass in court. But it might not too if the sign is located in a less than conspicuous place. Like on the wall off to the side at only one entrance and it can be proven that entrance wasn't used. Thing is... it still could end up in court as a trespass charge. A bit of a gray area there.....

    Edited to add:
    I am NOT an attorney! The above is merely my understanding of how things work.

  10. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    54
    Correct, it could end up as a trespass charge if I refuse to leave if asked to.

    Further, I understand the charge may get bumped to a 'D' felony if a firearm is involved.

    I guess the case can be made that I'm trespassing whether they ask me to leave or not, but I guess it would have to be proved that I knew the prohibition was in place. I'm not sure the local prosecutor would go after that on a law-abiding citizen.

    Now, let me be clear...I will not perjure myself to get out of a problem. I take responsibility for my actions.

    I think I'm going to ask a couple of my LEO buddies the question. Because, truth be known, it would definitely change the equation if I'm considered to be trespassing as soon as I go through the door.

    And, for the record, there is no 'gun buster' sign posted (that I've seen). The prohibition is the last line of a small (10x15?) sign that lists acceptable behavior. It's a general 'no weapons' line and is only posted at the food court entrance. I've looked.

  11. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,663
    Quote Originally Posted by Geosan1030 View Post
    Correct, it could end up as a trespass charge if I refuse to leave if asked to.

    Further, I understand the charge may get bumped to a 'D' felony if a firearm is involved.

    I guess the case can be made that I'm trespassing whether they ask me to leave or not, but I guess it would have to be proved that I knew the prohibition was in place. I'm not sure the local prosecutor would go after that on a law-abiding citizen.

    Now, let me be clear...I will not perjure myself to get out of a problem. I take responsibility for my actions.

    I think I'm going to ask a couple of my LEO buddies the question. Because, truth be known, it would definitely change the equation if I'm considered to be trespassing as soon as I go through the door.

    And, for the record, there is no 'gun buster' sign posted (that I've seen). The prohibition is the last line of a small (10x15?) sign that lists acceptable behavior. It's a general 'no weapons' line and is only posted at the food court entrance. I've looked.
    Ok... again... I am NOT an attorney..

    It would seem to me that if a person has prior knowledge of any "no guns" rule then going onto/into the property anyway would be intentionally trespassing..... because the person already KNEW guns were not allowed.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast