Do signs have the force of law?

[leadslinger972]

No concealed handgun permit is valid or entitles any permittee to carry a concealed weapon in any facility, building, location, zone, or area in which firearms are banned by state or federal law.4 In addition, no concealed handgun may be carried in any of the following:

it specifically states that a Property Owner, Lessee, or Legal Custodian can prohibit or restrict access to a person possessing a concealed handgun pursuant to a valid permit.

That is my interpretation. Yours may be different.

There has yet to be any evidence to support your interpretation.

How does it prohibit or restrict access?

The property owner, lessee, or legal custodian would have to identify that you are carrying a firearm and ask you to leave.

A sign, that I may or may not have seen, holds no value.

 

[AustinBR]

No concealed handgun permit is valid or entitles any permittee to carry a concealed weapon in any facility, building, location, zone, or area in which firearms are banned by state or federal law.4 In addition, no concealed handgun may be carried in any of the following:

it specifically states that a Property Owner, Lessee, or Legal Custodian can prohibit or restrict access to a person possessing a concealed handgun pursuant to a valid permit.

That is my interpretation. Yours may be different.

If an agent prohibits someone from entering their building with pink shirts and that person enters, knowingly violating the sign, has a crime been committed?

Furthermore, you are teaching your interpretation to people. Do you provide both sides or do you just state that it is illegal?

Also, at my previous question: Do you instruct your students to disarm if going to a movie theater or similar establishment or do you teach that it may be prudent to carry anyway even though the potential burden may be on them?

 

[Troedoff]

.

 

[Troedoff]

.

 

[AustinBR]

Here is an example:

My business does not have a no firearms sign, but I prohibit firearms at my business. I do not have any means of communicating that it is a prohibited area. By your logic, once you entered, you are breaking the law. How were you supposed to know it's a prohibited area?

Are you 12? You could not argue the point that your business is a prohibited place, because you have not expressly conveyed your wishes to your patrons. You would lose that argument. However if you had a sign clearly stating your intent, you would likely win. Apparently none of you have ever been to court where any matter was litigated. I am done with this discussion, it is clear that you are not looking for sensical answers.

Does an owner prohibiting (with a sign) anything make it a crime if any of his/her prohibitions have been ignored?

 

[AustinBR]

There is no law that states that I can prohibit you from entering my place of business with a pink shirt. There is however a law that says I can prohibit you from entering my business with a concealed firearm.

A business owner can prohibit anyone from entering or patronizing their business for any reason that is not protected (often federally) such as race, gender, sexual preferences, etc (anti-discremination laws).

Example: Restaurant or bar dress codes. They can deny you entry or ask you to leave for not following their dress codes (often posted online or at the door). If you refuse to leave you are remaining after forbidden / trespassing. But I'd like you to find a law or case that states that ignoring their sign / wishes (knowlingly or unknowingly) is, in and of itself, illegal and punishable by a criminal statute.

 

[leadslinger972]

Are you 12? You could not argue the point that your business is a prohibited place, because you have not expressly conveyed your wishes to your patrons. You would lose that argument. However if you had a sign clearly stating your intent, you would likely win. Apparently none of you have ever been to court where any matter was litigated. I am done with this discussion, it is clear that you are not looking for sensical answers.

Are you illiterate?

How do I expressly convey my wishes to my patrons?

There is no law that states that I can prohibit you from entering my place of business with a pink shirt. There is however a law that says I can prohibit you from entering my business with a concealed firearm.

How do you prohibit me?

 

[Troedoff]

.

 

[Troedoff]

.

 

[leadslinger972]

Okay my final attempt to tie these two together for you.

A business owner can prohibit your privilege to carry concealed in his or her property. Which makes your CHP useless, which puts you in violation of RS14:95 because you are carrying a concealed handgun outside the scope of your permitted use illegaly.

Where, in any statute, does it provide the information on how a property owner, lessee, or lawful custodian can prohibit someone?

I only see that they CAN prohibit someone, but do not see HOW they must prohibit someone.

If I walk into a business that has a no guns sign behind a trashcan, and I do not see it, have I committed a crime?

- - - Updated - - -

The law does not define how one should communicate their wishes. To stand in court, it would have to be written, or verbal with witnesses.

Where, in any statute, does it state that one must have written or verbal communication as to prohibit someone?

 

[bigtattoo79]

However if you had a sign clearly stating your intent, you would likely win.

What type of sign clearly states this? What size is it, what color is it, what height is it at, can it be blocked while the door is open, etc?

Look at Texas for example you are taught during the class exactly what to look for and where to look for it when entering a business. In Louisiana there is no standard sign or location so how long should I spend looking for a sign that may or may not be there??

 

[AustinBR]

Okay my final attempt to tie these two together for you.

A business owner can prohibit your privilege to carry concealed in his or her property. Which makes your CHP useless, which puts you in violation of RS14:95 because you are carrying a concealed handgun outside the scope of your permitted use illegaly.

You where a pink shirt I don't like pink I ask you to leave, you have only ignored my wishes for my business.

You carry concealed outside the scope of your permitted privileges, you are in violation of RS14:95 for illegaly carrying a concealed firearm.

The law does not define how one should communicate their wishes. To stand in court, it would have to be written, or verbal with witnesses.

I appreciate you going back and forth with us and not getting flustered and running off. Discussions like this can be fruitful and informative for many purposes.

Regarding the bolded part of your post:

R.S. 40:1379.3 (N) states that no concealed handgun may be carried into and no concealed handgun permit issued pursuant to this Section shall authorize or entitle a permittee to carry a concealed handgun in any of the following:

A law enforcement office, station, or building;
A detention facility, prison, or jail;
A courthouse or courtroom, provided that a judge may carry such a weapon in his own courtroom;
A polling place;
A meeting place of the governing authority of a political subdivision;
The state capitol building;
Any portion of an airport facility where the carrying of firearms is prohibited under federal law, except that no person shall be prohibited from carrying any legal firearm into the terminal, if the firearm is encased for shipment, for the purpose of checking such firearm as lawful baggage;
Any church, synagogue, mosque or similar place of worship; See RS 40:1379.3 (U)
A parade or demonstration for which a permit is issued by a governmental entity; (means be in the parade or part of the demonstration)
Any school *firearm free zone* as defined in R.S. 14:95.6. (School buses and anything within 1000 feet of school property).

Above, after the final period, is where the blue ends.
Next we have clarifications that having a CHP is NOT protected reason that people cannot be prohibited for (such as discrimation laws)

The provisions of R.S. 40:1379.3 (N) shall not limit the right of a property owner, lessee, or other lawful custodian to prohibit or restrict access of those persons possessing a concealed handgun pursuant to a permit issued under this Section. No individual to whom a concealed handgun permit is issued may carry such concealed handgun into the private residence of another without first receiving the consent of that person.


For example: A business owner cannot prohibit an armed law-enforcement officer from entering a business in the course or scope of his duties. He may be prohibited if OFF duty though (and still in his uniform). If an off-duty officer walks into a business with a no weapons sign, have they committed a crime? What if they are off-duty and carrying concealed? If an open-carrying individual enters a building with a no weapons sign, have they committed a crime? Is there a law that expressly states open carry may be prohibited by a business owner? I'm not aware of one.

What I am getting at is that the only purpose for the clarification at the end of the above law is to state that prohibiting someone bases on them having a concealed weapon is okay and they cannot file suit against you for it, as they could if you told them that they could not enter because they are gay.

Other than that, the sign is an advisement of the owners wishes. Violating people's wishes is not a crime. Remaining after being forbidden from someone else's property is a crime though.

 

[leadslinger972]

I appreciate you going back and forth with us and not getting flustered and running off. Discussions like this can be fruitful and informative for many purposes.

Regarding the bolded part of your post:

R.S. 40:1379.3 (N) states that no concealed handgun may be carried into and no concealed handgun permit issued pursuant to this Section shall authorize or entitle a permittee to carry a concealed handgun in any of the following:

A law enforcement office, station, or building;
A detention facility, prison, or jail;
A courthouse or courtroom, provided that a judge may carry such a weapon in his own courtroom;
A polling place;
A meeting place of the governing authority of a political subdivision;
The state capitol building;
Any portion of an airport facility where the carrying of firearms is prohibited under federal law, except that no person shall be prohibited from carrying any legal firearm into the terminal, if the firearm is encased for shipment, for the purpose of checking such firearm as lawful baggage;
Any church, synagogue, mosque or similar place of worship; See RS 40:1379.3 (U)
A parade or demonstration for which a permit is issued by a governmental entity; (means be in the parade or part of the demonstration)
Any school *firearm free zone* as defined in R.S. 14:95.6. (School buses and anything within 1000 feet of school property).

Above, after the final period, is where the blue ends.
Next we have clarifications that having a CHP is NOT protected reason that people cannot be prohibited for (such as discrimation laws)

The provisions of R.S. 40:1379.3 (N) shall not limit the right of a property owner, lessee, or other lawful custodian to prohibit or restrict access of those persons possessing a concealed handgun pursuant to a permit issued under this Section. No individual to whom a concealed handgun permit is issued may carry such concealed handgun into the private residence of another without first receiving the consent of that person.


For example: A business owner cannot prohibit an armed law-enforcement officer from entering a business in the course or scope of his duties. He may be prohibited if OFF duty though (and still in his uniform). If an off-duty officer walks into a business with a no weapons sign, have they committed a crime? What if they are off-duty and carrying concealed? If an open-carrying individual enters a building with a no weapons sign, have they committed a crime? Is there a law that expressly states open carry may be prohibited by a business owner? I'm not aware of one.

What I am getting at is that the only purpose for the clarification at the end of the above law is to state that prohibiting someone bases on them having a concealed weapon is okay and they cannot file suit against you for it, as they could if you told them that they could not enter because they are gay.

Other than that, the sign is an advisement of the owners wishes. Violating people's wishes is not a crime. Remaining after being forbidden from someone else's property is a crime though.

Off duty officers play by different rules thanks to LEOSA.

 

[AustinBR]

Off duty officers play by different rules thanks to LEOSA.

Gotcha. I am not familiar with the specifics of it, though I was under the impression that they could still be legally prohibited in certain instances.

 

[leadslinger972]

Gotcha. I am not familiar with the specifics of it, though I was under the impression that they could still be legally prohibited in certain instances.

It's a different discussion altogether.

 

[Troedoff]

.

 

[AustinBR]

The off duty is protected from RS14:95 in the text. An individual open carrying is not covered because it is too slipery a slope with the whole rights thing. A store owner can ask you to leave of you OC, and you would be in violation of other laws if you do not. The way I interpret this topic is that your chp, does not permit you to carry inside a place of business where that practice is not welcome. Which puts you in direct violation of RS14:95, unless you are otherwise exempted from that statute, which has a lengthy list of exemptions.

This is only an issue because Louisiana legislature does not create a clear direction on this matter. Maybe they will clear it up in the future, but for now we have to do what we believe to be correct.

I have seen real litigation, and can tell you that the law as it is written now support the property owner more so than the individual. The problem with chp in general is the vagueness with which everything is written, and how it ties into non chp regulations. I wish they would clear up this so that it is a non issue. In the long run people do what they want, and 99% of the time get away with it. If you fall into the 1% that don't get away with it 99% of the time you will just be asked to leave. Which is undeniably well within a business owners rights. As a legal custodian of a business my first response to any controversy is to ask the violating party to leave, because that expands the legal options I have to resolve the situation. I never address the problem directly until I have moved the situation out of the store.

Do you think that the following has any leverage in this case:

"The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms is fundamental and shall not be infringed. Any restriction on this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny."

I would think that CC would be more protected than OC due to the nature of how you get a permit and are statistically a better citizen. Generally, you can CC in more places than you can OC, and if you can OC somewhere is it not right to think that you can CC there too? In the instance of stores with a sign, if it went in front of a judge, I just can't see them hitting you with illegal carrying of a weapon solely because it was concealed (with a permit) inside of a business with a sign. It would be so easy to ask the judge if anything would have changed if it was OCd.

I respect your disagreement, I just think it's leaping a bit with the words in the law. Considering that you teach people, I still think it would be prudent to teach both sides of this disagreement and let everyone decide for themselves...instead of just outright saying that it is illegal.

 

[dougstump]

Unfortunately, Louisiana statutes does not spell it out like Texas does. For example, here are the requirements for open carry:
To prohibit the open carry of a firearm, a sign would have to include the following:
This specific text: "Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun), a Person Licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (Handgun Licensing Law), May Not Enter This Property with a Handgun that is Carried Openly."
The same text duplicated in Spanish
All text at least one inch in height, in block letters
Note that to prohibit both open and concealed carry they have to post four signs. Kinda clutters up the front of the store.

Like I said, if they don't want my pistol then they don't want my money. I just go somewhere else.

 

[Troedoff]

.

 

[nola000]

Using CHP would be short hand for Concealed Handgun Permit.

Using CHL or CCW instead of CHP is lazy and incorrect.

Jesus dude.

Ok, lets do this.




Sometimes I use the word "shorthand" to mean an alternative abbreviation to a similar abbreviated phrase thats also an synonym of the original phrase even though thats not the textbook definition of the term "shorthand".

Im also starting to question if you understand the underlying and ultimate goal of language, which is, to communicate meaning through verbal expression. A properly executed verbal exchange results in all parties involved in the exchange ending conversation with a clear understanding of what was said and the meaning behind it. Grammatical peccadilloes and pedantic pontification of minutiae is a waste of valuable time anywhere but in a classroom.

Did you fail to understand what I meant when I wrote "CHL"?