JoeLiberty
Well-Known Member
I'll quote that to save people trouble:
O. The provisions of Subsection N of this Section 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.
Where does that state that it is ILLEGAL to ignore those signs or NOT get consent?
^Also, just a heads up: Only laws that are state statutes are laws.
^That's not entirely correct. There is the statutory law but there is also case law and precedent. The LA Supreme Court also sets the law and informs how the lower courts will decide cases. Not that I know of any case law about this... just in general. Don't think the letter of the law tells you everything.
I also happen to disagree with your earlier interpretation of the 2nd part of O.
"No individual... may carry into a private residence... without... consent"
It echoes the beginning of N: "No concealed handgun may be carried... in any of the following"
If you don't get consent, you would be in violation of subsection "O". But, that only seems to apply to private residences.
Now for some reason it doesn't say anything like that for businesses, so that part I believe you guys have right.