Speed traps on private property

[smith625]

Law Enforcement! Thanks officer is the proper response! like and earlier post said i wish they would come sit in my driveway and witness the assclownage!!!

 

[FXDWG]

Wrong private property is private property yours and my rights end where our neighbors begin. Another words your property your rules.

If you open a business, then can you halt people from coming in because they do or do not meet your various preferences? The civil rights laws are pretty clear that you cannot.

I believe that this should extend to people who are exercising their right to carry self defense tools. I am not advocating for laws to create a right to open-carry in all privately-owned spaces which are opened for public business, but my view is that once someone has a concealed carry permit, their carry of a concealed weapon should be nobody else's business. A business owner must simply accept customers as they are.

If you value your property rights so greatly that you cannot accept the presence of your customers as they are, then do not open for business.

FXDWG

 

[FXDWG]

Intentionally ambiguous...

I'm not an internet lawyer, and I don't play one on TV. Hell I didn't even stay at a holiday inn express recently. But....I have been practicing criminal law for 20 years and I teach search and seizure law to law enforcement and to other attorneys.
I do not post to argue, only to inform. I don't like it when good people get themselves in bad situations due to misunderstanding legal concepts. So I sincerely hope my posts here do not come across as disrespectful. I just want to help get accurate information out there so good people like the members of this forum don't meet me in my courtroom.

It is interesting to see the varied views in here. Some people seem to really dislike the police for some reason. If this is the case, you might spend a moment or two looking in the mirror. You might be the problem.

On the other hand, I know of local agencies in Louisiana who were infamous for writing bogus traffic tickets to raise money for the town so I could understand a church which might reasonably want to avoid facilitating such activities.

But the legal answer is this. There are laws which generally permit enforcement officers to go onto a property in the performance of their duties. But both sides of this are purposefully stated in a manner which is far from absolute or clear in order to grant flexibility. A reasonable officer standard will be the test any court will use - so you be reasonable. It will not be viewed from the eyes of the property owner, but from the eyes of a reasonable law enforcement officer. Unless you know how they really work, you are at a disadvantage.

But neither the officer nor the property owner should stick their noses (or anything else) out too far because this could easily wind up in the legal and political realm. Who knows what a given judge will rule on a given day? What one party sees as their right to do something will have many nuances considered by people not wrapped in emotions of the moment. You are not generally a good lawyer when dealing with your own situations.

But another thing to consider. While the original question involved the law, the real dynamic is politics. The police officers work for a chief who works for a mayor - who works for voters. The deputy sheriff works for an elected sheriff who also works for voters. Troopers are a bit more insulated, but there is still a structure and a code of professional conduct and a rank structure. Also consider that lawsuits are expensive for someone - more likely everyone will pay a lot of money before the matter is resolved if it must go that far. Generally, nobody wins - aside from the lawyers from both sides. But social and political pressure can often accomplish a lot more.

Just be reasonable and civil in finding a way for everyone to get what they need. If things will just not go your way, never argue out on the road. If it must escalate, take it up the chain or over to the court.

My best realpolitik advice.

FXDWG

 

[sliguns]

If you open a business, then can you halt people from coming in because they do or do not meet your various preferences?

Yes, 100%! That is the way it "should" be. That is the very fabric of freedom & private property rights. Discrimination = Freedom. Forced Association = Anti-freedom.

*This assumes the agreement you voluntarily signed places no restrictions on the matter*

 

[Whitebread]

If you open a business, then can you halt people from coming in because they do or do not meet your various preferences? The civil rights laws are pretty clear that you cannot.

I believe that this should extend to people who are exercising their right to carry self defense tools. I am not advocating for laws to create a right to open-carry in all privately-owned spaces which are opened for public business, but my view is that once someone has a concealed carry permit, their carry of a concealed weapon should be nobody else's business. A business owner must simply accept customers as they are.

If you value your property rights so greatly that you cannot accept the presence of your customers as they are, then do not open for business.

FXDWG

You start by saying the you dont have a right to keep people out based on skin color or whatever then say you do have the right to keep out armed patrons. And you end by telling a private property owner how to handle his own private property.
Maybe its me.

I will point this out and the law has repeatedly backed that if you have private property and you open it up as a public place a business, church, ect. You do loose some freedom to discriminate based on legally protected attributes. One could argue a firearm like race or creed is a protected atribute. For me I just dont go places I'm not welcome for who I am I dont think they deserve to earn my money. As for a private residence if you are a racest and you tell your rainbow-striped neighbor to stay off of your property its your right. You would be a douche but its still your right.

 

[FXDWG]

You start by saying the you dont have a right to keep people out based on skin color or whatever then say you do have the right to keep out armed patrons. And you end by telling a private property owner how to handle his own private property.
Maybe its me.

I will point this out and the law has repeatedly backed that if you have private property and you open it up as a public place a business, church, ect. You do loose some freedom to discriminate based on legally protected attributes. One could argue a firearm like race or creed is a protected atribute. For me I just dont go places I'm not welcome for who I am I dont think they deserve to earn my money. As for a private residence if you are a racest and you tell your rainbow-striped neighbor to stay off of your property its your right. You would be a douche but its still your right.

I started by asking a question and giving the generally accepted answer. This was a lead to my main point. I then separated between open and concealed carry because I see a strong practical reasoning there. I close with my final argument which I freely admit might be used against my earlier statement.

Actually, we agree far more than we disagree. But I regard open display of weapons similar to genitalia - best concealed in almost all cases. :-)