gejoslin
Illegitimi non carborundu
I do so dearly miss Texas. I go back as often as I can! :man_in_love:
I know some of you are going to bash me
- Thread starter itsb
- Start date
I do so dearly miss Texas. I go back as often as I can! :man_in_love:
wolf_fire
New member
Well if no one will shut you up on this issue, then I will at least try. I'm sick of your "I'm right until someone proves me wrong attitude". I'd also like to point out that you haven't given one shred of evidence that it is NOT trespassing when you bring your weapon onto someone's private property when asked (either written or verbally) not to either.
Here is a link for the legal history and definition of the word "trespass". Please note one particular section that I will highlight, even though I will give you the link for the whole thing.
"In modern law the word trespass is used most commonly to describe the intentional and wrongful invasion of another's real property. An action for trespass can be maintained by the owner or anyone else who has a lawful right to occupy the real property, such as the owner of an apartment building, a tenant, or a member of the tenant's family. The action can be maintained against anyone who interferes with the right of ownership or possession, whether the invasion is by a person or by something that a person has set in motion. For example, a hunter who enters fields where hunting is forbidden is a trespasser, and so is a company that throws rocks onto neighboring land when it is blasting."
The intentional and wrongful invasion of another's real property, did you read that? If the private property owner does not want you on their property with a firearm, you are intentionally and wrongfully invading on their land. You have stated over and over again that you have the right to carry anywhere. NO you don't. If I don't want you on my property with a firearm and have diligently expressed that I don't and you intentionally come on it anyway... you have legally trespassed. Please drop this now.
Here's the link: Link Removed
B
Bikenut
Guest
I'm guessing that since you quoted me then your post is directed at me.
I think you have me mixed up with someone else.... I have been the one who has maintained that the property owner has the right to have a rule banning guns and to trespass anyone who carries a gun onto/into that property.
There are others who have maintained that they have the right to carry a gun into/onto private property despite the property owner having a no guns rule and it is Ok to disobey that no guns rule because "concealed means concealed" lets them get away with it whereas I have consistently maintained that the property owner's private property rights trump all other rights.... including the property owner's right to deny a trespasser's right to life itself that is upheld by Texas law. And I have given cites and links to prove my point.
And I have repeatedly asked those other folks for cites and/or links to prove that they have the legal right to carry a gun onto/into private property against the owner's wishes. Such proof has not been forthcoming.
May I suggest going back and reading all my posts on this matter? Or have I misunderstood the purpose of your post?
wolf_fire
New member
Bikenut, you are correct. I targeted the wrong person with my response. I get these threads through my email and finally got to the point that I was tired of hearing that people can stomp on the rights of property owners. I am heartily sorry for pointing my response toward you after I did reread the posts. Please accept my apology brother. I have read many of your posts and consider you one of the more knowledgeable people on this site.
This should have been directed at Pitbull11.
This should have been directed at Pitbull11.
B
Bikenut
Guest
Apology accepted and thank you for the kind words. I was fairly sure what happened was a case of mistaken identity and your post, which was excellent, was intended for someone else.
Based on your post you and I are in agreement. At least in Nevada, no gun signs do not carry the weight of law. I live in Nevada and follow the law. If you want look it up.
http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/nevada.pdf
A couple points I think are missing from the property rights advocates' arguments. When you open your establishment to the public especially as a business, you necessarily give up quite a few of your private property rights. You have to follow the fire codes, government safety regs, etc. Additionally if you want to prohibit some particular conduct, it is incumbent upon you to make that clear. When I walk in the grocery store carrying concealed, I don't stop at the customer service office and ask for the manager's 100 page book of store rules and then read it to see if he doesn't like guns.
Further, if the owner wants to use the police power of the State to enforce his wishes regarding my conduct, then in most states he has a legal obligation to take certain steps. In Texas where I am from it is posting a particularly defined and very large sign. In many other states it is verbally notifying you that you are not welcome in the store(which in the case of concealed carry is likely to mean telling everyone who walks in they can't carry), then giving you the opportunity to leave.
So as a result I don't spend much time worrying about the moral dilemma of walking past a 1/2" high circle slash gun sign at my local Exxon. Apparently I missed the shareholder vote on banning guns from my property....oh sorry 1 billionth of 1% my property, based on current market cap and my few common shares. There are probably a number of store owners that don't want any Democrats on their property, though were I a member of that party, I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep over violating their "right" to ban liberals. Or maybe the circle slash donkey sign just meant no jack---es...
I'm not "sneaking" into my local Safeway with a concealed handgun, I'm just legally carrying as I am licensed to do. I also don't care enough to find out whether I am offending the owners' sensibilities everywhere I go into, so I solve the dilemma by carrying everywhere that is legal to do so when I wish to. As I mentioned, if the owner is concerned enough to prohibit my conduct they can follow the legal steps required by state law to do so, or in others he can't. Too bad.
Further, if the owner wants to use the police power of the State to enforce his wishes regarding my conduct, then in most states he has a legal obligation to take certain steps. In Texas where I am from it is posting a particularly defined and very large sign. In many other states it is verbally notifying you that you are not welcome in the store(which in the case of concealed carry is likely to mean telling everyone who walks in they can't carry), then giving you the opportunity to leave.
So as a result I don't spend much time worrying about the moral dilemma of walking past a 1/2" high circle slash gun sign at my local Exxon. Apparently I missed the shareholder vote on banning guns from my property....oh sorry 1 billionth of 1% my property, based on current market cap and my few common shares. There are probably a number of store owners that don't want any Democrats on their property, though were I a member of that party, I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep over violating their "right" to ban liberals. Or maybe the circle slash donkey sign just meant no jack---es...
I'm not "sneaking" into my local Safeway with a concealed handgun, I'm just legally carrying as I am licensed to do. I also don't care enough to find out whether I am offending the owners' sensibilities everywhere I go into, so I solve the dilemma by carrying everywhere that is legal to do so when I wish to. As I mentioned, if the owner is concerned enough to prohibit my conduct they can follow the legal steps required by state law to do so, or in others he can't. Too bad.
Now bikebutt and firefart are going to tell you how you are morally bankrupt and how you have sinned in your heart and mind. Bikebutt will also sight some private property law that is about ranching and tell you how the owner can shot you, even though it has nothing to do with this discussion. Gotta love it
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
Now bikebutt and firefart are going to tell you how you are morally bankrupt and how you have sinned in your heart and mind. Bikebutt will also sight some private property law that is about ranching and tell you how the owner can shot you, even though it has nothing to do with this discussion. Gotta love it
It's time to grow up. I know police have issues with integrity, but you take the cake.
It is just amazing the statements you come up with! Reality is not a friend to you
B
Bikenut
Guest
He who resorts to insults and ridicule instead of presenting facts has already lost the argument.Now bikebutt and firefart are going to tell you how you are morally bankrupt and how you have sinned in your heart and mind. Bikebutt will also sight some private property law that is about ranching and tell you how the owner can shot you, even though it has nothing to do with this discussion. Gotta love it
And the Texas law that says it is legal for a property owner to use deadly force (yes DEADLY force) against a trespasser supports the property owner's right to protect his property and to deny the rights of others... including the right to life itself... is germane to this conversation since it shows that even the law in Texas recognizes that the property owner's private property rights trump all other rights. -->For the cite and link to that Texas law please see post #149<--
Like it or not... the private property owner has the right to deny anyone access to his property with the exception that a business must obey the laws about protected classes of people... and like it or not... those who carry guns ARE NOT on the list of protected people.
By the way... in the realm of rights those laws about protected classes are just as much an infringement upon the private property owner's right to exert control over his property as are gun control laws infringements upon the right to keep and bear arms.
You are way way way out there!!! You need to go find a private property owners site and argue there.
B
Bikenut
Guest
I have presented cites and links to actual factual law that supports private property rights trumping the rights of others.
You Sir... continue to present nothing but insults and ridicule...
There are all different laws through out this country. I cited the Nevada law that applies to me carrying on posted private business property which is what this thread is all about. "No force of law". Do you get it!!!
http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/nevada.pdf
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
It's pretty easy to amaze someone with such a high level of intelligence (aka denial) such as yourself. It's ironic, but you remind me of my two pitbulls, how easy it is to get their simple minds excited by just saying "walk". Of course, at least they understand the land they live on is our families land, and we make the rules.
JCliff
New member
Actually, Pitbull, I think it is you that are way, way, way out there.
.
Bikenut has argued on principle from the beginning, you have not. His principle arguments, that your second amendment rights do not trump the rights of an owner of private property, are correct. They actually are not in conflict, as the second amendment protects you from government, not from Joe at Joe’s Bar & Grill.
.
Property rights are tied to the principle that you own yourself, and therefore own the fruits of your labors. Rights of property are frequently referred to as a “bundled” right, and include (but are not limited to): Right of access, right of control/usage, right to exclusion (the violation of which is generally referred to as trespassing), and right to fruits of the property.
.
It is true that a property owner who conducts a business open to the public has some restrictions placed on his property rights with respect to the conduct of that business. There are protected classes, which Bikenut has discussed, that you may not exclude. There are other “safety” requirements (fire code, handicap access, etc.) that must be met. Bikenut is correct in that the “armed citizen” is not among those protected classes that must be admitted. So, if a private business puts up no-gun signage at entrances to the property, what he is indicating is that you are trespassing if you enter onto his property armed. Trespass laws apply in all states, though they differ from state to state in severity and what constitutes criminal trespass, etc. While the signage itself may have no de facto force of law, trespass laws do. Look ‘em up for your state and see. It is not difficult to envision how you could legally be found guilty of trespass, even if you agreed to leave on being discovered, for entering onto property properly posted for no-guns. Most business property owners simply would not take the trouble to prosecute if you left without trouble. Also, the signage does have force of law in many places (Tennessee, for example). If discovered there, you could be found guilty of a class B misdemeanor. In other places, it could even rise to armed criminal trespass, which is a felony.
.
Willfully, knowingly, and with aforethought committing trespass is not the action of a law-abiding citizen, respectful of his neighbor’s rights, which is what nearly everyone on this site vociferously claims to be. Regardless of how wrong-headed, even foolish, it may be for a business to declare their property a gun-free zone they have every right to do so. The answer? That proprietor has made a choice; you need to make a choice. Don’t patronize their business. Let them know you will not patronize their business, and why.
.
Bikenut has argued on principle from the beginning, you have not. His principle arguments, that your second amendment rights do not trump the rights of an owner of private property, are correct. They actually are not in conflict, as the second amendment protects you from government, not from Joe at Joe’s Bar & Grill.
.
Property rights are tied to the principle that you own yourself, and therefore own the fruits of your labors. Rights of property are frequently referred to as a “bundled” right, and include (but are not limited to): Right of access, right of control/usage, right to exclusion (the violation of which is generally referred to as trespassing), and right to fruits of the property.
.
It is true that a property owner who conducts a business open to the public has some restrictions placed on his property rights with respect to the conduct of that business. There are protected classes, which Bikenut has discussed, that you may not exclude. There are other “safety” requirements (fire code, handicap access, etc.) that must be met. Bikenut is correct in that the “armed citizen” is not among those protected classes that must be admitted. So, if a private business puts up no-gun signage at entrances to the property, what he is indicating is that you are trespassing if you enter onto his property armed. Trespass laws apply in all states, though they differ from state to state in severity and what constitutes criminal trespass, etc. While the signage itself may have no de facto force of law, trespass laws do. Look ‘em up for your state and see. It is not difficult to envision how you could legally be found guilty of trespass, even if you agreed to leave on being discovered, for entering onto property properly posted for no-guns. Most business property owners simply would not take the trouble to prosecute if you left without trouble. Also, the signage does have force of law in many places (Tennessee, for example). If discovered there, you could be found guilty of a class B misdemeanor. In other places, it could even rise to armed criminal trespass, which is a felony.
.
Willfully, knowingly, and with aforethought committing trespass is not the action of a law-abiding citizen, respectful of his neighbor’s rights, which is what nearly everyone on this site vociferously claims to be. Regardless of how wrong-headed, even foolish, it may be for a business to declare their property a gun-free zone they have every right to do so. The answer? That proprietor has made a choice; you need to make a choice. Don’t patronize their business. Let them know you will not patronize their business, and why.
JCliff
New member
Actually, Pitbull, I think it is you that are way, way, way out there.
.
Bikenut has argued on principle from the beginning, you have not. His principle arguments, that your second amendment rights do not trump the rights of an owner of private property, are correct. They actually are not in conflict, as the second amendment protects you from government, not from Joe at Joe’s Bar & Grill.
.
Property rights are tied to the principle that you own yourself, and therefore own the fruits of your labors. Rights of property are frequently referred to as a “bundled” right, and include (but are not limited to): Right of access, right of control/usage, right to exclusion (the violation of which is generally referred to as trespassing), and right to fruits of the property.
.
It is true that a property owner who conducts a business open to the public has some restrictions placed on his property rights with respect to the conduct of that business. There are protected classes, which Bikenut has discussed, that you may not exclude. There are other “safety” requirements (fire code, handicap access, etc.) that must be met. Bikenut is correct in that the “armed citizen” is not among those protected classes that must be admitted. So, if a private business puts up no-gun signage at entrances to the property, what he is indicating is that you are trespassing if you enter onto his property armed. Trespass laws apply in all states, though they differ from state to state in severity and what constitutes criminal trespass, etc. While the signage itself may have no de facto force of law, trespass laws do. Look ‘em up for your state and see. It is not difficult to envision how you could legally be found guilty of trespass, even if you agreed to leave on being discovered, for entering onto property properly posted for no-guns. Most business property owners simply would not take the trouble to prosecute if you left without trouble. Also, the signage does have force of law in many places (Tennessee, for example). If discovered there, you could be found guilty of a class B misdemeanor. In other places, it could even rise to armed criminal trespass, which is a felony.
.
Willfully, knowingly, and with aforethought committing trespass is not the action of a law-abiding citizen, respectful of his neighbor’s rights, which is what nearly everyone on this site vociferously claims to be. Regardless of how wrong-headed, even foolish, it may be for a business to declare their property a gun-free zone they have every right to do so. The answer? That proprietor has made a choice; you need to make a choice. Don’t patronize their business. Let them know you will not patronize their business, and why.
.
Bikenut has argued on principle from the beginning, you have not. His principle arguments, that your second amendment rights do not trump the rights of an owner of private property, are correct. They actually are not in conflict, as the second amendment protects you from government, not from Joe at Joe’s Bar & Grill.
.
Property rights are tied to the principle that you own yourself, and therefore own the fruits of your labors. Rights of property are frequently referred to as a “bundled” right, and include (but are not limited to): Right of access, right of control/usage, right to exclusion (the violation of which is generally referred to as trespassing), and right to fruits of the property.
.
It is true that a property owner who conducts a business open to the public has some restrictions placed on his property rights with respect to the conduct of that business. There are protected classes, which Bikenut has discussed, that you may not exclude. There are other “safety” requirements (fire code, handicap access, etc.) that must be met. Bikenut is correct in that the “armed citizen” is not among those protected classes that must be admitted. So, if a private business puts up no-gun signage at entrances to the property, what he is indicating is that you are trespassing if you enter onto his property armed. Trespass laws apply in all states, though they differ from state to state in severity and what constitutes criminal trespass, etc. While the signage itself may have no de facto force of law, trespass laws do. Look ‘em up for your state and see. It is not difficult to envision how you could legally be found guilty of trespass, even if you agreed to leave on being discovered, for entering onto property properly posted for no-guns. Most business property owners simply would not take the trouble to prosecute if you left without trouble. Also, the signage does have force of law in many places (Tennessee, for example). If discovered there, you could be found guilty of a class B misdemeanor. In other places, it could even rise to armed criminal trespass, which is a felony.
.
Willfully, knowingly, and with aforethought committing trespass is not the action of a law-abiding citizen, respectful of his neighbor’s rights, which is what nearly everyone on this site vociferously claims to be. Regardless of how wrong-headed, even foolish, it may be for a business to declare their property a gun-free zone they have every right to do so. The answer? That proprietor has made a choice; you need to make a choice. Don’t patronize their business. Let them know you will not patronize their business, and why.
JCliff, I live in Nevada. A no gun sign has no force of law at a business. You can't be prosecuted if you are carrying concealed with a CCW permit, It is not trespassing unless you are asked to leave and you refuse. We both know laws are different in every state. I've never even seen a no gun sign on a business in Nevada. Everyone should know the law in the state they are carrying and follow that law. This is the point I've been making, but I guess not very well.
Semper Fi from an old Marine (1969-1971)
Semper Fi from an old Marine (1969-1971)
JCliff, I live in Nevada. A no gun sign has no force of law at a business. You can't be prosecuted if you are carrying concealed with a CCW permit, It is not trespassing unless you are asked to leave and you refuse. We both know laws are different in every state. I've never even seen a no gun sign on a business in Nevada. Everyone should know the law in the state they are carrying and follow that law. This is the point I've been making, but I guess not very well.
Semper Fi from an old Marine (1969-1971)
Semper Fi from an old Marine (1969-1971)
