Benefits of carrying concealed and having real priorities.

[Nukeranger]

Permission???? What and why is it necessary to make what I said confusing? Let me be simple. I said "you are only trespassing if you retrieve a domestic animal and carry a weapon" in my state.

I was not commenting on all the other ways of trespassing.

 

[Bikenut]

People who keep insisting that their RULES on their property trump other peoples RIGHTS are thinking very shallow..... If it is as you say it is, then if you come on my property I could forbid you to breathe.. my property, my rights, my rules, RIGHT????????? and if you have the gall to breathe while on my property, according to firefighter, I now have the RIGHT to defend myself with deadly force because I now feeeeeeeel threatened because you broke my rules, right???

STOP imagining property "rights" to be more than they actually are...... If you find someone doing something against your "rules" on your property, ask them to leave, simple as that... IF they dont leave, THEN they have trespassed, not before.......... I have never, ever stated that you couldnt ask anyone to leave (or never come onto the property in the first place) for any reason you wanted to, or no reason.... doesnt matter. BUT no-one has the "right" to infringe on anyones RIGHT to carry an inanimate object on their person anywhere at anytime... That object does absolutely no harm or infringement to anyone or anything.

Your rights are only valid when they leave mine intact and the reverse applies...... because you confuse "Rights" with "Rules" you cannot fathom the very simple application of this true principle....

So my rights are only valid when they leave your rights intact .... but if the reverse applies... where your right to bear arms is only valid as long as my private property right to ban your bearing arms is left intact.... then exactly why do you think you can carry your gun on/in my private business property when I have the private property right to have a rule that says you do not have my permission to carry a gun on/in my property?

Perhaps what is needed is the understanding that you have absolutely no right to be on/in MY private property whether that private property be my home or my business. All you can ever have is my permission IF you abide by my rules. Do not abide by my rules and you do not have my permission... if you don't have my permission you are trespassing. And you are trespassing (do not have my permission) whether you get caught at it or not. All being asked to leave means is you got caught already in the act.

And kindly don't try that "public accommodation" crap because even though Judge Napalitano thinks that is something that should be.... it isn't. If it were then no one could ever be thrown out of a "public accommodation"/business and you know just as well as I do that such is NOT the factual case.

The private property right to have control of one's own property is the basis for the property owner to have the right to make rules that govern who has, and who doesn't have, permission (methinks some folks just can't get the concept that the property owner has the right to grant or deny permission!! Perhaps some folks don't like the idea that "open to the public" does NOT mean they have the right to be on/in a private property business but only means those individual members of the public who abide by the owner's rules have the owner's permission to be on/in that property).... and those who don't abide by the rules do NOT have permission to be on/in his/her private property.

By the way... so many folks confuse the act of trespass (sneaking a concealed gun into private property where guns are banned) with being caught at it (being asked to leave) and not understanding that refusing to leave is merely continuing with the original act of trespassing. And any consequences to that refusal is merely the punishment for trespassing.

 

[Bikenut]

Permission???? What and why is it necessary to make what I said confusing? Let me be simple. I said "you are only trespassing if you retrieve a domestic animal and carry a weapon" in my state.

I was not commenting on all the other ways of trespassing.

What is confusing about the simple concept that the property owner controls who has, and who doesn't have, permission to be on/in his property?

And if a property owner says people with guns do not have permission ... and a no guns rule is expressly telling folks that people with guns are not allowed (prohibited and do not have permission) to be on/in the property.... then those who violate that rule by carrying guns on/in the property do not have the owner's permission to be there and because they do not have the owner's permission they are... trespassing.

Sometimes folks get all tied up in firearm's laws and ignore all the other laws that, while may not expressly be firearm's laws, still apply to behavior while carrying.

I asked what State you are from because I'd like to see what other trespass laws apply besides the one you are referencing.

 

[Johnny Dollar]

Permission???? What and why is it necessary to make what I said confusing? Let me be simple. I said "you are only trespassing if you retrieve a domestic animal and carry a weapon" in my state.

I was not commenting on all the other ways of trespassing.

Care to post the actual statue?

 

[Johnny Dollar]

People who keep insisting that their RULES on their property trump other peoples RIGHTS are thinking very shallow..

It's not the rules that are being insisted on it's the property owner's right to make those rules. But you knew that.

 

[Axeanda45]

The POINT of the OP is that having a firearm for self defense is more important than worrying about breaking rules/trespassing... and I agree 100%

 

[Axeanda45]

All of us (humans, no matter where we are on earth) have the inherent RIGHT by being alive to have the tools we choose to carry on our person to protect that life.... The tool(s) themselves pose no danger (or infringement) to anyone as long as they stay where they are and are not used until needed to protect that life. Property rights dont just apply to terrain/land/location.... what I carry on my person is MY PROPERTY, is it not? It is none of your or anyone elses business what I carry on my person AS LONG AS in its carried state it causes no harm to anyone (it is inert, an inanimate object, by itself undisturbed, it does NOTHING.....) now, if I wanted to carry around a flask or whatever filled with a toxic chemical and spill it everywhere, THEN AND ONLY THEN can someone have a say in what I am carrying...

 

[Axeanda45]

So my rights are only valid when they leave your rights intact .... but if the reverse applies... where your right to bear arms is only valid as long as my private property right to ban your bearing arms is left intact.... then exactly why do you think you can carry your gun on/in my private business property when I have the private property right to have a rule that says you do not have my permission to carry a gun on/in my property?

It is actually so freeking simple that you keep ignoring it although half of your azz is in it's mouth... RULES are NOT RIGHTS....... they are 2 entirely different things... When you finally have that thought firmly implanted in your head, then and only then can we continue....

 

[Bikenut]

All of us (humans, no matter where we are on earth) have the inherent RIGHT by being alive to have the tools we choose to carry on our person to protect that life.... The tool(s) themselves pose no danger (or infringement) to anyone as long as they stay where they are and are not used until needed to protect that life. Property rights dont just apply to terrain/land/location.... what I carry on my person is MY PROPERTY, is it not? It is none of your or anyone elses business what I carry on my person AS LONG AS in its carried state it causes no harm to anyone (it is inert, an inanimate object, by itself undisturbed, it does NOTHING.....) now, if I wanted to carry around a flask or whatever filled with a toxic chemical and spill it everywhere, THEN AND ONLY THEN can someone have a say in what I am carrying...

The flaw is thinking that you have some kind of right to be on/in my property. You do not. All you have is either my permission to be there .... or my denial of permission for you to be there.

And I have the inherent right to control my property and that means I can deny you permission to be on/in my property. If I decide to deny you permission because you have a gun that is MY private property RIGHT to do so.

Perhaps what you have a problem with is the idea that someone else has the power to give, or deny, you ... permission.

Want to keep your right to bear arms intact? Shop at a business where you have the property owner's permission to bring in a gun. Want to shop where guns are banned anyway? Then you have to make the decision whether you will respect the property owner's rights and leave your gun outside when you shop there... or you will disrespect the property owner's property rights as commit the crime of trespass as you sneak your gun in anyway. But make no mistake... the property owner with a no guns rule is NOT denying you the right to bear arms.... you still have the option of keeping your right and shopping somewhere else.... or voluntarily disarming... or intentionally disrespecting the property owner's rights by sneaking in a gun anyway.

I find it discouraging how many people will scream they want their right to bear arms respected ... yet will use the excuse of wanting to protect themselves as they disrespect the property owner's private property rights by sneaking a gun in where the property owner has exercised his right to ban guns instead of respecting the rights of others and shopping somewhere else. I find that just a bit hypocritical.

 

[Firefighterchen]

It is actually so freeking simple that you keep ignoring it although half of your azz is in it's mouth... RULES are NOT RIGHTS....... they are 2 entirely different things... When you finally have that thought firmly implanted in your head, then and only then can we continue....

I have the RIGHT to make whatever rules on MY properties, if anyone breaks those rules by carrying a firearm onto MY properties I have another RIGHT to stop that person for threatening me by whatever means necessary.

Simple as that.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Bikenut]

It is actually so freeking simple that you keep ignoring it although half of your azz is in it's mouth... RULES are NOT RIGHTS....... they are 2 entirely different things... When you finally have that thought firmly implanted in your head, then and only then can we continue....

You are resorting to insults? Is your argument that weak?

It is the private property right to control one's own property that gives the owner the power to deny access to his property with rules that outline who has, and who doesn't have, his permission to be there (have access). It is the trespass laws that support the private property owner's right to control who has, and who doesn't have, his permission to be there (have access). Those who do not have permission are required to leave (no longer have access) or suffer the penalties provided by the trespass laws.

The rules the property owner makes are merely extensions of his private property right to control who has access to his property.

But I'm curious... what exactly do you think "private property rights" are?

 

[Axeanda45]

My goodness, the lack of comprehension is thick among you.........



A human being has the same set of rights no matter where on this earth they happen to be standing..... it is actually that simple.


In order to infringe on someones rights, an actual harm has to be shown... Carrying something unknown to the property owner is not harmful in any way (see prior examples of exceptions).



I have tried so many different ways to get this across to you but have obviously failed... so, now you can rejoice in your ignorance as I will not try to educate you any longer in this thread...

this post is directed to no-one in particular....

 

[Johnny Dollar]

All of us (humans, no matter where we are on earth) have the inherent RIGHT by being alive to have the tools we choose to carry on our person to protect that life.... The tool(s) themselves pose no danger (or infringement) to anyone as long as they stay where they are and are not used until needed to protect that life. Property rights dont just apply to terrain/land/location.... what I carry on my person is MY PROPERTY, is it not? It is none of your or anyone elses business what I carry on my person AS LONG AS in its carried state it causes no harm to anyone (it is inert, an inanimate object, by itself undisturbed, it does NOTHING.....) now, if I wanted to carry around a flask or whatever filled with a toxic chemical and spill it everywhere, THEN AND ONLY THEN can someone have a say in what I am carrying...

So if called to jury duty you'd carry right? After all it is your inherent RIGHT by being alive to have the tools we choose to carry on our person to protect that life right?

 

[Bikenut]

My goodness, the lack of comprehension is thick among you.........



A human being has the same set of rights no matter where on this earth they happen to be standing..... it is actually that simple.


In order to infringe on someones rights, an actual harm has to be shown... Carrying something unknown to the property owner is not harmful in any way (see prior examples of exceptions).



I have tried so many different ways to get this across to you but have obviously failed... so, now you can rejoice in your ignorance as I will not try to educate you any longer in this thread...

this post is directed to no-one in particular....

You have attempted to avoid and evade answering my question:

Originally posted by Bikenut:
But I'm curious... what exactly do you think "private property rights" are?

Every human being has the same set of rights (including private property rights!) yet I have the private property right to decree who will, and who will NOT, be allowed to stand on the bit of earth I own as my private property. On my private property it is I who decrees who will be, and who will NOT be, given permission to stand on my property. You can keep all of your rights simply by staying out of/off of my private property. If you want to be on/in my private property you WILL either abide by my rules in order to have my permission to be allowed on/in my property or I WILL require you to leave. If you refuse to leave when required ("asking" is merely a polite way of "requiring") then I will use the power of trespass laws to punish you for being on/in my property without my permission.

But then.... I am so glad your post wasn't directed at anyone in particular since I highly doubt anyone in particular will see any relevance in it anyway.

 

[GlassWolf]

The poster stated quite clearly that his right to defend his life and by extension to carry the tools to do so over rode anyone else’s right to tell him he couldn’t carry . People can be and have been shot in Court Houses.

In case you forgot

No, my reading comprehension is quite good. Excusing the bad sentence structure, he stated this:

Therefore, I carry everywhere. There aren't any metal detectors. There aren't any guards frisking people. I keep it concealed and nobody is the wiser.

to which I pointed out (to you) that Jury duty takes place in a court house, which has both of the stated modifiers above.

 

[BC1]

In order to infringe on someones rights, an actual harm has to be shown... Carrying something unknown to the property owner is not harmful in any way (see prior examples of exceptions).

That I absolutely agree with this. Since the signs have no weight of law in my state I'm not obeying them. If they should see it printing and ask me to eave then I will... just to avoid an incident. But I'm not telling anyone I have it. I will resist an attempt by a security guard to detain me and just leave. And my right to remain silent means I don't answer the security guard's questions. So I would just walk away and leave without a word.
.
Regarding not allowing it on my property its simple... I don't want any stranger on my property, armed or not. Unless its a worker but then again I know my regular workers. That's the purpose of a gate at the road, fences and a dog. Armed has nothing to do with my decision. It's not the inanimate object that concerns me, its people I don't personally know. Could be any as$h0le.
.
I once had a contractor come to replace my old central A/C units. Signed an order with the company and gave them a down-payment of $4,500. They showed-up to work with the wrong units. I called and was told they were using these as replacements. Uh-uh. Ain't happening. My contract was for two Lennox units, not some no-name brand. Contractor told me he would keep the deposit. So I closed the garage door on his equipment, locking-it up until I could stop the check. His dirt-bag worker went nuts. Started kicking the doors and threatened me with a hammer. I let my GSD out and that ended that. He waited in his truck with the dog sitting at his door. I called to stop the check then gave him his equipment back. That could have gone real bad had he been armed. I believe either me, the dog or both would have been capped.
.
If I don't know you, I'm on you like a fly on crap. You're watched very closely. And I won't let you inside the house armed. But when people came to my wife's yard sale I saw guns printing. I didn't say anything. Didn't care. They're near the road. Its a very small town and most faces were at least familiar in some way.
.
Brings me to another good story. A local restaurant owner and his son were gunned down in a botched home robbery in the Hudson Valley around 2004. The poor father died and the son had a long recovery. The shooter escaped into the woods and vanished. A few years later an arrest was made. A guy with a long criminal history was caught stealing a car and had to submit DNA. It was a match to DNA from chewing gum he lost while struggling with the son years earlier. I crapped myself when I saw who got pinched. It was a local electrical contractor with a couple of trucks and employees. I saw this guy twice a week at the local deli getting coffee. He looked and acted completely normal... very friendly guy. Would never have guessed it. Now he's where he belongs for life.

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Axeanda45 View Post
In order to infringe on someones rights, an actual harm has to be shown... Carrying something unknown to the property owner is not harmful in any way (see prior examples of exceptions).

That I absolutely agree with this. Since the signs have no weight of law in my state I'm not obeying them. If they should see it printing and ask me to eave then I will... just to avoid an incident. But I'm not telling anyone I have it. I will resist an attempt by a security guard to detain me and just leave. And my right to remain silent means I don't answer the security guard's questions. So I would just walk away and leave without a word.
.
Regarding not allowing it on my property its simple... I don't want any stranger on my property, armed or not. Unless its a worker but then again I know my regular workers. That's the purpose of a gate at the road, fences and a dog. Armed has nothing to do with my decision. It's not the inanimate object that concerns me, its people I don't personally know. Could be any as$h0le.
.
I once had a contractor come to replace my old central A/C units. Signed an order with the company and gave them a down-payment of $4,500. They showed-up to work with the wrong units. I called and was told they were using these as replacements. Uh-uh. Ain't happening. My contract was for Lennox units, not some no-name brand. Contractor told me he would keep the deposit. So I closed the garage door on his equipment, locking-it up until I could stop the check. His dirt-bag worker went nuts. Started kicking the doors and threatened me with a hammer. I let my GSD out and that ended his crap. He waited in his truck. I called to stop the check then gave him his equipment back. That could have gone real bad had he been armed. I believe either me, the dog or both would have been capped.
.
If I don't know you, I'm on you like a fly on crap. You're watched very closely. And I won't let you inside the house armed. But when people came to my wife's yard sale I saw guns printing. I didn't say anything. Didn't care. They're near the road. Its a very small town and most faces were at least familiar in some way.

Let me see... you don't want any strangers on your private property because you don't trust them. Ok... whether or not your distrust is warranted isn't any issue since you have the private property right to do so.

But then... what about the business owner who doesn't want any armed strangers in his store because he doesn't trust them whether or not his distrust is warranted? Doesn't that store owner have just as much right to not want you armed on/in his private property as you have the right to not want any strangers on/in your private property?

I find it interesting that you would have no problem with restricting who is allowed on your private property while also having no problem disregarding the private property business owner's right to do the same thing.....

 

[BC1]

Let me see... you don't want any strangers on your private property because you don't trust them. Ok... whether or not your distrust is warranted isn't any issue since you have the private property right to do so.

But then... what about the business owner who doesn't want any armed strangers in his store because he doesn't trust them whether or not his distrust is warranted? Doesn't that store owner have just as much right to not want you armed on/in his private property as you have the right to not want any strangers on/in your private property?

I find it interesting that you would have no problem with restricting who is allowed on your private property while also having no problem disregarding the private property business owner's right to do the same thing.....

Yeah, I'm being pretty much a hypocrite. I ignore the signs but will apologize and comply if they ask me to leave. I had a no-guns policy in my employee handbook because having certain internal policies improves insurance costs. Its on the GL insurance application... "do you presently have a no-weapons policy in the workplace?" Some carriers won't underwrite the policy if you refuse to prohibit firearms in the workplace. I never enforced anything in the office with my employees. I didn't ask. But we were a consulting firm. We weren't open to the public. My consultants and employees were required to respect the gun/weapon policies at client locations. It was in their contract. No second chances as it reflected on my client relationship and future contracts. Some of these guys got a $buck$ an hour so they weren't complaining anyway.
.
Now home is a whole other issue. This is where my valuables are. Where my family is. I defend this place like no other. I control everything on these grounds without question and in a deliberate manner. I'm not letting anyone else in my family be victimized. We already lost one. This is sacred to me. There's no double standard when it comes to homes because I generally lock it in the car when visiting friends' houses. Not that they might care but I don't need it... my friends have things well in hand in their own homes.

 

[Nukeranger]

What is confusing about the simple concept that the property owner controls who has, and who doesn't have, permission to be on/in his property?

And if a property owner says people with guns do not have permission ... and a no guns rule is expressly telling folks that people with guns are not allowed (prohibited and do not have permission) to be on/in the property.... then those who violate that rule by carrying guns on/in the property do not have the owner's permission to be there and because they do not have the owner's permission they are... trespassing.

Sometimes folks get all tied up in firearm's laws and ignore all the other laws that, while may not expressly be firearm's laws, still apply to behavior while carrying.

I asked what State you are from because I'd like to see what other trespass laws apply besides the one you are referencing.

It seems to me you are the type of person who has to be right by complicating a trespass law with regards to a concealed weapon. I live in Louisiana and we enjoy our freedom. The laws are clear on where it is illegal to bring a gun (R.S. 40:1379.3 (N)). It seems important to you that it needs to be complicated and to a point it may be. I'll spot you that anything can be made very complicated.

So, I respect your right to your opinion. But others have their own opinions and that's ok. So, to satisfy your needs, refer to Louisiana R.S. 40:1379.3 (N). 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 which does support your opinion. Additionally, RS 14:63 discusses Criminal Trespassing.

 

[Firefighterchen]

It seems to me you are the type of person who has to be right by complicating a trespass law with regards to a concealed weapon. I live in Louisiana and we enjoy our freedom. The laws are clear on where it is illegal to bring a gun (R.S. 40:1379.3 (N)). It seems important to you that it needs to be complicated and to a point it may be. I'll spot you that anything can be made very complicated.

So, I respect your right to your opinion. But others have their own opinions and that's ok. So, to satisfy your needs, refer to Louisiana R.S. 40:1379.3 (N). 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 which does support your opinion. Additionally, RS 14:63 discusses Criminal Trespassing.

His opinion is not complicated at all. Trespass is trespass, whether or not it involves a gun, been his point the entire time.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app