STOPPED by MALL security guard @ Circle Centre Mall for OC

[actaeon277]

There is no reason not to open carry. If you have to hide something like a gun that implies that is taboo.

Jake has been banned.
I hope we're not going to start another OC/CC debate.

 

[Ted]

There is no reason not to open carry. If you have to hide something like a gun that implies that is taboo.

Another response to someone banned from INGO.

 

[indyjoe]

troll taken care of.....

It ultimately came down to violating VUPDblue's Rule #1, didn't it?

Edit: After reading through this thread, I learned something new. Specifically the "Shooter" label. I now wonder if I had that on my name for my couple days on the bench. Or if it is only for perm bans.

 

[Kutnupe14]

It ultimately came down to violating VUPDblue's Rule #1, didn't it?

"If you kill the Joe, make some mo'"

 

[Hoosierdood]

It ultimately came down to violating VUPDblue's Rule #1, didn't it?

Edit: After reading through this thread, I learned something new. Specifically the "Shooter" label. I now wonder if I had that on my name for my couple days on the bench. Or if it is only for perm bans.

Anyone who gets banned gets the Shooter designation while they are banned, whether it is temp or permanent.

 

[thompal]

Does a "No Trespassing" sign hold force of law?

Only if you are trespassing.

Which of course means if you are there illegally. The sign bans what is already illegal. In the case of carrying a gun, I would carry that over to mean "no illegally carried guns." If you have an LTCH, you are legally carrying a handgun.

 

[KG1]

Only if you are trespassing.

Which of course means if you are there illegally. The sign bans what is already illegal. In the case of carrying a gun, I would carry that over to mean "no illegally carried guns." If you have an LTCH, you are legally carrying a handgun.

I don't think the sign differentiates between a legally or illegally carried firearm. It just means any firearm.

 

[thompal]

I don't think the sign differentiates between a legally or illegally carried firearm. It just means any firearm.

If that were true, a no trespassing sign would prohibit entry by anyone. That is clearly not the case, since it is legal for certain persons to be there.

Also, if it meant ANY/ALL firearms, then police would be equally barred from carrying, as would store owners/employees. While it may be against COMPANY POLICY at certain backward, statist companies for employees to carry, it is only illegal at certain, well-defined types of businesses (and no, I don't remember what types of businesses those are).

 

[Roadie]

So...are we are back to the difference between a "No Trespassing" sign. a "No Guns" sign and a "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" sign..

A "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" isn't a No Trespassing sign, is it? I would think it is a condition of entry.

Does walking into a restaurant with no shirt on mean you are trespassing? No.
Does walking into a restaurant with no shirt, and refusing to leave when asked, mean you are trespassing? Yes.

We are also back to the point made in my previous post:

When gun info websites such as handgunlaw.us discuss signs and the "weight of law", aren't they usually referring to GUN law, and whether or not violating a No Guns sign is a gun related crime?

Such as NC, for example:

§ 14-415.11. Permit to Carry Concealed Handgun; Scope of Permit.
(c) Except as provided in G.S. 14-415.27, a permit does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun in any of the following:
(8) On any private premises where notice that carrying a concealed handgun is prohibited by the posting of a conspicuous notice or statement by the person in legal possession or control of the premises.

A "No Guns" sign does not hold the weight of law in Indiana, in the same way it holds the weight of law in NC. It IS a gun crime there. It is not here. And as Guy previously posted, the wordage of the sign matters as to whether or not it holds any weight of law in regards to Trespass.

If I understand correctly:
The wording of the sign matters
Simple No Guns sign does not equal No Trespassing
..unless you refuse to leave when asked

Yes? No? Maybe? Bacon?

 

[KG1]

So...are we are back to the difference between a "No Trespassing" sign. a "No Guns" sign and a "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" sign..

A "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" isn't a No Trespassing sign, is it? I would think it is a condition of entry.

Does walking into a restaurant with no shirt on mean you are trespassing? No.
Does walking into a restaurant with no shirt, and refusing to leave when asked, mean you are trespassing? Yes.

We are also back to the point made in my previous post:

When gun info websites such as handgunlaw.us discuss signs and the "weight of law", aren't they usually referring to GUN law, and whether or not violating a No Guns sign is a gun related crime?

Such as NC, for example:


A "No Guns" sign does not hold the weight of law in Indiana, in the same way it holds the weight of law in NC. It IS a gun crime there. It is not here. And as Guy previously posted, the wordage of the sign matters as to whether or not it holds any weight of law in regards to Trespass.

If I understand correctly:
The wording of the sign matters
Simple No Guns sign does not equal No Trespassing
..unless you refuse to leave when asked

Yes? No? Maybe? Bacon?

I would agree with that. To me a "No Trespassing" sign is an entry denial period without conditions. Different than the other conditional signs that you mention because you can still enter the property but be asked to leave under those conditions and only then does it become trespassing if you refuse that request. IMO

 

[LP1]

Ted, your posts in the various forums are consistently non-productive. While there may be a handful who come here to read such contrarian nonsense, I assure you the majority do not. Maybe you could find something else with which to occupy your time?

Simon Mall security officers are not armed. Even if they were, they would be so with the approval of the property owner. We want LEO's, and properly trained security, to carry openly in shopping malls. There is a reason for them to do so. We don't want civilians doing so. Learn the difference, Ted. At any given time, there are likely 100 or more civilians carrying concealed in Circle Center Mall and that's exactly how we want it.

Who is "we"?

 

[KG1]

Who is "we"?

Yeah Jake. "We" are waiting for an answer.

 

[Ted]

Yeah Jake. "We" are waiting for an answer.

Ya going to have to wait a while.

 

[Expat]

He seems to be wanting to build up the suspense.

 

[StrongSide]

Easily the best read today

You sounded like you did the right thing at every point. EXCEPT, you had no emergency meter/garage money in your car.

You did the right thing with the guard. I have a hard time with the ," **** OFF RENT A COP I DO WHAT I WANT!" mentality.

Sorry for the hassle but hopefully you just made it easier on the next 5 people who OC by the security guard.

 

[Kutnupe14]

So...are we are back to the difference between a "No Trespassing" sign. a "No Guns" sign and a "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" sign..

A "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" isn't a No Trespassing sign, is it? I would think it is a condition of entry.

Does walking into a restaurant with no shirt on mean you are trespassing? No.
Does walking into a restaurant with no shirt, and refusing to leave when asked, mean you are trespassing? Yes.

We are also back to the point made in my previous post:

When gun info websites such as handgunlaw.us discuss signs and the "weight of law", aren't they usually referring to GUN law, and whether or not violating a No Guns sign is a gun related crime?

Such as NC, for example:


A "No Guns" sign does not hold the weight of law in Indiana, in the same way it holds the weight of law in NC. It IS a gun crime there. It is not here. And as Guy previously posted, the wordage of the sign matters as to whether or not it holds any weight of law in regards to Trespass.

If I understand correctly:
The wording of the sign matters
Simple No Guns sign does not equal No Trespassing
..unless you refuse to leave when asked

Yes? No? Maybe? Bacon?

That;s exactly what I'm trying to state.

 

[Roadie]

That;s exactly what I'm trying to state.

Cool. It's gone back n forth so much I got lost

 

[jbombelli]

In my almost 25 years of living in Indiana I've seen plenty of no-guns signs. Not one was ever worded to actually be a denial of entry.

Not one. Anywhere in the state.

 

[Roadie]

In my almost 25 years of living in Indiana I've seen plenty of no-guns signs. Not one was ever worded to actually be a denial of entry.

Not one. Anywhere in the state.

Only one I have ever seen was at Chuck E Cheese:

 

[Bunnykid68]

Only one I have ever seen was at Chuck E Cheese:

I didnt see any sign when I walked in, I was holding the door open for an older lady and 4 kids